SOL (www.sofemaonline.com) looks at Measuring the Effectiveness of the Aviation Organisation’s QC Management 

QC Belongs to Production

As an Introduction and to share as a common understanding within the EASA system that Quality Assurance QA is independent & QC is essentially embodied within the production process.

Please consider the following elements:

Steve Bentley CEO of Sofema Aviation Services www.sassofia.com looks at common errors made by MRO’s in allocating responsibilities for process 7 procedures – compounded by the weakness of regulatory auditors to identify such. 

All comments are welcome office@sassofia.com 

145.121 Maintenance procedures and quality system

(a) The organisation shall establish a safety and quality policy for the organisation which shall be included in the organisation’s exposition.

Steven Bentley MD of Sofema Aviation Services believes it is time to recognise QAS as a component of our organisations' SMS.

Where Should an EASA Compliant Quality Assurance System “Sit” in relation to the Organisations SMS?

Introduction

Historically (and growing up in the workplace through the 1970’s I can attest to the fact) there was no formal Quality Assurance within European Aviation Operations.

Of course we had Quality Control and the Role of Flight Operations Director and within Maintenance the Role of “Chief Inspector”.

As the Joint Airworthiness Authority’s influence grew the concept of an independent assessment of conformity became the acceptable way of demonstrating compliance.

Considering the Fundamental EASA QA/ QC Relationship

The Quality Manager (Compliance Manager) is responsible for the independent assessment of compliance – not to loose sight that this process is additional and should be considered as a Safety Net rather than a primary method of ensuring compliance.

The Continuing Airworthiness Manager (CAM) is responsible for the QC Activities related to the compliances which are validated during the ACAM process.

Building on this understanding means that an effective oversight of an effective process will focus on the physical management, delivery and maintenance of competence within the system of control.

The Regulatory Point of View

There can be two reasons to implement a Quality Assurance System. The first is that it is a required mandatory process to ensure compliance with all regulatory and organisational requirements. The second is that we have an opportunity to use the QA process to support the companies objectives to effectively manage the business in the most efficient way.

A commitment to Quality can become intrinsic within the organization whereby Quality becomes the driver rather than allowing Compliance to become the driver – Compliance should be assumed as a given rather than a target.

If a regulatory audit throws up a non compliance then it is also an indication of a Quality Assurance system shortfall as this is where the non compliance should have been identified. To move to a higher level requires the company to develop effective and compliant business processes which are acceptable to the post holders and business area managers and can at the same time be supported by all employees.