Learn: RSA QMS Training, Calibration, and Quality Projects Overview | Quizlet

QMS Analysis

Before we began creating our standardized training program, we reviewed RSA existing training material that was accessible to better understand how the organization had previously structured employee training. We found that although existing training covered some QMS concepts, it did not address all 32 QMS procedures. To better understand which QMS procedures had historically been associated with quality issues and identify which procedures required additional emphasis throughout our training program, we reviewed historical corrective action reports, or CARs, from 2020-2026. The Pareto chart summarizes the eight QMS procedures that were most frequently associated with historical corrective actions. This demonstrated that many of our QMS procedures within our program have been related to quality issues in the past. Although standardized training cannot eliminate all human error, providing consistent instructions on every QMS procedure helps ensure employees are trained on the latest revisions, requirements, and standardized processes. During our internship, we also had the opportunity to participate in a corrective action involving Product Identification and Traceability, the second most frequent procedure associated with historical corrective actions.

Corrective Action Example

This slide shows the Product Identification and Traceability corrective action that we had the opportunity to participate in during our internship. A corrective action identified issues with illegible or partially missing part markings. As a result, the Product Identification and Traceability procedure was reviewed and revised. During our internship we participated in the procedure redline meeting alongside the quality team, where we reviewed the proposed revisions, discussed additional procedural requirements, and helped incorporate the changes into the finalized procedure. The revision included the additional sections of 6.6.3 Marking Traceability Records and 6.6.4 Two-Person Verification of Product Identification. Section 6.6.3 introduced new documentation requirements by requiring objective evidence of product marking to be retained with the work order, improving documentation and traceability. Section 6.6.4 added a two-person verification requirement where a second individual verifies that the marking is correct, legible, and complete before production continues, helping reduce the likelihood of identification errors progressing through the manufacturing process. Once the revised procedure was approved, we updated the corresponding training module to incorporate these new requirements. This demonstrated the value of the standardized training program. RSA now has the foundation for a more efficient and sustainable continuous improvement process because future procedure revisions can be incorporated by updating the corresponding training module. With the training content established, our next step was to determine how these trainings would be assigned throughout the organization.

Competence & Awareness Matrix

To accomplish this, we helped develop the RSA Competence and Awareness Matrix which serves as the primary tool for assigning procedure-based training throughout the organization. Rather than assigning every employee all quality training like we did prior, we developed a role-based approach where training is assigned based upon an employee's role and responsibilities. The matrix identifies required procedures for each role in green and employees qualified to provide training in dark green. By assigning training based on an employee's role, employees receive training procedures that they use in their daily work rather than completing unnecessary training. This creates a more focused role-based training program. Centralizing all training requirements into a single document also provides RSA with a consistent process for managing the QMS training program.

QMS Results

The most significant outcome of this project was the development of the standardized training framework covering all 32 QMS procedures. We developed a training presentation and corresponding competency verification assignments for each procedure using a consistent format, creating a standardized approach to employee training throughout RSA's Quality Management System. By directly linking each training module to its governing QMS procedure, RSA now has foundations for a more efficient and sustainable process for maintaining employee training. As procedures continue to evolve, the corresponding training module can be updated to reflect the latest requirements. This project also supports RSA efforts to address an Opportunity For Improvement identified during a customer audit related to employee training. The OFI identified areas where the organization's employee training process could be further strengthened, which this project supports through a standardized and repeatable training framework. Overall, this project established a standardized training framework that RSA can continue to maintain and expand as the Quality Management System evolves.

Training Deliverables

Shown on the left are the 32 standardized QMS training presentations, and on the right are the corresponding competency verification assignments. In addition to developing the training material, we focused on how they were organized within our system. As shown in the folder path highlighted in the red boxes, we created dedicated folders to organize the training program efficiently, making them easier to locate and update over time. While this project established the foundation for a standardized training program, we also identified several opportunities to further strengthen and expand the program moving forward.

Calibration Analysis

After verifying and documenting the majority of RSA's calibration assets, we evaluated the overall progress of the calibration management system by comparing it to the previous calibration inventory. Before Hannah and I joined the project, the Quality team had already begun developing a new calibration inventory to replace the previous Excel database. Our role was to support the expansion and validation of the new calibration database. As shown in the calibration inventory expansion table on the bottom left, the previous inventory contained 333 documented calibration assets in February 2026, while the new inventory expanded to 566 assets. This increase was not the result of purchasing additional equipment. Instead, it reflected a more complete inventory by identifying calibration assets that had not previously been documented and improving the overall organization of the calibration system. We improved digital records by creating complete digital folders for all calibration assets. To support that effort, we reviewed, verified, scanned, and digitally organized 977 current and historical calibration certificates into their corresponding asset folders, physically located 443 calibration assets, captured 648 asset images, and created 52 employee accountability forms to support long-term calibration management. By validating the calibration inventory and supporting documentation, we established a more complete understanding of RSA's calibration system.

Calibration Results

The most significant outcome of this project was the development of a more complete, accurate and organized calibration management system. Shown on this slide, each calibration asset was documented with key information including RSA ID number, calibration status, calibration cycle, expiration date, owner, and department location. Every RSA ID number had a folder linked that contained equipment images, if the ID was not visible another calibration sticker image, and both the current and historical calibration certificates. Overall, these improvements strengthened asset accountability, improved traceability and data accuracy, and provided RSA with a stronger foundation for long-term calibration management and future calibration audits.

Additional Quality Engineering Experience

In addition to our two capstone projects we presented, we also had the opportunity to support various other quality projects. These included material review board meetings every week and later running the meetings, inspection rejection reports, acceptance test procedures, first article inspections, pre-audit meetings for the Nadcap audit later this month, welding audit trainings and welding inspection, corrective action reports, receiving inspection, document control, and Faro Arm experience. Together, these experiences provided us with valuable exposure to the day-to-day responsibilities of a Quality Engineer.