The Hidden causes of non-conformities in industrial processes

A non-conformity is rarely what it appears to be at first glance. In manufacturing, poor quality is often equated with scrap: non-compliant products destined for disposal. The cost of poor quality is then seen as the financial loss associated with that scrap. Yet this represents only the tip of the iceberg.

Behind every recurring non-conformity lies a systemic cause. In industrial environments where the ERP system serves as the central repository and interfaces with PLM, MES, quality management tools, and suppliers, these causes can almost always be traced back to the quality of master data.

An ECO is approved by the design engineering team, but the corresponding Bill of Materials (BOM) in the ERP system is not updated in time. Production continues using the previous revision. The non-conformity is detected during final inspection or, worse, by the customer, even though its root cause lies in a documentation gap between the PLM and ERP systems that may have existed for several weeks.

An incorrect supplier Part Number, an inaccurate packaging unit, or an outdated delivery lead time in the ERP supplier record can throw the entire procurement process off track. Incoming materials no longer match BOM specifications, incoming inspections generate a series of non-conformities, and no one immediately traces the root cause back to the supplier record.

In a digitized industrial environment, manufacturing routings often exist in two places: in the ERP system (for cost calculation and planning) and in the MES or Opcenter system (for shop-floor execution). When these two data repositories diverge, whether through differences in operation sequences, incorrect allocated times, or outdated machine parameters, operators are left working with conflicting instructions, directly increasing the risk of process-related non-conformities.

Inventory recorded in the ERP system at locations that do not physically exist, negative quantities for active items, or expired batches still listed as available: these anomalies can trigger production orders (POs) for components that shop-floor teams cannot locate. The result is production line stoppages and costly emergency procurement decisions, sometimes followed by customer delivery non-conformities.

Even today, many companies still rely on outdated tools such as scattered Excel spreadsheets, fragmented email threads, and even paper forms. This manual approach leads to considerable time loss, increased risk of errors, and a lack of visibility. The direct consequence: the same non-conformities keep recurring because lessons learned and previous corrective actions are neither captured nor accessible to all relevant teams.

When the same component is registered under two different codes in the ERP system, parallel purchases may be made from different suppliers, sometimes with slightly different specifications. When both versions reach the production line, quality inspectors may face a part that is “compliant with its own specification” but not interchangeable with the other version. This non-conformity has no technical justification; its root cause is purely documentary.

Certain operational warning signs indicate that a quality issue may stem from poor master data quality rather than a process or machine malfunction. Here are the key signs to look out for.

ISO 9001:2015 requires a structured process for managing non-conformities. In practice, however, this process often stops at immediate corrective action without tracing the issue back to its systemic documentation root cause. Here’s how to structure a process that addresses the problem at its source.

La méthode CAPA (Corrective Action / Preventive Action) est l’outil standard du traitement des NC. Appliquée aux données de référence, elle prend une dimension particulière :

Recurring non-conformities in manufacturing have two types of root causes: those related to processes and equipment, and those that can be traced back to master data in the ERP, PLM, and MES systems. The latter are not always addressed in depth by in-house teams, who often lack the time and methodology to tackle them.

KLERIA’s Zero-Backlog Engine™ methodology was specifically designed for this situation: industrial companies dealing with recurring non-conformities whose causes are known but never fully resolved, due to a lack of dedicated resources to correct source data such as BOMs, manufacturing routings, Master Data, and ECO statuses. We take care of this in-depth work, working alongside your teams without disrupting ongoing production.

ISO 9001:2015 requires a structured process for managing non-conformities. In practice, however, this process often stops at immediate corrective action without tracing the issue back to its systemic documentation root cause. Here’s how to structure a process that addresses the problem at its source.