Case Study

Automotive / Tier 1 Stamping & Assembly

Background:

A major automotive OEM requested an independent operational review of a Tier 1 supplier facing escalating quality and launch performance issues. Simultaneous launches, production transfers, workforce instability, and COVID-era disruptions strained operations, driving stamping variation, process instability, quality escapes, and increased customer concern around production readiness.

Critical Issues:

  • Escalating customer quality concerns and safe launch exposure
  • Missed manufacturing processes and assembly escapes
  • Excessive sorting, rework, and containment activity
  • Stamping defects driving excessive WIP and operational instability
  • Launch activities extending well beyond planned timing
  • Limited indirect resources to support simultaneous launches and operational demands
  • Incomplete process validation and capability studies
  • Weld process instability and process change control gaps
  • Weak systemic root cause execution and corrective action effectiveness
  • Material flow congestion and manufacturing inefficiencies
  • Lack of proactive layered audit systems tied to operational risk

Our Approach:

XO conducted an independent manufacturing and quality system assessment while deploying embedded operational leadership across multiple facilities to stabilize execution, assess operational risk, and restore disciplined performance management.

Key Actions:
  • Supported operations supervision, quality containment, and materials management
  • Implemented QRQC escalation and structured problem-solving processes
  • Supported poka-yoke validation and manufacturing process verification
  • Assisted with launch readiness and operational stabilization activities
  • Introduced layered process audit (LPA) methodology
  • Enhanced PFMEA, control plan, and standardized work alignment
  • Supported weld validation governance and process control improvements
  • Improved production leadership structure, accountability, and training systems
  • Assisted in PFEP and material flow optimization initiatives

Results:

  • Stabilized manufacturing operations during active launch conditions
  • Reduced operational and quality risk exposure
  • Improved customer confidence and operational transparency
  • Strengthened manufacturing process discipline and accountability
  • Improved escalation management and QRQC execution
  • Enhanced launch governance and process validation rigor
  • Reduced operational congestion and manufacturing instability
  • Improved management visibility to systemic operational issues
  • Improved management visibility to systemic operational issues
  • Established foundation for sustainable operational recovery and launch execution

By the Numbers

50+
Active Sort/Containment Conditions
3
Targeted sites for support (Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee)