A pile of sheets nobody reads
The QC team walks the lines with clipboards. Each inline check is a sheet: line, style, operator, defects found. Final inspection uses the brand's form, filled in by hand, with the AQL sample size worked out from a laminated chart. At the end of the week the sheets go in a box file. When the same open seam turns up on three orders in a row, nobody can say which operation it comes from, because that information is in the box.
Then a brand asks for a summary of defects on their last five orders.
Recording is not the same as knowing
The QC team is doing the inspections. The trouble is that paper records are write-only. They satisfy the brand's form but cannot be sorted, added up or compared.
- Defect names vary by inspector: "open seam", "seam open", "skip stitch".
- Inline results are not linked to the operation or operator that caused the defect.
- Sample sizes are looked up by hand, and occasionally wrongly.
- Photos, when taken, are on personal phones.
- Brands each want their own report format, typed up from the paper sheets.
What paper QC costs
Defects that are not traced to their operation keep happening. Every repeat means rework on the line, or worse, a failed final inspection by the brand's own QC, which can mean re-inspecting or reworking a whole order before it ships. The QC team spends time typing up reports instead of on the floor. And you cannot show a brand, with evidence, that your quality is improving.
There is also the question of consistency between inspectors. One inspector counts a loose thread as a minor defect, another ignores it, a third calls it major. On paper this never shows up. It only becomes visible when the brand's own QC applies their standard and fails an order your team passed.
A tablet inspection app, built around your checks
- Your defect list is set up once with standard codes and names, grouped into major and minor as your brands define them.
- For inline checks, the inspector picks the line, style and operation, checks the pieces and taps defects as they find them, with an optional photo.
- For final inspections, the app works out the sample size from the lot size and the AQL level the brand specifies, and shows the accept and reject limits as the inspection progresses.
- Results are stored against the order, style, line and operation, so defects can be counted and compared across orders and weeks.
- Failed inline checks can alert the line supervisor straight away, so a faulty operation is corrected while the bundle is still on the line.
- Reports are produced in each brand's format from the recorded data, for the QC manager to check before sending.
| Question | With clipboards | With the app |
|---|---|---|
| Which operation causes open seams? | Unknown | Counted by operation |
| What sample size for this lot? | Laminated chart | Worked out from the brand's level |
| Where is the photo? | Inspector's phone | Attached to the defect |
| Brand defect report | Typed up by hand | Generated from the records |
A QC team with evidence
The production manager can see at the weekly meeting which operations produce most defects, by line, and can act on training or machine settings. Line supervisors hear about a problem while it is happening. Brand reports come out of the app, with photos. And when a brand queries a failed inspection, you have the detail.
Does your QC look like this?
- Inspection records are paper forms in box files.
- The same defects keep turning up on new orders.
- You could not quickly say which operation causes most rework.
- QC staff spend time typing up reports for brands.
- Orders have failed brand final inspections you thought would pass.