AIAG vs VDA AIAG PFMEA? Know the differences between

For quality professionals, a deep dive into Process FMEA (PFMEA) is always worthwhile. While the unified AIAG-VDA FMEA has become the standard, recognizing the differences and evolution from the original AIAG PFMEA is key to a complete understanding. 

In this article we’ve compiled the main differences regarding structure and format, highlighting the primary distinctions in SOD ranking, risk assessment, action prioritization, and team involvement. Read on to understand how the VDA-AIAG PFMEA optimizes proactive quality management.

What is FMEA and why is it essential in quality management?

The Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) is a proactive, systematic methodology used in quality management to identify and prioritize potential failure modes within a product design, manufacturing process, or service. It’s a critical tool for predicting and mitigating risks before they impact the customer or incur significant costs. 

This systemic analysis enables the prioritization of actions based on severity, occurrence, and detectability. FMEA fosters a culture of continuous improvement, allowing organizations to embed quality at every stage, from concept to production. 

Why was the AIAG-VDA PFMEA format created?

In 2019 the harmonized AIAG-VDA PFMEA Handbook was released. Previously, suppliers navigating both American (AIAG) and German (VDA) automotive requirements faced the burden of maintaining two distinct PFMEA formats and methodologies, which created unnecessary complexity and inconsistencies. 

The joint AIAG-VDA PFMEA streamlines this process, providing a common language and a more robust, prevention-focused methodology. It aims to offer a single set of requirements, replacing the separate AIAG format and VDA format, thereby simplifying compliance and enhancing global collaboration for suppliers across the automotive supply chain. 

The new 7-step approach and the transition from RPN to Action Priority (AP) are key improvements designed to ensure more effective risk prioritization and mitigation. 

AIAG PFMEA vs. AIAG-VDA PFMEA

AIAG and VDA aim to achieve similar goals: identify potential risks in processes and products and take actions to mitigate them. They both follow the concept of PFMEA, but their approaches, terminologies, and assessment methodologies may differ. 

In order to ensure compliance and accuracy, we recommend consulting the latest versions of the AIAG and VDA PFMEA guidelines. Adapt them as per your specific industry requirements and regulations for better results.

Structure and format

• AIAG PFMEA: It is organized into ten columns, each capturing specific information about the process, failure modes, potential effects, and corresponding actions.
• VDA-AIAG PFMEA: It focuses on a different way of organizing information than the AIAG format, and follows a 7-step risk analysis and mitigation approach: planning and preparation, structure analysis, function analysis, failure analysis, risk analysis, optimization, and lastly results documentation. 

Severity, Occurrence, and Detection (SOD) ranking scale

• AIAG PFMEA: Uses a ranking scale of 1 to 10 for evaluating Severity (S), Occurrence (O), and Detection (D) scores. Higher scores indicate higher risks.
• VDA-AIAG PFMEA: Evaluates risks through a 5×5 risk matrix with axes representing Severity and Occurrence. The Detection ranking is not explicitly considered in the same way as AIAG.

Risk assessment and action prioritization

• AIAG PFMEA: Prioritizes actions using the Risk Priority Number (RPN) formula (RPN = Severity x Occurrence x Detection). The higher the RPN, the higher the priority for mitigation.
• VDA AIAG PFMEA: It emphasizes the product’s or process’s absolute risk. Severity and Occurrence are combined to determine an Action Priority (AP). Detection, rather than being part of the prioritization score, serves as an input for determining the effectiveness of current controls. 

Team involvement

• AIAG PFMEA: It typically encourages cross-functional teams to perform the PFMEA analysis, ensuring diverse perspectives from engineering, manufacturing, quality, and maintenance contributed to risk identification.
• VDA AIAG PFMEA: While still mandating a team approach, this version provides more explicit guidance on the required core competencies and responsibilities within the team. It implicitly elevates the expectation of subject matter expertise and direct involvement of process owners, fostering a more deeply integrated and accountable team structure beyond cross-functional representation.

How a digital tool like Kiuey simplifies PFMEA management

The true power of the AIAG-VDA FMEA framework can be unlocked and amplified with the right digital tools. Kiuey’s PPAP Manager is specifically designed to streamline the entire PFMEA process, moving beyond cumbersome spreadsheets to offer centralized data management, real-time collaboration, and automated calculations. 

Kiuey helps teams increase the effectiveness and accuracy of analyses while reducing the manual effort involved. This frees up SQEs to focus on strategic risk reduction and continuous improvement, giving them back invaluable time while ensuring PFMEA becomes a truly living and impactful document within your quality ecosystem.

Schedule a free demo today and try a better, smarter way of managing your quality processes. Discover how Kiuey can transform your FMEA management.