Total Quality Management & Business Excellence

ISSN: 1478-3363 (Print) 1478-3371 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ctqm20

Measurement system analysis for continuous

quality improvement in automobile SMEs: multiple
case study

Jigar A. Doshi & Darshak A. Desai

To cite this article: Jigar A. Doshi & Darshak A. Desai (2017): Measurement system analysis
for continuous quality improvement in automobile SMEs: multiple case study, Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2017.1324289

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2017.1324289

Published online: 12 May 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 6

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ctqm20

Download by: [The UC San Diego Library] Date: 14 May 2017, At: 01:46
Total Quality Management, 2017
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2017.1324289

Measurement system analysis for continuous quality improvement

in automobile SMEs: multiple case study
∗
Jigar A. Doshi a,b and Darshak A. Desai c
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, R. K. University, Rajkot, India; b4C Consulting Pvt.
Ltd., Ahmedabad, India; cMechanical Engineering Department, G H Patel College of
Engineering & Technology, Vallabh Vidyanagar, India

The objective of this study is to substantiate the practicality of measurement system

analysis (MSA) for continuous quality improvement (CQI) specifically for the
automobile small-to-medium enterprises (SMEs). MSA is one of the Auto Core
Tools widely used in the automobile industry. The real-life case studies have been
carried out in the automobile SMEs situated in Gujarat, India. Four automobile
SMEs have been preferred to conduct MSA. All of them supply their products to
automotive Original Equipment Manufacturers. MSA – Gauge R&R (repeatability
and reproducibility) study has been conducted for critical to quality (CTQ)
parameters of each company’s product and results have been analysed. MSA has
been utilised to measure its impact on product and process quality and external/
internal failure, the overall effect on CQI. The results of MSA at each of four SMEs
identify opportunity for quality improvement; specifically in the measurement
system – instrument and appraiser. Identified improvement points have been
implemented during the period of six months which improves the results
significantly. The results of MSA show the significant improvement in the
measurement system, mainly in appraiser variation and equipment variation. This
paper traces how MSA had been implemented in automotive SMEs and quality
improvement methods identified. It should be of high value to practitioners and
academicians who are interested in MSA, and CQI.
Keywords: measurement system analysis; continuous quality improvement;
automotive core tools; small and medium enterprises

1. Introduction
The current scenario in Indian automobile industries is very delicate. On one side the
industry is growing rampantly and, on the other side, competition is getting tougher and
tougher. Competition has increased because of increased customer demands. The manu-
facturing industry, especially small suppliers to automobile Original Equipment Manufac-
turers (OEMs), has to continuously improve its processes and products in order to improve
its customers’ satisfaction. To measure the performance of product and process quality and
customer satisfaction, a possible way out is continuous quality improvement (CQI) tools.
At the same time, CQI is not an easy task and requires lots of understanding and determi-
nation. With the advent of quality system certifications, measurement system analysis
(MSA) has begun to get its due importance in relation to CQI. However, the common
Indian experience is that most of the industries conducting MSA studies are finding it
extremely difficult to investigate the root causes behind poor gauge R&R and conse-
quently to take proper corrective actions (Doshi, Kamdar, Jani, & Chaudhary, 2012).

∗
Corresponding author. Email: jigardoshi11@gmail.com

# 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

2 J.A. Doshi and D.A. Desai

Most of the exercises thus end solely in an audit-oriented evaluation of the gauge R&R
without any systematic effort for CQI (Dasgupta & Murthy, 2001). Many past studies
show the use of Six Sigma and lean tools in automobile industries, especially in India,
is successful in achieving CQI, but very less work has been carried out using MSA
(Doshi & Desai, 2016b). The restricted use of MSA to achieve quality improvements as
well as the difficult task of achieving CQI motivated the authors to conduct the multiple
case study-based research in India. Case study research was chosen given the need to
gather in-depth, rich data on the phenomenon of MSA implementation to achieve
quality improvements (Yin, 2003).
This paper describes the efforts made to reveal the usefulness of MSA to achieve CQI
with the help of real-life cases of an Indian small-scale engineering company. The objec-
tive of multiple case studies was to discover a robust conclusion rather than the output of a
single case. Four small-to-medium-sized automotive companies were carefully chosen
under the study. A cross-functional team (CFT) was formed at each case company to
carry out the study. MSA was implemented at each company separately by the respective
CFT and the results were scrutinised. Application of MSA at each case company in ques-
tion helped to identify many improvement opportunities. The methodology adopted
helped to chart the continuous improvement roadmap. The methodology and findings as
illustrated in the concluding remarks can further be strengthened through implementation
of all identified improvement opportunities and also recommending carrying out such
activity three to four times in a year.

2. Literature review
2.1. CQI and measurement analysis
CQI is routed through analysis and diagnosis of gathered data; then the quality of data
becomes more important for quality improvement. It is obtained by the application of
the measurement system in the measurement procedure (Zhang, Chen, & Zhu, 2008).
Hence the accuracy of a measurement system will have a direct influence on the right jud-
gement for product and process quality. CQI is a sequence of the relative quality initiative,
the result of quality tools that help in producing high-quality products and enhance the
overall business performance. Many effective qualities and productivity improvement
tools and techniques generally do not find a place in small-to-medium enterprises
(SMEs) due to lack of knowledge and resources to implement them (Desai, 2008).
CQI can be done through a problem solution in SMEs (Doshi & Desai, 2016a). MSA
and other tools can be used as sources to identify the sources of the problem, probably a
potential problem, and methods can be deployed as a solution which will be the way
forward for CQI (Teixeira, Lopes & Sousa, 2012). The use of MSA along with other
quality tools was proposed by researchers (Doshi et al., 2012) to reduce the fin problem
observed in radiator manufacturing to improve quality continuously. The fin problem
can be described as irregularities in dimensions and shapes of the fin of the radiator.
They used an Ishikawa diagram in the company with the help of available resources
and found that many causes related to measurement and process variations are contributing
to the fin problem. The important component of CQI, especially improvement of process
and product, is the measurement system (Doshi & Desai, 2014). The accuracy of a
measurement system will have a direct influence on the right judgement for product and
process quality. The R&R study is an important approach for evaluating the precision
of MSA (Chen & Lyub, 2009). The measurement system, which is different from the tra-
ditional measurement instrument, consists of the measured part, measurement method,
 Total Quality Management 3

measurement process, measurement instrument, reference standards, and measurement

environment. It means the entire measurement process. Because of various reasons, it is
possible that each element of the measurement system will bring variation and discreteness
into the measurement results and affect the measurement accuracy (Doshi & Jani, 2012).
In order to ensure the reliability of the measurement system, it is necessary to analyse the
measurement system so as to determine and control the sources of variation. So far,
research work on the statistical discreteness in the measurement system is rarely
implemented. In the viewpoint of mathematical statistics, the evaluation indexes of
measurement system include bias, stability, linearity, repeatability, reproducibility, etc.
(Breyfogle, 2003). Among them, R&R is an important quality index, which can reflect
measurement capability and precision, namely the discreteness caused by the statistical
random effect. The discreteness must be controlled within a certain range to ensure that
measurement results are reliable. The quality of measurement data is defined by the stat-
istical properties of multiple measurements obtained from a measurement system operat-
ing under stable conditions. For instance, suppose that a measurement system, operating
under stable conditions, is used to obtain several measurements of a certain characteristic.
If the measurements are close to the master value for the characteristic, then the quality of
the data is said to be high. Similarly, if some, or all, of the measurements, are far away
from the master value, then the quality of the data is said to be low (Automotive Industry
Action Group [AIAG], 2010).
A measurement system incapable of detecting process variation can never be trusted to
make decisions on process adjustment (Evans, 2001). MSA focus is on understanding the
measurement process, determining the amount of error in the process, and assessing the
adequacy of the measurement system for product and process control and promotes under-
standing and improvement-variation reduction (AIAG, 2010). The purpose of each MSA
study is to answer the following fundamental questions:

. Does the measuring equipment have the capability in the consequent measurement?
. Do all operators have the same efficiency?
. Do the operators have the potential of making errors that may lead to duplication
cost and defective product?
. Is there any difference between operators in the consequent measurement?
. Is there any tendency in operators to accept or reject the product?

MSA was used to measure the performance of the measuring system in a real condi-
tion.Understanding and management of measurement errors, generally called MSA, it is
anextremely important function for process improvement(Montgomery, 2013), if all cus-
tomer engineering design record and specification requirements are properly understood
by the supplier and that the process has the potential to produce product consistently
meeting during an actual production run. In one of the researches, it is also explained
that when measurements are nonreplicable, assessing the measurement system is a difficult
task and cannot be done using the conventional gauge repeatability and reproducibility
methods (Awad, Erdmann, Shanshal, & Barth, 2009). This is due to the fact that the
object measured is affected by the measurement and/or changes with time.

2.2. MSA study

Detailed knowledge of the process parameters, how the process is doing, and what can go
wrong are essential to effectively manage a variation of any process. The difference
4 J.A. Doshi and D.A. Desai

between inspection and the measurement process is quite important, but not commonly
understood. Negligence of any of these leads to heavy loss and consequences. Inspection
is the act of examining process parameters, parts in-process, assembled subsystems, or
complete end products with the aid of suitable standards and measuring devices which
enable the observer to confirm or deny the premise that the process is operating in a
stable manner with an acceptable variation to a customer-designated target. It is observed
that many companies put highest weightage on equipment, the more expensive the gauge/
equipment, the more important the characteristics of the process and product. The useful-
ness of the instrument, its compatibility with the process and environment, and its usability
were rarely questioned (AIAG, 2010). Consequently, these gauges were often not used
properly or simply not used. The measurement process includes measurement activity
and analysis activity as shown in Figure 1 (Doshi & Desai, 2016c). Application of statisti-
cal, logical, and management techniques is essential for better decision-making and
output.
Equipment is only one part of the measurement process. But purchasing the best or the
latest measurement technology will not necessarily guarantee correct production process
control decisions. The owner of the process must know how to correctly use this equip-
ment and how to analyse and interpret the results. Provision of clear operational definitions
and standards, as well as training and support, is essential. Monitoring and controlling of
the measurement process are essential to assure stable and correct results. Study of the
gauge, procedure, user, and environment; i.e. normal operating conditions, is the next
important step, called MSA. It is important to analyse two things – variation caused by
the instrument and variation caused by the inspector. Variation between measurement
values which are obtained when one or several inspectors repeatedly measure the same
parameter of the same kind of parts by using the same instrument is called repeatability
(Bhuiyan, Baghel, & Wilson, 2006). However, the variation between mean values
which are obtained when different inspectors repeatedly measure the same parameter of
the same kind of parts by using the same instrument is called reproducibility. Gauge
R&R is an estimate of the combined variation of repeatability and reproducibility. It pro-
vides the variation that exists within-system and between-systems variances.

s2GRR = s2reproducibility + s2repeatability .

2.3. Steps for conducting MSA to determine repeatability and reproducibility

The Average and Range method (X & R) is an approach which will provide an estimate of
both repeatability and reproducibility for a measurement system.
Although the number of appraisers, trials, and parts may be varied, the subsequent dis-
cussion represents the optimum conditions for conducting the study (AIAG, 2010). The
detailed procedure is as follows:

Figure 1. Measurement process.

 Total Quality Management 5

(1) Obtain a sample of n . 5 parts that represent the actual or expected range of
process variation.
(2) Select three appraisers, called A, B, and C. Number the part 1 through n so that the
numbers are not visible to the appraisers.
(3) Calibrate the gauge if this is part of the normal measurement system procedure.
Let the appraiser ‘A’ measure n parts in a random order and record the results.
(4) Let appraisers ‘B’ and ‘C’ measure the same n parts without seeing each other’s
reading; then record the results, respectively.
(5) Repeat the cycle using a different random order of measurement. Record the data
in the appropriate column. If three trials are needed, repeat the cycle.
(6) Calculate Range, Average, Repeatability, and Reproducibility as per their
equations or using software/excel templates.

3. Research approach – case study

Yin (2003) describes three types of case study: exploratory, explanatory, and descrip-
tive, indicating that all three are valid approaches. The exploratory stage comes
before the theory-building stage and seeks to ‘uncover areas for research and theory
development’ (Voss, Tsikriktsis, & Frohlich, 2002). The advantages of the case study
approach at this stage of research include the ‘exploratory depth’ of understanding
that can be achieved as described in Meredith (1998). Exploratory research is appropri-
ate here as very little is known in the academic literature about the CQI through MSA.
A multiple case study approach is needed to overcome the shortcomings of much of the
previous research reported in the literature, which has concentrated on a single organ-
isation. The multi-case study approach allows a more direct comparison between the
similarities and differences of the implementation practices in the different contexts
considered (Preeprem & Hendry, 2008). It also enables more generic conclusions to
be reached (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007).

3.1. Research methodology

As a multiple case study approach, four automotive SMEs are identified where MSA can
be implemented and CQI can be monitored. While selecting companies, the following par-
ameters are considered. (A) All companies shall be suppliers of automotive OEMs, (B) all
shall be of the same size – number of employees, and (C) all shall be situated in a similar
region. The first step identified is to study the manufacturing process of the companies in
detail and after that to identify critical measurement systems to monitor through MSA.
Identification of measurement systems is based on the critical dimensions of the
product produced by the respective companies. Three quality inspectors (workers who
actually measure the dimensions), i.e. three appraisers, were used for the MSA study
and 10 samples of the product selected. These data are then plotted in an excel sheet pre-
pared as per the AIAG guideline for MSA. The methodology used for case study-based
research is described in Figure 2.

3.2. Companies’ background

Four automotive component manufacturers were chosen for the research. One is a man-
ufacturer of air duct used in the automobile air conditioning system (hereafter called as
DBI); the second is a manufacturer of the radiator (hereafter called as VRPL); third is a
6 J.A. Doshi and D.A. Desai

Figure 2. Research approach (flow chart).

manufacturer of the corrugated tube (KWPL); and fourth is a manufacturer of Bolt

(SPPL). All companies are small-scale companies. DBI has around 15 – 17 employees,
VRPL has 25 – 30 employees, KWPL has 13 – 15 employees, and SPPL has 18 – 20
employees. All companies are located in the state of Gujarat in India. DBI manufac-
tures air ducts using the blow moulding process which is used in the air conditioning
system of automobiles and is supplier to one of the premier automobile manufacturers.
VRPL manufactures radiators using various mechanical processes which are used in an
automobile and is also a supplier to one of the premier automobile manufacturers.
KWPL is a manufacturer of corrugated tubes used for electrical wiring in an auto-
mobile and is a supplier to a premier automobile manufacturer. SPPL is a manufac-
turer of bolts using various machining processes and is a supplier to a premier
automobile manufacturer as well.

3.3. MSA implementation in companies

The numbers of appraisers selected are three, trails to conduct by each appraiser are
also three, and 10 parts are selected as per the AIAG guideline for the MSA study
(AIAG, 2010). Then critical measuring instruments are identified for each company
based on critical to quality (CTQ) of the product and are shown in Table 1. This

Table 1. Critical measurement for companies.

Company Product Critical measurement Instrument
01-DBI AC air duct Hole – Diameter Vernier Caliper
02-VRPL Radiator Radiator tube – Diameter Digital Vernier Caliper
03-SPPL Bolt Neck – Diameter Digital Vernier Caliper
04-KWPL PVC sleeve Outer diameter Micrometer
 Total Quality Management 7

Figure 3. CTQ for AC air duct.

will help to recognise the critical quality requirements of the product. This will also
help to identify the reasons because of which a product may fail (Desai, Kotadiya,
Makwana, & Patel, 2015). Figures 3 – 6show the CTQ of the product of each company.
Sample MSA calculation tables (Tables 2 and 3) and charts (Figures 7 and 8) are
presented hereafter, which show all the details of the MSA study conducted at one of
the companies with the results. Due to space limitation, calculations for other compa-
nies are not presented in the paper. The MSA sheets are prepared such that all
calculations required for the MSA study can be done automatically, and software
like Minitab or SPSS may be used for the MSA study. The formulas used to calculate
average, range, mean, upper control limit (UCL), lower control limit (LCL), repeatabil-
ity, reproducibility, R&R, part variation (PV), etc. are shown in the sample calculation
sheet.

Figure 4. CTQ for radiator.

8 J.A. Doshi and D.A. Desai

Figure 5. CTQ for PVC sleeve.

The following are the criteria for acceptance of gauge repeatability and reproducibility
(AIAG, 2010):

. Under 10% errors – the measurement system is acceptable.

. 10 –30% errors – may be acceptable based upon the importance of the application,
cost of gauge, cost of repairs, etc.
. Over 30% errors – the measurement system needs improvement. Make every effort
to identify the problems and correct them.

3.4. Analysis of MSA study results

Results of the MSA study conducted at each identified company: automotive SMEs show
that %R&R (Repeatability & Reproducibility) is above 30% in all companies. The impor-
tant parameters of study like appraiser variation (AV), equipment variation (EV), and PV
along with %R&R are shown in Table 4. It is quite evident that in all of the companies EV
is much higher compared to AV and PV is also quite high. The results of the MSA study
indicate that variation in equipment, measurement method, and PV is quite high, which
means that the measurement system needs immediate improvement in each company.
The amount of variation in the measurement system is high, as shown in Table 4, and
that directly affects product quality and process quality. Immediate attention to the
problem is essential to improve the quality of the system. To overcome the problem ident-
ified, a CFT including an industry expert was prepared, which had to identify the root
causes of higher %R&R.

Figure 6. CTQ for bolt.

 Total Quality Management 9

Table 2. Calculations of MSA at 01-DBI Company.

After the MSA study and the results of the same as presented in Table 4, brainstorming
sessions were organised in each case company to find out the root causes of the higher vari-
ation in the measurement system. The help of the technical consultants was also taken
when variations were related to the processes. As a result of many brainstorming sessions
and opinions, the CFT had listed improvement points. To scrutinise those points, again the
help of technical experts and managers was taken and identified critical points are listed
below which have a significant impact on improvement in product quality and process
quality.

Table 3. R&R Calculations for 01-DBI Company?.

10 J.A. Doshi and D.A. Desai

Figure 7. X-Bar chart of MSA at 01-DBI Company.

Identified improvement opportunities for company-01-DBI

. Reduction of watermarks on the product to improve Product Quality. Watermarks
on the product are because of poor dye/tool conditions. A tool maintenance
system has to be introduced.
. The responsibilities and authorities have to be defined and communicated within the
organisation, especially for Quality Control. An especially dedicated quality inspec-
tor has to be appointed for measuring critical dimensions.
. A Standard Operating Procedure/Work Instruction has to be developed and dis-
played in the inspection area for inspection of products at various stages.
. Measuring instrument calibration frequency has to be fixed and calibration of
measuring instruments has to be done from a good laboratory accredited by ISO
17025 or nationally accredited.
. Repetitive training has to be given to workers/quality inspectors on use of measuring
instruments.
. Storage area for measuring instruments has to be chosen and their preservation has to
be improved, like identification of the area (cupboard), storage in the proper box, etc.

Identified improvement opportunities for company-02-VRPL

. The clamping mechanism, a semi-automatic instrument, may be developed to over-

come the problem of improper method of handling clamps during assembly

Figure 8. R-Bar chart of MSA at 01-DBI Company.

 Total Quality Management 11

Table 4. MSA study result comparison.

Company – Company – Company – Company –
DBI SPPL VRPL KWPL
Appraiser variation 2.87% 6% 7% 8%
Equipment variation 30.80% 92.13% 61.07% 28.86%
Part variation 6.29% 41% 36% 157%
Repeatability and 30.93% 92.31% 61.5% 30.05%
Reproducibility

. The responsibilities and authorities are to be defined and communicated within the
organisation, especially for Quality Control. An especially dedicated quality inspec-
tor for measuring critical dimensions has to be appointed.
. A Standard Operating Procedure/Work Instruction has to be developed and dis-
played in the inspection area for inspection of products at various stages.
. Measuring instrument calibration frequency has to be fixed and calibration of
measuring instruments has to be done from a good laboratory accredited by ISO
17025 or nationally accredited.
. Repetitive training has to be given to workers/quality inspectors on the use of
measuring instruments.

Identified improvement opportunities for company-03-SPPL

. The responsibilities and authorities have to be defined and communicated within the
organisation, especially for Quality Control. An especially dedicated quality inspec-
tor for measuring critical dimensions has to be appointed.
. A Standard Operating Procedure/Work Instruction has to be developed and dis-
played in the inspection area for inspection of products at various stages.
. Measuring instrument calibration frequency has to be fixed and calibration of
measuring instruments to be done from a good laboratory accredited by ISO
17025 or nationally accredited.
. Repetitive training has to be given to workers/quality inspectors on the use of
measuring instruments.
. Storage area for measuring instruments have to be chosen and their preservation has
to be improved, like identification of the area (cupboard), storage in the proper box,
etc.

Identified improvement opportunities for company-04-KWPL

. To reduce dimensional defects in the component

W Go/No Go Fixture has to be developed and implemented,

W Operators have to be trained on the inspection method

. Improvement in the In-process inspection

W Operators need to be trained in inspection methods

W Quality Plan has to be finalised and documented

. The responsibilities and authorities have to be defined and communicated within the
organisation, especially for Quality Control. An especially dedicated quality inspec-
tor for measuring critical dimensions has to be appointed.
12 J.A. Doshi and D.A. Desai

. Measuring instrument calibration frequency has to be fixed and calibration of

measuring instruments has to be done from a good laboratory accredited by ISO
17025 or nationally accredited.
. Repetitive training has to be given to workers/quality inspectors on the use of
measuring instruments.
. Storage area for measuring instruments has to be chosen and their preservation has to
be improved, like identification of the area (cupboard), storage in the proper box, etc.

The improvement points identified are as mentioned above, each of them was taken as
project for improvement and implementation of the same were started in each SME. Their
implementation takes some efforts, time, and resources. Major limitations of each SME
were competent staff and resources. During the following six months, the major improve-
ment points implemented are mainly:

. Reduction in rejections by improvement in the process – addition of inspection

processes
. Training operators on measurement methods
. Calibration and removal of instrument errors
. Implementation of SOPs or Work Instruction for measurement.

Still, many suggested improvement points are in the process of implementation. The
MSA study was conducted at each company, after the implementation of a few projects,
after six months. The results of the same are presented in Table 5, which shows effective
signs of improvements.

4. Managerial implications
Most of the quality tools are key to improving the business process, innovation perform-
ance, and technical performance in such a way that it may help in satisfying customer
needs and expectations. Specifically, automobile industries focus on the Auto Core
Tools, mainly on MSA, for CQI. The focus of this study for deploying MSA is to
meet the stated objectives within budget and time constraints. MSA helps practitioners
in identifying errors prevailing in the measurement system. This will specifically help
quality managers in identifying products with measurement errors and prevent them
from delivering such defective products to the customer. This paper will be of value
to practitioners in automobile SMEs by providing guidance in implementing MSA and
how to identify quality improvement opportunities. Practitioners will find useful prin-
ciples, tools, and techniques used to achieve CQI. It should also be useful to academics
who are interested in MSA implementation methods and its usefulness for quality
improvement.

Table 5. MSA study result (after six months).

Company – DBI Company – SPPL Company – VRPL Company – KWPL
AV 2.36% 5.1% 4.5% 6.5%
EV 10.96% 40.25% 30.5% 14.35%
PV 3.67% 25% 28% 80%
R&R 11.21% 40.5% 30.83% 15.75%
 Total Quality Management 13

5. Conclusion and suggestions

This research presents multiple case studies to demonstrate how the effective introduction
and implementation of the MSA tool can lead to a detailed understanding of the com-
ponents of variation during the measuring process and evaluation if a measurement
system is suitable for a specific application of the product’s most critical quality par-
ameters. From a detailed study of MSA in four automotive SMEs, it is recognised that
CQI is very much possible on the basis of MSA results presented in Section 3.4. The
results of MSA observed were dissimilar in each SME even though all of them are supply-
ing their products to automotive OEMs; because all have different technical capabilities,
producing different products, have different skill sets, and much more. %R&R was more
than 30% in each SME, which indicates that improvement in the measurement system as
well as the processes is needed. Hence, the CFT of respective companies had identified
improvement points based on the brainstorming sessions so process quality can be
improved. Implementation of the identified improvement points definitely leads to
improvement of product quality and process quality. The signs of improvement in the
process are visible in the results of MSA after implementation of some improvement
points. The improvement in the %R&R is quite visible as mentioned in Table 5. The
%R&R has improved to 11.21% from 30.93% in company DBI, improved to 40.5%
from 92.31% in company SPPL, in company VRPL from 61.5% to 30.38%, and in
company KWPL from 30.05% to 15.72%. The comparative analysis of MSA results,
before and after improvement point implementation, is shown in Figure 9.
Considering that SMEs have many constraints to implementing all suggestions for
improvement within a short period of time, it is clear that further improvement is possible
after implementation of the remaining improvement points.The purpose of steering case
study in four automotive companies is flourishing as all companies showing significant-
signs of quality improvement. Hence it is apparent that MSA is one of the important
tools for CQI in automotive SMEs.

Figure 9. Comparative analysis of MSA results.

14 J.A. Doshi and D.A. Desai

One of the limitations can be the skill sets available to SMEs. MSA as well as CQI
concepts require quite a bit of technical competence and experience. Another can be a
shortage of resources required for improvement in a measurement system, processes,
and product in SMEs. In order to achieve CQI and absolutely accept this measuring
system for automotive SMEs, we suggest practicing this measurement system. Despite
this, it is recommended to first understand the concepts of MSA completely, improve
awareness in the organisation for MSA, as well as CQI and good scientific brainstorming
sessions for best results.

6. Further scope
It is concluded that many of the above findings constitute an important contribution to our
knowledge of MSA and quality improvement in their own right, while others would
benefit from further research. Also, it is recommended for future to carry out such an exercise
at least three or four times each year and then some concrete method may be drawn up for
continuous improvement. Although much research has been conducted on the individual
MSA, to the authors’ knowledge, little focus has been directed towards developing a
model that would enable SMEs to identify the CQI methodology that best suits its needs,
given a certain budget for such programmes. Thus, an interesting topic to pursue in the
field of CQI is how to determine the appropriate methodology for SMEs. Furthermore,
there is also a need for research in the field of the hybrid methodologies, i.e. a combination
of quality tools such as MSA along with SPC, MSA with FMEA, etc., to determine their appli-
cability in various SMEs. Such projects are the basis of the future research plans of the authors.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References
Automotive Industry Action Group. (2010). Measurement system analysis – reference manual
(pp. 5– 125, 4th ed.).
Awad, M., Erdmann, T. P., Shanshal, Y., & Barth, B. (2009). A measurement system analysis
approach for hard-to-repeat events. Quality Engineering, 21, 300–305.
Bhuiyan, N., Baghel, A., & Wilson, J. (2006). A sustainable continuous improvement methodology
at an aerospace company. International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, 55(8), 671 –687.
Breyfogle, F. W. (2003). Implementing Six Sigma: Smarter solutions using statistical methods (2nd
ed., 35–72). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons.
Chen, M., & Lyub, J. (2009). A novel evaluation model for measurement system analysis.
Production Planning & Control: The Management of Operations, 20(5), 420–430.
Dasgupta, T., & Murthy, S. V. S. N. (2001). Looking beyond audit-oriented evaluation of gauge
repeatability and reproducibility: A case study. Total Quality Management, 12(6), 649– 655.
Desai, D. A. (2008). Cost of quality in small- and medium-sized enterprises: Case of an Indian engin-
eering company. Production Planning & Control, 19(1), 25 –34.
Desai, D. A., Kotadiya, P., Makwana, M., & Patel, S. (2015). Curbing variations in packaging
process through six sigma way in a large-scale food-processing industry. Journal of
Industrial Engineering International, 11(1), 119–129. doi:10.1007/s40092-014-0082-6
Doshi, J. A., & Desai, D. A. (2014). Review of continuous quality improvement methodology –
enablers, exertion, benefits for SMEs. International Journal of Quality and Innovation,
2(3), 245 –255.
Doshi, J. A., & Desai, D. A. (2016a). Statistical process control: An approach for continuous quality
improvement in automotive SMEs – Indian case study. International Journal of Productivity
and Quality Management, 19(3), 387– 407.
 Total Quality Management 15

Doshi, J. A., & Desai, D. A. (2016b). Role of production part approval process in continuous quality
improvement and customer satisfaction. International Journal of Engineering Research in
Africa, 22, 174 –183.
Doshi, J. A., & Desai, D. A. (2016c). Overview of automotive core tools: Applications and benefits.
Journal of the Institution of Engineers (India): Series C, 2(3), 245. doi:10.1007/s40032-016-
0288-z
Doshi, J. A., & Jani, S. Y. (2012). Measurement system analysis for quality improvement using gage
R&R study at company based Ahmedabad – manufacturer of automotive AC air duct (pp. 1–
7). AdMet ARAI.
Doshi, J. A., Kamdar, J. D., Jani, S. Y., & Chaudhary, S. J. (2012). Root cause analysis using
Ishikawa diagram for reducing radiator rejection. International Journal of Engineering
Research and Applications (IJERA), 2(6), 684–689.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and chal-
lenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.
Evans, J. R. (2001). An exploratory study of performance measurement system and relationship with
performance results (pp. 1–27). The Decision Science Institute, 32nd annual conference, San
Francisco.
Meredith, J. (1998). Building operations management theory through case and field research.
Journal of Operations Management, 16, 441– 454.
Montgomery, D. C. (2013). Statistical quality control: A modern introduction (7th ed.356–402).
Jefferson City: Wiley & Sons.
Preeprem, N, & Hendry, L. (2008). Exploring the six sigma phenomenon using multiple case study
evidence. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 28(3), 279–303.
Teixeira, H. N., Lopes, I. S., & Sousa, S. D. (2012). A methodology for quality problems diagnosis in
SMEs. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 64, 1117–1122.
Voss, C, Tsikriktsis, N, & Frohlich, M. (2002). Case research in operations management.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(2), 195–219.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Zhang, Xiao-hai, Chen, Bing-ya, & Zhu, Yi. (2008). Application of Measurement System R&R
Analysis in Ultrasonic Testing, pp. 25– 35. 17th World Conference on Nondestructive
Testing. Shanghai, China, 25 –28 Oct 2008.