Rev.

New Dated 3 SEP 2019

SCMH Section 7.2 www.iaqg.org/scmh

Maturity Matrix Guidance

This evaluation assesses the maturity of and organization's Advanced Product Quality Planning
philosophy (management awareness/commitment and organizational alignment & effective 1. Enter background information of the organization being
communication), project/risk management, use of tools, and readiness of external suppliers. assessed and the person doing the assessing.

2. Enter the level of the organization in the column titled “Score”. The organization must comply with everything in the
level and have objective evidence of compliance to justify the level chosen. Levels are progressive. In order to comply
with a level you must comply with everything listed. If not all items of a level are met at a higher level choose the next
lower level for which compliance can be demonstrated. If an item does not apply or there is no supporting process, it is
scored as a 1.

3. Enter evidence to
justify the score
provided and add any
additional comments
Note: Additional detail will
provide future assessors or
organizations further
detail on areas of
improvement

Note: Weighting entered in the cells are the recommended weights of each item. If
weights are adjusted ensure that the total weight of each category equates to 100%

4. Reporting:
The raw and overall weighted category score will be provided under each category. The total score will be shown at the bottom and the top of
the page. A detailed and summary report is provided on the additional tabs.

© 2019 IAQG The IAQG is a legally incorporated international not for profit association (INPA) with membership from the Americas, Europe and the Asia Pacific Region (Rev. 08-2015)
 9145 Maturity Matrix Rev. New Dated 3 SEP 2019
SCMH Section 7.2 www.iaqg.org/scmh
Data
Assessment date:
Name of organization being assessed: Total Overall Weighted Score
Contact of organization being assessed: 0.0%
Assessed by (Name/Company):

1.0 Philosophy: Management Awareness and Commitment

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
Item Content Weight Score Comment / Evidence
(1 pt) (2 pt) (3 pt) (4 pt) (5 pt)
Advance Product Quality Planning No knowledge of APQP. Not Basic knowledge and Implementation plan in place APQP is defined and fully Organizational structure and
(APQP) Philosophy & Knowledge integrated into product awareness of APQP and basic for integrating APQP into integrated in product systems in place to support
of Requirements development process. understanding of requirements Product Development process. development process. APQP. Continuous
and skills needed to deploy. Key personnel trained in the Strategic communications and improvements plans to ensure
APQP methodologies. objectives driving the APQP the APQP philosophy continues
1.1 philosophy. to drive culture change. 30%

Organizational Support Limited support and no APQP Acknowledged and supported Leaders of function roles (e.g. Buy-in at all levels and relevant Leadership objectives met and
executive leadership directive. in isolated sectors of the engineering, quality, functional organizations of the tactical objectives
organization. (e.g. driven by operations, procurement, etc.) organization and working to implemented. Results analysis
quality and/or engineering) understand and support APQP. achieve the tactical objectives. driving improvements and
Organization trained and some closing gaps.
1.2 use of tools & process is 70%
evident.

Raw Score Overall Weighted Category Score

#DIV/0! 0.0%

2.0 Philosophy: Organizational Alignment and Effective Communication

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
Item Content Weight Score Comment / Evidence
(1 pt) (2 pt) (3 pt) (4 pt) (5 pt)
Ownership of APQP process Ownership is not defined. Multiple owners. Philosophy Executive owner is established Multi-discipline structure Resources are optimized and
Functions are operating in silos driven by multiple functions. and organizational structure to established and decision there is a process in place to re-
and are task driven. Direction not assigned. There support APQP process is making process in place. allocate as needed.
2.1 are pockets of tools being defined. 40%
used.

Communication of Product Product development progress Product development reviews Multi-discipline project review Reviews are stable, multi- Central repository established
Development Activities is not communicated. and communication occurs process is defined. disciplined and effectively for managing product
within isolated sectors. Not Review frequency is managed to communicate development process and
multi-disciplined. No established and the project outputs and escalation ensuring access of information.
frequency is established. organization is starting to of issues. Gated executive and Reviews are consistently
conduct reviews. periodic customer reviews are communicated (e.g. project
2.2 conducted. status, newsletters, etc.). 20%

Human Resource Planning No plan for human resources Human resource needs are Human resource needs are Qualified personnel are in APQP roles are embedded into
needed to support the APQP determined in some areas and identified for all functional place and there is a process the organizational structure.
process. Resources are added evaluated for capability with areas and training plans are defined to sustain APQP. Capabilities of APQP resources
as the need arises. plans to close skill gaps. completed. are maintained systematically
2.3 & optimized for on-going 40%
process effectiveness.

Raw Score Overall Weighted Category Score

#DIV/0! 0.0%

© 2019 IAQG The IAQG is a legally incorporated international not for profit association (INPA) with membership from the Americas, Europe and the Asia Pacific Region (Rev. 08-2015) Page 2 of 9
 9145 Maturity Matrix Rev. New Dated 3 SEP 2019
SCMH Section 7.2 www.iaqg.org/scmh
3.0 Project and Risk Management
Data
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
Item Content Weight Score Comment / Evidence
(1 pt) (2 pt) (3 pt) (4 pt) (5 pt)
Project Management Execution Little to no knowledge of Some elements of project Project management skills Defined APQP Project APQP Project Management
Project Management. management are understood developed and being applied Management processes and organizational
and used for product to some product development procedures in place. structure/resources (project
development but has not projects. The organization has the owners and multidiscipline
considered all 9145 Requirements of 9145 have demonstrated capability to resources) and information
requirements been incorporated. establish detail level APQP systems in place for effective
Starting to incorporate a project plans to manage Project Management.
Project management skill gaps disciplined project product development. Continuous improvement.
are understood and training management approach, with Capability to conduct Phase Criteria established to evaluate
3.1 underway. high level APQP project plans Gate reviews and periodic key Project Management and 35%
to manage product project/phase reviews with APQP deliverables.
development. regular project status
reporting.

Risk Management and Escalation Little to no knowledge of Risk Some knowledge of Risk Organization has Risk Defined Risk Management Organizational structure and
Management. Management, but no plan for Management knowledge and processes and procedures in information systems are in
Risk Management in the APQP how product development risk skills. place. place to support effective Risk
Context applies to Project, will be managed. Risk Management The organization has Management.
Supplier. Feasibility (design to Current risk management implementation plan in place. demonstrated Risk Risk Management philosophy is
manufacturing handoff and activities are adhoc. Starting to incorporate a Management capability in embedded and part of the
sales to design handoff), Risk Management skill gaps are disciplined Risk Management product development. organization's culture.
Product (DFMEA or equivalent) understood and training approach, with a defined The organization can identify, Risk management includes
3.2 or Process (PFMEA), Gaging underway. escalation process to manage escalate, and manage high continuous improvement 35%
(MSA), and Product and product development risks. priority and product feedback from previous
Process Capabilities (CP, CPK) development risk issues with projects.
highest level of management
involvement.

Project Reviews and Escalation Little to no knowledge of the Some knowledge of APQP Organization has knowledge Defined APQP Project review Organization structure and
APQP Project review and Project review and escalation and skills to conduct APQP and escalation processes and information systems in place to
escalation processes. processes, but no plan for Project reviews and escalation procedures in place. support APQP Project reviews.
conducting Project reviews for product development. The organization has Project management / Team
and escalation. Implementation plan for APQP. demonstrated capability to resources are experienced with
Current Project reviews and Project review process is in conduct regular Project verifiable past experience in
escalation are adhoc. place, including processes for reviews of APQP output Project reviews.
escalation. deliverables. APQP Project reviews include
Starting to incorporate Project The organization has the top management where critical
reviews for APQP output demonstrated capability to decisions are needed. Project
deliverables (e.g. Preliminary escalate product development data is used for tracking of
Design Review, Critical Design issues for resolution. Project KPIs, with
Review, Production Readiness demonstrated achievement of
Review). Project performance objectives.
APQP Project review content is
evolving, considering
3.3 continuous improvement 30%
feedback from previous
projects, (e.g. project review
process regularly updated
based on lessons learned from
past projects).

Raw Score Overall Weighted Category Score

#DIV/0! 0.0%

© 2019 IAQG The IAQG is a legally incorporated international not for profit association (INPA) with membership from the Americas, Europe and the Asia Pacific Region (Rev. 08-2015) Page 3 of 9
 9145 Maturity Matrix Rev. New Dated 3 SEP 2019
SCMH Section 7.2 www.iaqg.org/scmh
4.0 Tools: APQP
Data
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
Item Content Weight Score Comment / Evidence
(1 pt) (2 pt) (3 pt) (4 pt) (5 pt)
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis No knowledge of FMEA. Not Basic knowledge and Personnel are trained in use of FMEA approach is Organizational structure and
(FMEA) integrated into product or awareness of FMEA. Basic FMEA-tools with staff in place standardized and fully information systems in place to
process development. understanding of requirements to facilitate the process using integrated in product support FMEA development
and skills needed to deploy. multifunctional teams. Lessons development process. FMEA and maintenance. FMEAs
Limited participation in FMEA Learned, historical data is used process is leading to RPN support the organization's
development. as an input to the FMEA. reduction and process/quality continuous improvement
FMEAs are used to identify improvements. FMEAs are philosophy.
risks with mitigation plans of updated as needed based on
RPN reduction. process output data, e.g.
Linkage is established between escapes, rejects, etc.
Design FMEA (DFMEA),
4.1 Process flow diagram, Process 20.0%
(PFMEA) and Control Plans.

Process Flow Diagram (PFD) No knowledge of Process Flow Basic understanding of the PFD Personnel are trained in the A standard PFD process is in
Organizational structure and
Diagrams (PFD). Considers requirements and skills use of PFDs. PFDs contain place and is implementedinformation systems in place to
shop router or traveler as needed to deploy. Process defined process operations in across products. support Process flow
equivalent to PFD. Does not flow diagrams (PFD) exists, but detailed sequence. improvements.
always include alternate do not contain sufficient The system is used to identify Product and process families Group related Lessons Learned
processes, movement, and details to produce the product. process flow and has are identified and used as and best practices are
external operations. standardized diagram symbols. appropriate to standardize communicated. Process flow
operations. Diagrams are updated when
Linkage is established between changes and improvements are
Design FMEA (DFMEA), PFD, PFD is used to identify sources made.
4.2 Process (PFMEA) and Control of variation and risk. 10.0%
Plans. PFDs are updated when
changes and improvements
are made.

Control Plans (CP) No knowledge of Control Basic understanding of control Personnel are trained in the Control Plans have been Organizational structure and
plans. Considers inspection plans and skills needed to development and use of developed across products information systems in place to
plans, process instructions, develop them. Some control Control Plans. Key product Product and process families support Control Plans.
router, etc. to be equivalent to plans under development but and process characteristics are identified and used as Control Plans are initiated in
Control Plan. not always linked to PFMEA (KCs , CIs) are identified in the appropriate to standardize the product development
and/or PFD. Format not Control Plan. The Control operations. phase and continue to mature
standardized. Plans include product and Control Plans are being used to throughout the product life
process controls manage and control process cycle.
Linkage is established between and product variation. Control Plans are updated
4.3 Design FMEA (DFMEA), PFD, when changes and 10.0%
Process (PFMEA) and Control improvements are made.
Plans.

Measurement System Analysis No knowledge of Basic understanding of MSA Personnel are trained in the Defined process in place for Organizational structure and
(MSA) measurement system analysis. and skills needed to use of MSA and understand MSA. MSAs are repeated when information systems in place to
Measurement controls limited implement. MSA is limited to the basic factors that impact inspection process is modified support MSA improvements.
to calibration of gages. gage repeatability and the MSA results. or new inspectors are The MSA plan has all inspection
reproducibility (GR&R) introduced into the process. tools and equipment identified
MSAs are performed for key and performs trend analysis for
product and process The organization implements wear, changes, etc.
4.4 characteristics (KCs , CIs). corrective action plans when 10.0%
MSA results do not satisfy the
acceptance criteria.

© 2019 IAQG The IAQG is a legally incorporated international not for profit association (INPA) with membership from the Americas, Europe and the Asia Pacific Region (Rev. 08-2015) Page 4 of 9
 9145 Maturity Matrix Rev. New Dated 3 SEP 2019
SCMH Section 7.2 www.iaqg.org/scmh
Management and Identification of No knowledge of how to KCs and CIs identified through KCs are documented and
Data
All KCs are identified and Information systems in place to
Critical Items define and manage critical the design risk analysis are variation management (ref. controlled as defined in the monitor, alert and analyze KCs
items and their relationship to included in the design records 9103) is implemented for KCs process control plans. variation data. KC reliability
(Including Key Product key product characteristics. but not consistently carried throughout the manufacturing data analyzed to predict
Characteristics) through manufacturing process. Process capability is potential product performance
documentation (e.g. inspection established and plans in place issues. Statistical analysis tools
plans, control plans, etc.) to reduce variation as needed are used to improve product
to meet the requirements. variation.
Manufacturing documentation
4.5 gaps regarding KCs and CIs are Process in place to re-evaluate 20.0%
identified and a plan is in place KCs as needed.
to close the gaps.

Management and Identification of No knowledge of how to Key process characteristics, Key process characteristics are All Key process characteristics Information systems in place to
Key Process Characteristics identify and manage key impacting KCs, are identified in documented and variation are identified and controlled as monitor, alert and analyze KCs
process characteristics related the Process FMEA but not management (ref. 9103) is defined in the process control variation data. KC reliability
to KCs and Cis. consistently included in implemented throughout the plans. data analyzed to predict
manufacturing documentation manufacturing process. potential product performance
or control plans. Process capability is issues. Statistical analysis tools
established and plans in place are used to improve product
to reduce variation as needed variation.
to meet the requirements.
4.6 10.0%
Process in place to re-evaluate
for all process related changes.

Capability Studies No knowledge of how to Basic understanding of process Organization has a system in Standard work is in place to Organizational structure and
perform capability studies. No capability studies and skills place for capturing and perform process capability information systems in place to
statistical methods used to needed to perform them. calculating capability data. studies. Process capability monitor, alert and analyze
manage product and/or Some capability studies have Process capability indices (e.g., requirements have been process capability data.
process variation. been performed but little Cpk, Ppk) are calculated after achieved for product and Statistical analysis tools are
4.7 action has been taken to the process is determined process KCs and/or plans in used to improve process 10.0%
improve processes. stable. place to improve. capability.

Capacity Assessment No knowledge of how to Basic understanding of Organization has a system in Standard work is in place to Organizational structure and
perform capacity assessments. capacity assessment and skills place for capturing and perform capacity assessments. information systems in place to
The organization does not use needed to perform them. calculating capacity data. Capacity assessments are support capacity assessments
Capacity assessments. Some capacity studies have Implementation plan in place. performed and output is used for continuous improvement.
been performed but little Organization is using capacity to make improvements to
action has been taken to assessment tools on a limited fulfill customer demand.
4.8 improve processes. Gaps are basis. 10.0%
understood and training is
underway.

Raw Score Overall Weighted Category Score

#DIV/0! 0.0%

© 2019 IAQG The IAQG is a legally incorporated international not for profit association (INPA) with membership from the Americas, Europe and the Asia Pacific Region (Rev. 08-2015) Page 5 of 9
 9145 Maturity Matrix Rev. New Dated 3 SEP 2019
SCMH Section 7.2 www.iaqg.org/scmh
5.0 Readiness of External Providers
Data
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
Item Content Weight Score Comment / Evidence
(1 pt) (2 pt) (3 pt) (4 pt) (5 pt)
Supplier's Readiness for APQP No plan for flow-down of APQP Current flow-down of APQP Organization has the Defined processes and Organization structure and
Deployment Readiness Assessment to Readiness Assessment to knowledge and skills to Flow- procedures in place for Flow- information systems in place to
suppliers. suppliers is adhoc. down APQP Readiness down of APQP Readiness manage Flow-down of APQP
Assessment to suppliers. Assessment to suppliers. Readiness Assessment to
Implementation plan to flow- Demonstrated capability to suppliers.
down APQP flow APQP Readiness Organization's suppliers use
Readiness Assessment to Assessment to suppliers. results of self assessment for
suppliers is in place. Suppliers perform self continuous improvement and
Starting to incorporate APQP assessment and report results. to improve APQP maturity
Readiness Assessment Demonstrated capability to level; action plans developed
requirements into flow-down evaluate supplier APQP and tracked for continuous
5.1 requirements for suppliers. Readiness Assessment results.. improvement. 50%
Organization's suppliers are
flowing APQP Readiness
Assessment requirements to
their suppliers.

Flow-down of 9145 Requirements No plans to flow-down of 9145 Current flow-down of 9145 Organization has the Defined processes and Organization structure and
requirements to sub-tier requirements to suppliers is knowledge to define how and procedures in place for flow- information systems in place to
suppliers. inconsistent. when to flow-down 9145 down of 9145 requirements to manage Flow-down of 9145
No defined process for requirements to sub-tier suppliers. requirements to suppliers.
determining when to flow- suppliers. Consistently flowed-down to Organization has visibility of
down 9145 Implementation plan in place sub-tier suppliers as planned. key 9145 deliverables at
Starting to flow-down 9145 Process in place to assess sub- suppliers (e.g. digital,
5.2 requirements to sub-tier tier supplier's competency and automated reporting of 9145 50%
suppliers. compliance to 9145 deliverables).
requirements.

Raw Score Overall Weighted Category Score

#DIV/0! 0.0%

Total Overall Weighted Score

0.0%

© 2019 IAQG The IAQG is a legally incorporated international not for profit association (INPA) with membership from the Americas, Europe and the Asia Pacific Region (Rev. 08-2015) Page 6 of 9
 Rev. New Dated 3 SEP 2019
Summary Report SCMH Section 7.2 www.iaqg.org/scmh

Assessment date: 0
Name of organization being assessed: 0
Contact of organization being assessed: 0

Category Average Score Low

1 Management Awareness and Commitment #DIV/0! 0 0
2 Organizational Alignment and Effective Communication #DIV/0! 0 0
3 Project and Risk Management #DIV/0! 0 0
4 Tools: APQP #DIV/0! 0 0
5 Readiness of External Providers #DIV/0! 0 0

Management Awareness and Commitment

Readiness of External Providers Organizational Alignment and Effective Communication

Tools: APQP Project and Risk Management

9145 Maturity Matrix

© 2019 IAQG The IAQG is a legally incorporated international not for profit association (INPA) with membership from the Americas,
Europe and the Asia Pacific Region (Rev. 08-2015)
 Rev. New Dated 3 SEP 2019
Detailed Report SCMH Section 7.2 www.iaqg.org/scmh

Assessment date: 0
Name of organization being assessed: 0
Contact of organization being assessed: 0

SCORE COMMENTS / EVIDENCE

Section 1 Management Awareness and Commitment
1.1 APQP Philosophy & Knowledge of the Requirements 0 0
1.2 Organizational Support 0 0
Section 2 Organizational Alignment & Effective Communicati
2.1 Ownership of APQP process 0 0
2.2 Communication 0 0
2.3 (People) 0 0
Section 3 Project and Risk Management
3.1 Project Management Execution 0 0
3.2 Risk Management and Escalation 0 0
3.3 Project Reviews and Escalation 0 0
Section 4 Tools: APQP
4.1 Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) 0 0
4.2 Process Flow Diagram (PFD) 0 0
4.3 Control Plans (CP) 0 0
4.4 Measurement System Analysis (MSA) 0 0
4.5 Management and ID of CIs & KCs 0 0
4.6 Management and ID of Key Process Characteristics 0 0
4.7 Capability Studies 0 0
4.8 Capacity Assessment 0 0
Section 5 Readiness of External Providers
5.1 Supplier's Readiness for APQP Deployment 0 0
5.2 Flow-down of 9145 Requirements 0 0

9145 Maturity Matrix

© 2019 IAQG The IAQG is a legally incorporated international not for profit association (INPA) with membershipPage
from8the
of 9
Americas, Europe and the Asia Pacific Region (Rev. 08-2015)
 Rev. New Dated 3 SEP 2019
Action Tracker SCMH Section 7.2 www.iaqg.org/scmh

Name of organization being assessed: 0

Contact of organization being assessed: 0

Examples/Documentation of Improvement
Action Item Maturity and
# Status Date Opened Matrix Item # Specific Areas to be Improved Action(s) to be Taken to Improve Maturity Owner Additional Notes Toward Improvement Date Closed
1
2
3
4

9145 Maturity Matrix Page 9 of 9

© 2019 IAQG The IAQG is a legally incorporated international not for profit association (INPA) with membership from the Americas, Europe and the Asia Pacific Region (Rev. 08-2015)