---
title: Product quality investigation use case
description: Use case scenarios demonstrate when and how to use the Product non-conformance application to create a product quality investigation report. It provides practical examples of common product quality investigation situations.
locale: en-US
canonical_url: https://www.servicenow.com/docs/r/australia/manufacturing/mco-product-quality-investigation-use-case.html
release: australia
topic_type: concept
last_updated: "2026-03-18"
reading_time_minutes: 1
breadcrumb: [Quality management, Explore, Manufacturing Commercial Operations]
---

# Product quality investigation use case

Use case scenarios demonstrate when and how to use the Product non-conformance application to create a product quality investigation report. It provides practical examples of common product quality investigation situations.

## Scenario-Airbag sensor defect investigation

This use case is a follow-up use case from Product non-conformance, see [Product non-conformance use case](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ServiceNow/ServiceNowDocs/australia/markdown/australia/manufacturing/mco-product-non-conformance-use-case.md).

Alectri detects airbag sensor defects affecting 2024 Voltar VS vehicles. Quality teams must conduct a comprehensive investigation with cross-functional coordination, structured root cause analysis, and financial governance. Key challenges include:

The quality investigation team encounters some challenges:

-   Communication silos: fragmented communication across engineering, quality, and finance teams
-   RCA methodology: lack of structured root cause analysis methodology.
-   Cost visibility: missing visibility into total quality costs.
-   Approval authority: No clear governance for remediation action approval.

## Solution

Manage the quality investigation through four key workflow phases:

1.  Investigate: Able Tutor \(Quality Lead\) opens the investigation case and creates analysis tasks \(sensor calibration, manufacturing process, supplier controls\).
2.  Analyze: Emily Cooper \(Investigation Member\) performs 8D analysis with Fishbone methodology to identify root causes and define corrective and preventive actions.
3.  Coordinate: Establish RACI roles across Engineering, Supplier Quality, Manufacturing, and Dealer teams. Review impacted assets and create remediation actions.
4.  Approve: Finance Lead reviews line-level charges for parts, labor, and process improvements, then approves remediation costs with full traceability.

The [Product quality investigation](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ServiceNow/ServiceNowDocs/australia/markdown/australia/manufacturing/mco-PQI-use.md) provides real-time visibility into investigation status, root causes, and cost of quality \(CoPQ\) tracking across all remediation activities.

## Benefits

Compare the impact of using the Product Quality Investigation application.

|Without MCO|With MCO Quality Investigation|
|-----------|------------------------------|
|Uncoordinated root cause analysis|Structured 8D methodology with Fishbone analysis identifies underlying issues.|
|Scattered corrective actions|Linked corrective and preventive actions with clear ownership and timelines.|
|Hidden quality costs|CoPQ tracking provides visibility across containment, remediation, and prevention activities.|
|Manual approval workflows|Line-level approval authority maintains cost governance and end-to-end traceability.|

## Outcome

Alectri completes the airbag sensor defect investigation with cross-functional coordination and structured analysis. Emily identifies root causes through 8D methodology, develops corrective and preventive actions, and raises a financial request for remediation. Finance approves line-level charges, maintaining cost governance. The investigation establishes preventive measures and provides end-to-end traceability from root cause identification through remediation completion.