Our initial problem was finding a method that would best identify the sequence and interactions and provide a method to describe the process without rewriting the entire system. There was no value seen to rewriting procedures to describe processes that were already in place and may need only minor revisions to be compliant. The Corporate Management Rep reviewed the Quality Manual that he was responsible for at corporate and identified where our current system aligned with the TS requirements. The result was a matrix showing where in our current system we addressed the requirements of the TS 16949 standard and/or customer specific requirements. Once this was done it was then possible for the plants to understand the relationship their current documentation had to applying it in the process model that was to be developed. We had tried conventional flow chart software but, though it could show sequence, it didnt make it practical to describe the interactions and the processes (Who, What, How, Inputs, Outputs and measurables) effectively. We finished a Corporate and Plant model but they still were unclear and many interactions (links) were not readily apparent. At this point we trialed software (Terrapene Process Management Suite) at our corporate office that was advertised on the AIAG website and followed up with an onsite demonstration by the manufacturer (Plexus Corp., St. Paul, MN). The Corporate demonstration included our Quality Director, IT Director and the plant Quality Managers. The usefulness of this software in accomplishing what we were working on was readily apparent. The Executive Staff approved it. Corporate developed and owns the Level 1 Quality Manual and reviewed the TS and customer specific requirements to what we currently had documented. Policies were revised as necessary and the Table of Contents reformatted to cross reference where we addressed TS requirements in the existing system. This then became the guide for the plants in applying existing documentation to the new processes. The software was purchased by corporate, installed on a server that all locations had access to and the software supplier was brought in to train each locations implementation team. The plants were then told to begin mapping their processes including linking relevant documentation (procedures, work instructions and metrics) to each process. The plants were directed to not rewrite everything we had but to identify in the process diagrams (referred to as turtles in our Terrapene software) where the particular document was applicable and link it to that turtle. The document was then reviewed to ensure it was compliant with the requirements and matched the process it was linked to. Most changes to our documentation revolved around taking out references to the QS 9000 standard. Under corporate direction the plants were then directed to begin developing their individual systems and these were monitored from corporate on the server as they were developed. A team was established made up of the heads of each department and the Management Rep to brainstorm and map the corporate core, management and support processes. Once this top level model was agreed to process owners were assigned that would be responsible for the development of the process that represented their area(s) of responsibility. The documentation (Policy, Procedures, work instructions and forms in electronic form) were moved into a shared folder on the main server to give access to all CPAC salaried employees so they could be linked where necessary to the project turtles in our Terrapene system. The corporate Management Rep set up the project and gave access to the Terrapene process owners to begin developing their processes. Process owners had been trained on the use of the Terrapene software and began filling in their turtles using input from other members of their department. The Management Rep at Corporate monitored work on the Terrapene projects at all sites and provided direction where problems were observed or reported. Each plant Management Rep was granted read rights to review work being done at the other locations to work to commonize/standardize as much as possible between all sites. This process took three months to complete once the software was in place and work was assigned to the process owners. No one worked full time on this effort but instead had worked when time was available. Internal audits were conducted next to validate the work and to verify we were compliant to TS 16949 and customer specific requirements. The system was adjusted where necessary through our normal corrective action process and areas of nonconformance were re-evaluated. Management review was conducted at Corporate and the system was approved. During the Corporate Management Review, the completed project was reviewed and the CEO saw the opportunity to track plant data through the Terrapene system and also to include our Corporate Management Reports that are reviewed in monthly business review meetings (both at the corporate office and at each manufacturing site). The plant managers were then directed to develop the Management Responsibility process at each facility to include the measurables that the plant reviews each month with the Executive Staff during plant level business review meetings. These are all linked using the Terrapene software so that the CEO can review these through the Corporate system whenever needed Write a summary of this case study