汽車零件開發品質管制關鍵工作評估 —以中華汽車公司為例

Key Jobs of Quality Control for Developing Vehicle Parts －A Case of China Motor Corporation

余良香(Hsiang-Liang Yu)

指導教授 ： 胡宜中 ； 邱榆淨

中原大學/商學院/企業管理研究所/碩士(2006年)

https://doi.org/10.6840/cycu200600738

摘要

中文摘要

台灣國內有十家汽車製造業，每年汽車需求約為45萬輛，面對快速及激烈變化的外在環境，公司一定要有因應的策略才能生存。汽車上的各類零件可以來自世界不同地區，只要品質、價格、交期能符合汽車公司的要求皆可以採用。就中華汽車公司而言在消費者品質需求高漲，國家法規定訂於嚴格之際，如何在汽車國產化零件開發品質管制規劃上審慎評估，並持續保持競爭優勢，是目前重要課題。
本研究之目的係藉由層級分析法，找出影響中華汽車公司零件開發品質管制工作之關鍵因素，做為品質審查之依據，以提升中華汽車公司零件品質。
本研究經參考相關文獻、及對中華汽車公司零件開發品質管制工作有深入了解之專家進行討論，建立一套客觀周延的零件開發品質管制工作評估準則層級架構。再以此架構作為問卷設計之主要內容，並針對中華汽車公司內部員工(新車型零件開發品質管制專家、工程師)及廠商專家三個群體進行問卷調查，共發出21份問卷，回收有效問卷計有17份，有效回收率為80.9％，並分析各項因素的權重值，以了解不同群體在評估層面或評估準則的重視度及其異同處。
研究結果經分析後，得到結論如下
ㄧ、整體而言較重要的構面為計畫核准、原型，較不重要為試作、量產等二項。
二、「設計FMEA」、「開發ABCD計畫表」、「ES-TEST試驗」、「製程FMEA」、「製程防呆防誤確認」等五項是中華汽車公司零件開發再次構面上，關鍵的品質管制工作。
三、「材質證明」、「零件樣品提出」與「外包申請」等三項，在整體權重分別排名倒數第三、二與一名；權重排名較後，表示其在中華汽車公司零件開發品質管制關鍵評估準則分析中比較不受重視。但以實質觀點而言，「外包申請」在廠商方面應該很重要，此次調查整體上不受重視，主要是在廠商專家全體仍然權重高，而中華汽車公司廠內專家與廠內工程師群體，認為有罰則及廠商已經養成習慣，因此，調查時廠內專家與廠內工程師群體都認為「外包申請」這一項就沒那麼重要了。

關鍵字

品質管制 ； 零件開發 ； 中華汽車公司 ； 層級分析法

並列摘要

Abstract

The present study aims to locate key factors influencing quality control performance of auto parts development in CMC for serving as reference for quality review in order to enhance CMC auto parts quality, through using AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process), in view of the grounds and the vital tasks for CMC to preserve her competing edges given below: Firstly among the ten exiting vehicle manufacturing businesses in Taiwan to compete fiercely in filling the 450,000 vehicle demand per year only those with proper strategies to address very rapidly changeable external environments can survive. Secondly, from the view of CMC, while various parts of vehicles can be introduced and obtained from different regions or parts of the world once their quality, prices and delivery meet vehicle manufacturers’ specific requirements, how to draw up and evaluate the optimal quality control planning programs for domestically developed parts to answer the increasingly stringent quality demand from the end users and to meet the more strict statutory requirements is vital and of top priority.
The study begins with literature review and thorough discussion with experts sophisticated and well experienced in the vehicle parts development quality control processes in CMC in order to formulate and establish an objective and all-around framework for parts development quality control job evaluation criteria. Next, the study conducts a questionnaire survey with a questionnaire especially designed to cover the framework, over three target groups namely CMC in-house staff - especially Quality Control specialists for parts development for latest vehicle models and engineers for the same, and also supplier specialists; achieves a valid return rate of 80.9% by distributing 21 copies of the questionnaire collecting back 17; and analyzes the weighted value of every factor to find out the emphasis and the differences as well as the similarities of the groups.
The study comes to the conclusions as the follows on the basis of the analysis results:
1. Among all aspects of the study, plan approval and prototype are dominant while trial production and mass production subordinate;
2. “Design FMEA, Development ABCD Plan Scheme, ES-TEST, and Process Mistake/Idle proofing” are the key quality control items in the sub-aspects of CMC parts development;
3. In overall weight the three items, namely “Material Certificate, Parts Sample Submission, and Application for Outsourcing”, ranks as the last first, second and third priorities respectively; the lower priorities in the weight reveal that they catch less emphasis in the analysis of CMC parts development quality control key criteria. However, in terms of practical view, Application for Outsourcing, despite of it should be critical for the manufacturers, appears to be not valued to the results of the analysis in the study. What lies behind is that most of the CMC in-house experts and in-plant engineers believe anyway there are existing penalty provisions disapproving “application for outsourcing” and they as manufacturer’s staff are happy with the existing routines without outsourcing, consequently the CMC in-house experts and in-plant engineers all reckon that the item “Application for Outsourcing” is not really important.

並列關鍵字

Parts Development ； QC (Quality Control) ； AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) ； CMC

參考文獻

賴士葆，1990年，科技策略與新產品發展績效相關之研究，台北科技管理論文集，台北:大葉文教基金會。

陳文輝，2002年，從ISO/TS 16949談全球佈局，品質月刊，第38卷，第4期，台北:中華民國品質管制協會出版，頁91~92。

吳彥明，2003年，QS-9000 品質系統實施效益之研究，台南:成功大學碩士論文。

Belton, V, Gear, A.E., 1985, The Legitimacy of Rank Rreveral-A Comment, Omega,Vol.17, P233~247.

Cooper, R.G. , Kleinsvhmidt E.J, 1986, An Investigation into the New Product Process : Steps,Deficiencies and Impact, Journal of Product Innovation Management Vol.3 No2, P71~85.