Opening (60 sec)
Good morning / afternoon everyone. Thank you for joining.
Today I want to walk us through where we are with the emissions regulation compliance work, what went wrong in the past, and where we need to focus going forward.
Background (90 sec)
Let me start with the R101 case from 2020.
In 2020, we had a compliance issue with the R101 model. This is one of our reference cases for what happens when our process has gaps.
After R101, IRCO — our internal regulatory coordination office — created what's called an organization charge. They used EPS to visualize where the problems were.
The key learning: the issue wasn't only with the spare parts. It was also with the wider process. So IRCO's charge to us was: identify where our current process breaks down, then close the gaps.
Current Flow (90 sec)
Let me walk you through what our work flow looks like today:
1
EMC provides the standard list — 35 regulation items approved at PMM
2
ASSB creates the check sheet — too general, needs breakdown by model
3
EPS visualization — find where the problem is in the process
4
Final submission — DMC or other authority, recorded in COP (Confirmity of Product)
The 8 Problems (3 min)
Using the EPS approach, I have identified eight problems in our current process:
Problem 1: No guidance from DMC
Issue: When I receive information from DMC, I don't have clear guidance on what they actually want from me.
Impact: I don't know what the standard means in our specific context.
Problem 2: Don't know what details to check
Issue: When I create the check sheet, I don't know what specific details to check. I have to confirm with the designer every time.
Impact: This makes the process very time-consuming.
Problem 3: No experience on breaking down by model
Issue: The check sheet is too general. I don't have experience breaking it down model by model (gasoline, diesel, hybrid, ICE).
Impact: One camera check per model needed, but I don't know how to structure it.
Problem 4: Unclear on Route 3
Issue: I don't fully understand why we're using Route 3 in the flow.
Impact: Need clarification before proceeding.
Problem 5: Final submission point unclear
Issue: Not 100% sure whether the final report goes to DMC or a different authority.
Impact: Could create rework if sent to the wrong place.
Problem 6: Highlight line usage
Issue: I don't fully understand when to use the highlight line in the process.
Impact: Need EMC explanation to clarify.
Problem 7: PMM approval scope
Issue: Need to confirm with PMM — the 35 regulation items are approved, but I need clarity on the scope of what's been approved vs. what we still need to do.
Impact: Could be working on already-approved items unnecessarily.
Problem 8: Timing & coordination
Issue: Multiple stakeholders, unclear sequence — EMC, designer, DMC, PMM. The flow is fragmented.
Impact: Hard to deliver on time.
What We Need from EMC (90 sec)
- Guidance on the standards — what they actually mean in our context
- Clarification on Route 3 — why we're using it and how
- Support on check sheet design — how to structure it model-by-model
- Final submission process — who owns the final sign-off (DMC vs. other)
- Timeline — when we need each deliverable
In return, we will:
- Develop a model-specific check sheet (one per model: gasoline, diesel, hybrid, ICE)
- Use EPS to visualize and validate the process
- Submit a clean final report to the correct authority
- Update our organizational charge document to reflect the new flow
Next Steps (60 sec)
| When | Action | Owner |
|---|---|---|
| This week | EMC reviews our 8-problem analysis, provides written guidance on items 1, 4, 5 | EMC |
| Next week | Joint workshop: redesign check sheet template (model-by-model) | EMC + ASSB designer |
| Within 2 weeks | Pilot run on R101 to validate new flow | ASSB team |
| Monthly | Status update at PMM using EPS visualization | PMM coordinator |
🤝 Closing (30 sec)
The good news: the EPS approach worked for R101 — it just needs to be applied systematically for our other regulation items.
My ask: Let's commit to closing at least 3 of the 8 problems by next PMM.
Thank you. Questions?
The good news: the EPS approach worked for R101 — it just needs to be applied systematically for our other regulation items.
My ask: Let's commit to closing at least 3 of the 8 problems by next PMM.
Thank you. Questions?
Key Terms Reference
| Term | Meaning |
|---|---|
| EMC | External Manufacturing Compliance |
| DMC | Department of Motor Compliance |
| PMM | Plant Monthly Meeting |
| EPS | Toyota's visualization / analysis tool (used to map problems) |
| COP | Confirmity of Product (product conformance record) |
| TPS | Toyota Production System |
| Office TPS | Office Toyota Production System (administrative/office application of TPS) |
| IRCO | Internal Regulatory Coordination Office |
| R101 | Specific compliance case from 2020 (reference) |
| 35 regulation items | Approved items at PMM (scope) |
| Route 3 | One of the 3 process flows being used (needs clarification) |
Speaker Tips
- Total runtime: ~9 minutes
- Tone: Professional Toyota-formal
- Pace: Slow at the 8-problem section (let it sink in)
- Engagement: Ask for "thumbs up if Problem 1 resonates" after the first 2 problems
- Backup slides: Have the EPS visualization on screen to point at