Useful metrics for managing failure mode corrective action

A reliability growth program differs from a conventional reliability program in that there is a more objectively developed growth standard against which assessment techniques are compared. A comparison between the assessment and the planned value provides a good estimate of whether or not the program is progressing as scheduled and will attain the desired goal. If the program does not progress as planned, then new strategies should be considered. For example, a reexamination of problem areas may result in changing the management strategy so that more problem failure modes surfaced during the testing actually receive a corrective action instead of a repair. The management strategy may be driven by budget and schedule but it is defined by the actual actions of management in correcting reliability problems. The proper approach to what modes to fix and when, is often difficult for management to determined, even with ideal data. It becomes more difficult if certain failure patterns and trends are not measured and understood. In this paper we discuss management strategy concepts and provide a simple pie chart metric approach to aid management and engineering in interpreting the meaning of certain important trends and averages during reliability growth development testing