Carric
Talk to Carric

Case study · Defense manufacturing

A defense manufacturer unifies production hold reviews across three plants.

Carric connected four systems so the quality team can assemble each held lot’s records and track the quality manager’s decision through confirmed system updates.

See how the system works Talk to Carric
A red hold tag being applied to a tray of precision-machined components
Client
Advanced defense manufacturer
Operation
Production hold resolution
Systems
MES, PLM, QMS, and ERP
Decision owner
Quality Manager

The operating constraint

The quality team searched four systems to prepare each hold review.

The client is an advanced defense manufacturer with three production sites. Four systems held the records needed to review a production hold. MES held the work order and lot, while PLM held the current manufacturing traveler. QMS held inspection and material records, and ERP held the delivery date.

The quality team searched each system, checked the current revision and identified any missing evidence. It then assembled a record for the quality manager to review. After the decision, system updates required manual follow-up.

Before

The quality team rebuilt the lot record from four systems.

  1. Production places the hold
  2. The team finds the records
  3. The team checks the evidence
  4. Staff track system updates
After

Teams follow each hold through the decision and confirmed updates.

  1. The system gathers records
  2. Missing evidence is visible
  3. The quality manager decides
  4. MES and ERP confirm changes

The new operating path

The quality team reviews each lot in a shared record.

Carric built the software that connects MES, PLM, QMS and ERP around a shared hold record. A hold in MES opens the record for review. The software gathers the evidence, records the quality manager’s decision and tracks the approved action until MES and ERP confirm their updates.

  1. 01

    A production hold opens a shared record.

    MES adds the work order, lot, hold reason, owner and due time to one queue. The production control team uses the queue to track open holds.

  2. 02

    The software assembles the lot evidence.

    PLM supplies the current manufacturing traveler, QMS supplies inspection records and lot history, and ERP supplies the delivery date. The quality team can see which evidence is missing.

  3. 03

    The quality manager chooses the next action.

    The quality manager reviews the evidence and decides whether to release the lot, request rework, keep it on hold or escalate the review.

  4. 04

    MES and ERP confirm the approved action.

    Both systems must confirm their approved updates before the record closes. The team can then verify that the decision reached the production systems.

Human authority

The quality manager authorizes the action for each held lot.

The software Carric built assembles the evidence and tracks the approved action. The lot record retains the approver, decision time and replies from MES and ERP.

What changed operationally

Three plants use the same review and confirmation process.

The quality team now reviews one record that links the lot evidence to the approved decision. MES and ERP confirmations show that the systems received the changes. This gives each plant a record of both the authorization and its execution.

01

The team reviews current evidence.

Records from all four systems are available together. The quality team can check which revision and supporting evidence informed the decision.

02

Each hold has a clear decision owner.

The production control team manages open holds. The quality manager decides the action for each lot.

03

MES and ERP confirm execution.

Both systems confirm the changes before the record closes. The team can trace the approved action through to its execution.

Cover of the Production Hold Resolution case study and operating blueprint PDF

Downloadable case study

See how teams review and resolve production holds.

The illustrated guide shows the screens used to review lot evidence, record the quality manager’s decision and check system updates.

  • The production hold and the missing inspection record
  • The connected path across MES, PLM, QMS, and ERP
  • Questions to assess a similar operation

The case study remains open. By continuing, you agree that Carric may contact you about this operating pattern. Privacy policy.

A similar operating pattern

Which production hold requires your team to reconstruct the lot record?

Bring a recurring production hold and the systems your team uses to review it. Carric will help assess how the evidence, decision and system confirmations connect.

Book a 30-minute fit call No formal brief is required.