Your 8D came back "Not Approved." The customer SQE flagged D5 and D6 as insufficient. Your team thinks the corrective action is solid — the process change is in place, the verification data looks good, and the read-across analysis is complete. So why did it get rejected?
Because the customer SQE has 14 other 8D reports open this week, none of them have time for a phone call, and your D5 doesn't tell them what they need to know in the time they can give it. 8D rejection is rarely about the engineering. It's about whether the report can be verified without external help.
This article covers what customer SQEs actually look for in each of the 8 disciplines, the OEM-specific differences between GM, Ford, and Stellantis 8D expectations, and the structural elements that consistently produce first-time approval at major North American assembly plants.
Why 8D Reports Get Rejected
Customer SQEs reject 8D reports for five recurring reasons. The technical merit of the corrective action is rarely the primary driver.
- Root cause is symptomatic, not systemic. The 8D identifies what failed without explaining why the supplier's process allowed it to fail.
- Corrective action is not verifiable from the document. The customer cannot tell whether the action is implemented without contacting the supplier.
- Read-across is missing or unconvincing. The customer worries that the same defect mode could affect related parts and the 8D doesn't address this.
- Verification data is insufficient. Sample sizes, time windows, or test conditions don't give the SQE confidence the fix is working in production.
- Format doesn't match customer-specific requirements. Generic 8D templates don't meet GM/Ford/Stellantis-specific elements the customer needs.
The 8 Disciplines — What Customers Actually Want to See
D1: Team
Customer SQEs check D1 to confirm the right cross-functional roles are involved. Generic team lists ("Quality Manager, Engineering, Production") signal a process-of-record team. Specific role assignments with named individuals signal a team that actually met. Include team leader, customer interface, quality engineering, manufacturing engineering, and (when applicable) supplier or sub-supplier representatives.
D2: Problem Description
The single most under-developed section in most 8D reports. Customers want the IS / IS NOT analysis done well. What part numbers are affected? What time window? What plants? What customers? What's similar but not affected? A weak D2 cascades into a weak D4 because root cause analysis depends on accurate problem definition.
D3: Interim Containment Action
Customers want to see specific containment actions with start dates, end criteria, and effectiveness verification. "100% sort at supplier dock" is not a containment action — it's a label. "100% sort at supplier dock using gauge X-7142 against criteria documented in Boundary Sample BS-2026-04 starting March 15, completed when 30 consecutive shifts show zero defects in line testing" is a containment action.
D4: Root Cause and Escape Cause Analysis
The most-scrutinized discipline. Customer SQEs want both: (1) why the defect occurred (root cause), and (2) why the supplier's quality system didn't catch it before shipment (escape cause). Many 8D reports cover root cause well and skip escape cause entirely. Escape cause is what tells the customer your quality system has been improved, not just that this one defect was fixed.
D5: Permanent Corrective Action
Specific actions taken at specific operations on specific dates. Include process changes, tooling modifications, training, control plan updates, and PFMEA revisions. Reference document control numbers so the customer can verify the changes are in your formal system, not just a manager's email.
D6: Implementation Verification
Evidence that the permanent corrective action is working in production. Capability data, layered process audit results, customer complaint trend, defect rate in production output. Sample sizes and time windows must be statistically meaningful — not three days of clean shipments, but enough data to give the SQE statistical confidence the fix is working.
D7: Prevention and Read-Across
What's been changed in your broader quality system to prevent recurrence on this part and analogous parts. Read-across analysis identifies parts with similar designs, processes, or failure modes and confirms whether they need investigation. This discipline gets cursory treatment in many 8D reports and is exactly where customer SQEs lose confidence.
D8: Team Recognition
Often dismissed as administrative. Smart suppliers use D8 to summarize what's improved at the system level, not just to thank team members. A strong D8 reinforces that the entire process produced learning and improvement.
OEM-Specific Requirements
GM
GM uses 5-Phase Problem Solving as a parallel methodology to AIAG 8D, though most suppliers continue submitting traditional 8D. GM expects detailed escape cause analysis (D4 split), specific reference to GM Quality Management System requirements where applicable, and read-across that covers all GM platforms where the supplier ships. GM PRR closure is more sensitive to the strength of D6 and D7 than other OEMs.
Ford
Ford GIR (Global Issue Report) closure uses 8D format with Ford-specific PFMEA references required. Ford SQEs heavily weight D7 read-across analysis and expect supplier development engineers to confirm read-across has reached all Ford programs. Ford Q1 status loss tied to 8D quality is a real risk for repeated weak submissions.
Stellantis
Stellantis uses CARS (Corrective Action Request System) with 8D format. Customer-specific PFMEA template usage is required. Stellantis SQEs tend to focus on D5 implementation specificity and D6 capability data more than other elements. Cross-platform read-across (especially across former FCA brands) needs explicit address.
The Structural Elements That Produce First-Time Approval
- Specific dates, names, and document numbers in every discipline — not generic descriptions
- Visual evidence — process flow diagrams, before/after photos, capability charts, control chart screenshots
- Document control references for every changed document (control plan, work instruction, PFMEA, etc.)
- Statistically meaningful verification windows with explicit sample sizes and time periods
- Read-across analysis as a separate table listing every analogous part and disposition
- OEM-specific format elements for the customer in question (don't use a generic 8D for GM, Ford, and Stellantis interchangeably)
When the 8D Gets Rejected Twice
A second 8D rejection is a credibility event, not just a technical event. By this point the customer SQE has lost confidence in the supplier's ability to address the problem internally. The recovery requires different tactics: customer site visits, joint root cause analysis sessions, and often external quality liaison support to mediate the technical conversation.
IDS provides 8D coaching and customer-facing presentation support for Tier 1, 2, and 3 suppliers — including on-site review of corrective action implementation at GM Spring Hill, Ford Kentucky Truck, Stellantis Detroit, and other major facilities. The goal is not to write the 8D for the supplier but to ensure the customer can verify the corrective action without a phone call.