Quality Management Plan
Document Type Deliverable
Document Number D8.4
Primary Author(s) Martin Wifling | ViF
Document Version / Status 1.0 | First issue (living document)
Distribution Level PU (public)
Project Acronym FACTS4WORKERS
Project Title Worker-Centric Workplaces in Smart Factories
Project Website www.facts4workers.eu
Project Coordinator Martin Wifling | ViF | [email protected]
Grant Agreement Number 636778
This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement n˚ 636778
Quality Management Plan
CONTRIBUTORS
Name Organization Name Organization
Martin Wifling ViF
Stelios Damalas ViF
REVIEWERS
Name Organization Date
Detlef Gerhard TU Wien 2015-06-25
DOCUMENT HISTORY
Revision Date Author / Organization Description
First draft 2015-05-18 Stelios Damalas / ViF
PU (public) | 1.0 | First issue (living document) Page 2 | 11
Quality Management Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 4
2 QUALITY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY AND OBJECTIVES 5
3 QUALITY CONTROL ACTIVITIES 6
3.1 Defined milestones 6
3.2 Review process 6
4 QUALITY ASSURANCE ACTIVITIES 8
4.1 Frequent communication within the project 8
4.2 Risk management 9
5 REFERENCES 11
PU (public) | 1.0 | First issue (living document) Page 3 | 11
Introduction FACTS4WORKERS
1 INTRODUCTION
This Quality Management Plan defines the acceptable level of quality and describes how the
project will ensure this level in its deliverables and work processes. It serves as a reference for all
related project members in order to identify their roles & responsibilities and to address quality-
related project processes.
PU (public) | 1.0 | First issue (living document) Page 4 | 11
Quality Management Strategy and objectives FACTS4WORKERS
2 QUALITY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY AND OBJECTIVES
The Quality Management in FACTS4WORKERS consists of planned and systematic activities to
determine and ensure achievement of the project’s quality objectives. The purpose is to validate
that the project deliverables are completed with an acceptable level of quality. Quality management
assures the quality of the project deliverables and the quality of the processes used to manage and
create the deliverables.
The Quality Management Plan identifies these key components:
Objects of Quality
Quality Measure Quality Evaluation Methods
Review
Project Deliverables • Deliverable Quality Quality Control Activities
Standards
• Completeness and
Correctness Criteria
Project Processes • Process Quality Standards Quality Assurance Activities
• Stakeholders Expectations
The following are the quality objectives of the project that reflect the overall intentions to be
applied with regard to quality throughout the project:
• Deliverables support improved project management proficiency
• Deliverables meet the requirements of partners, project managers and the European
Commission
• Deliverables align with industry best practices for project management and Web delivery
• Deliverables represent best practices of usability.
• Project processes conform to recommended project management standards
• Project processes meet the standards for good scientific practice
PU (public) | 1.0 | First issue (living document) Page 5 | 11
Quality Control Activities FACTS4WORKERS
3 QUALITY CONTROL ACTIVITIES
The focus of quality control is on the deliverables of the project. Quality control monitors project
deliverables to verify that the deliverables are of acceptable quality and are complete and correct.
The following processes are established to ensure the quality of the deliverables:
3.1 Defined milestones
As the main quality gates, the defined milestones need to be met.
The milestones will be reviewed by a formal review against the “means of verification”-definition at
the Executive Board during the monthly status meeting. The milestone responsible should present
at the regular Executive Board meeting, why the Milestone should be declared as met. The
Executive Board releases the crossing of the milestones; the Scientific Responsible proposes then
the crossing of the Milestone to the general Assembly at the next meeting. In case the General
Assembly does not accept the crossing of the milestone, the Scientific Responsible will define
corrective actions.
FACTS4WORKERS uses global project milestones as crucial “points of alignment” for the whole
project (see Project-Handbook [2], Section 2.1.3).
3.2 Review process
The quality of the deliverables including the reports is managed through an extensive
review process.
Before they can be released, all deliverables have to pass a deliverable review process. This is to
verify that the technical content is evolving the state of the art, and contribution to certain topics like
FACTS4WORKERS overall projects objectives is clearly stated. The main goal of the deliverable
review process is to ensure that only high quality deliverables are submitted to the EC by
eliminating any problems regarding quality before the deliverable is released.
Before releasing the deliverable, several tasks have to be performed by the deliverable
responsible:
• Spell check (UK English)
• Consistency (wording, multiple spaces...)
• All references up to date and working (e.g. table of contents, cross references)
• No track-changes, comments etc. included, and track-changes turned off
• Check the complete document according to the acceptance criteria defined in
FACTS4WORKERS is having a formal review process, which consists of an internal and an
independent formal review.
First, an internal review within the WP creating the deliverable has to be performed. The goal of
this internal review is to assure, that the document matches the basic quality criteria (technical,
structure/content...). If possible, it shall also already be checked against the majority of the
acceptance criteria defined in the Project Handbook. There is no requirement to produce a formal
record of this internal WP review.
The second stage in the FACTS4WORKERS review process is the independent formal review. It
has to be initiated by the Scientific Responsible. The Scientific Responsible shall nominate suitable
PU (public) | 1.0 | First issue (living document) Page 6 | 11
Quality Control Activities FACTS4WORKERS
reviewers; preferably these are the project internal “customers” of the work content and check that
they are willing to do the review. External reviewers should also be involved. The involvement of
suitable external reviewers is managed by the Scientific Responsible. If an external reviewer is
involved, the deliverable responsible must be informed.
The following criteria apply for the selection of internal and external reviewers:
• There shall be at least two independent reviewers for the deliverable.
• All reviewers should not be deeply involved within the WP that created the deliverable.
• The reviewers shall have a sufficient amount of expertise.
The review must be performed based on the provided FACTS4WORKERS deliverable review
template and has to take the defined acceptance criteria and scoring metrics into account. By
using this template, the review must be documented. The review forms must be handed in once
the final deliverable is submitted to the project coordinator to act as proof for the independent
formal review. The deliverable-review-template is available on ProjectPlace:
https://service.projectplace.com/pp/pp.cgi/0/1118787256?op=wget#folder/1096561539
(H2020-facts4workers 01_Workpackages WP8 Templates
FACTS4WORKERS_Deliverable_Checklist_Template).
The results of the independent formal review shall be checked by the Scientific Responsible.
Appropriate actions have to be taken to assure that the review comments are integrated into the
final version of the deliverable. If required (acceptance criteria not met), this should also involve
another review by the reviewers to check if the document is of sufficient quality (see Project-
Handbook [2], Section 7.6).
The deliverable responsible has the final responsibility that the deliverable is meeting the
acceptance criteria in both technical and formal way to ensure that only high quality
deliverables are submitted to the EC.
PU (public) | (H2020-facts4workers 01_Workpackages WP8 Templates
FACTS4WORKERS_Deliverable_Checklist_Template). Page 7 | 11
Quality Assurance Activities FACTS4WORKERS
4 QUALITY ASSURANCE ACTIVITIES
The focus of quality assurance is on the processes used in the project. Quality assurance ensures
that project processes are used effectively to produce quality project deliverables. The following
activities are established to ensure the quality of the processes used in the project:
4.1 Frequent communication within the project
As the most important quality assurance activity, a good, regular and frequent
communication within the project has to be established!
Therefore, the statuses of all Work Packages need to be communicated on a monthly basis to the
project. First internal reporting process is a monthly status report to be delivered by each WP-
Leader. A simple template is provided for this, which has to be completed and uploaded by each
WP every month until 2 days before the monthly project-wide status meeting via webex (or other
virtual method). The WP-Status-Template can be found here:
https://service.projectplace.com/pp/pp.cgi/0/1118787256?op=wget#folder/1096561539
(H2020-facts4workers 01_Workpackages WP8 Templates
FACST4WORKERS_Monthly_Report_Template).
During the monthly Status Meeting, which can be part of the regular Executive Board meeting, the
status of each WP is discussed and the stoplight colour coding agreed or updated if necessary.
This will allow all project partners to gain clear insight to the actual status of the project. It also is
for detecting problems and risks in time, so that effective actions can be defined very quickly. It
contains no numbers on costs and efforts, but should focus on the progress of deliverables and the
innovations achieved. This monthly project-wide status report is the main problem and risk
reporting process regarding quality and schedule. Due to its monthly occurrence, it is easy to
analyse what has changed/improved/fallen off in quality since the last status report. Every WP
leader (or an according substitute) shall be present within these monthly meetings.
In the last status meeting before a General Assembly meeting, the Executive Board prepares a
status report for the General Assembly meeting, containing all 8 WP-Status one pagers. Necessary
corrective measures should be proposed in a way that the General Assembly is able to take the
relevant decisions.
Schedule of meetings during the overall project duration is shown in the table below:
PU (public) | (H2020-facts4workers 01_Workpackages WP8 Templates
FACTS4WORKERS_Deliverable_Checklist_Template). Page 8 | 11
Quality Assurance Activities FACTS4WORKERS
Meeting Date / Frequency Involved Type
Kick Off 2015-01-12/13 All partners F2F
Meeting
Executive 10-12 per year WP-leaders, Scientific Webex
Board Responsible, Coordinator, other
partners upon request and/or
interest
Fixed date@Kick-Off: every 2nd
Tuesday per month, 9am-11am
General 1-2 per year GA representatives F2F
Assembly
WP-specific On request (by WP leader) All WP partners F2F,
Workshops Webex
Advisory 1 per year (from year 2 on), All partners F2F
Board combined with GA meeting
Review Month 12-13 (tbc), combined with All Partners F2F
meeting 1 GA meeting
Review Month 30 (tbc), combined with GA All partners F2F
meeting 2 meeting
Review Month 48, November 2018 All partners F2F
meeting 3
Closing
Event
4.2 Risk management
The second critical quality assurance activity is the control of the risk management and the
relevant contingency plans. Hence it is necessary to review the open risks on a regular
basis within the Executive Board.
The risk management is intended to recognize overall project risks as early as possible and
respond proactively to these risks before they become a problem for the project. During the project,
project progress and project risks have to be reviewed continuously and systematically, and
appropriate risk management measures have to be taken. The main risks in FACTS4WORKERS
are on technical, organisational and financial level. The Coordinator must monitor the indicators of
the risk, and manage and monitor the realization of the countermeasures. The Coordinator will be
supported by the WP-Leaders and their related risk management.
The main process for reporting of any new risks/problems is the monthly status report to be done
by each WP Leader. Thus, the WP Leaders and the Executive Board will dynamically identify
potential risks and describe them by using the risk analysis form. Any identified risk immediately
PU (public) | (H2020-facts4workers 01_Workpackages WP8 Templates
FACTS4WORKERS_Deliverable_Checklist_Template). Page 9 | 11
Quality Assurance Activities FACTS4WORKERS
has to be reported to the Scientific Responsible and the Coordinator, independent of when the next
monthly status report will be done.
Within the Description of Action, several initial risks have already been identified (see Grant
Agreement [1], p.208, 124-126) and according initial counter measures defined. The Scientific
Responsible together with the Coordinator will track the Risk Analysis and set up appropriate
Contingency Plans.
Based on the initial risk analysis, a risk analysis template is provided on ProjectPlace:
https://service.projectplace.com/pp/pp.cgi/0/1118787256?op=wget#folder/1097469855
To identify the criticality of any risk, the risks are evaluated on a standard procedure:
Probability of occurance Damage to FACTS4WORKERS
in FACTS4WORKERS and/or partners/Consortium
highly improbable negligible
< 0.1% Reputation and/orTargets of project and/or partners are
unaffected,
Payments from EC will be unaffected
improbable noticeable
(0.1% - 1%) Targets of project are affected, Reputation of project not
affected,
Payments from EC will be unaffected
quite likely bearable
(1% - 10%) Project Targets and Reputation of project is at risk,
Payments from EC will be unaffected
probably dangerous
(10% - 30%) Project Targets and Reputation of project is affected,
Payments from EC for involved partners is at risk
almost certain disastrous
(30% - 100%) Reputation of FACTS4WORKERS is damaged and reputation
of partners are affected / Payments of EC for consortium is at
risk
PU (public) | (H2020-facts4workers 01_Workpackages WP8 Templates
FACTS4WORKERS_Deliverable_Checklist_Template). Page 10 | 11
References FACTS4WORKERS
5 REFERENCES
[1] FACTS4WORKERS Grant Agreement Annex 1 – Description of Work, Issue of
[2] FACTS4WORKERS Project-Handbook
PU (public) | (H2020-facts4workers 01_Workpackages WP8 Templates
FACTS4WORKERS_Deliverable_Checklist_Template). Page 11 | 11
