Audit-ready dossier

The problem

What costs money is not the audit, it is the week before it.

IATF 16949 audits and PPAP requests require evidence that today gets rebuilt manually, with non-conformity risk from incomplete documentation.

• The evidence exists, scattered across paper, spreadsheets, the ERP and somebody's memory. That is the honest state of almost any certified molding shop, and nobody is embarrassed about it until the week before an audit.
• The cost is the days spent rebuilding it, and for a molder those days repeat for every customer that requests a PPAP on their own part.
• Reconstructed evidence inherits every gap of whatever nobody wrote down at the time, and a gap found by the auditor is a documentation non-conformity — raised not on what went wrong on the press, but on what the plant cannot prove.
• Meanwhile the quality team is doing archaeology instead of quality, which is the part nobody puts in the budget and everybody pays for anyway, several times a year.

How it fits the IRIS system

Edge captures at the moment; Agents indexes it against the standard.

Edge captures the photo and parameters for every change; Agents organizes the dossier by certification standard (IATF 16949, PPAP) with zero post-hoc human work. The auditor or customer logs in and downloads the evidence pack for the lot or period.

Direction is the whole difference. A document manager stores what somebody decides to upload afterwards and inherits the same holes; here every mold change, color change and lot startup closes its own dossier — first-article photo, process parameters, signed decision log — at the moment it happens, and what Agents does is reorganize it for whoever is asking.

See the full IRIS architecture →

Before and after

Audit preparation today versus the permanent dossier

Aspect	Today	With iLEAN Agents
Assembling a PPAP package	Days of hunting	Already assembled per part number
Evidence of a lot startup	Rebuilt from paper	Closed when it happened
First-article photo of a change	Not kept	Stored with its parameters
The decision log	Scattered across emails	One dated, signed chain per change
A customer asking about last quarter	Someone drops everything for days	A download
Documentation non-conformity	Found during the audit	Flagged when the gap appears

days spent pre-audit or pre-PPAP rebuilding → zero. Documentation non-conformity risk → eliminated.

Impact estimate

Impact estimate — to be validated with your numbers.

The block below is an estimate to be validated against your plant's actual data. We put it forward so the committee has an order of magnitude; we refine it during the assessment.

• Estimated payback 6-12 months, depending on how many audits and PPAP requests you serve a year.
• Days of pre-audit and pre-PPAP reconstruction down to zero, and the saving repeats for every customer that asks rather than happening once a year.
• Documentation non-conformity risk effectively removed, because the gap is flagged when it occurs and not when it is found.
• Continuous protection of the IATF certificate and of the preferred-supplier status that conditions which programs you are invited to quote next.

continuous protection of the IATF certification and preferred-supplier status, estimated payback 6-12 months depending on audit/PPAP frequency. Estimate to validate.

And the fair question from the production manager

"Is this just another document manager with a nicer name?" — no, and the difference is when the evidence is created. A document manager waits for someone to upload; here Edge captures the photo and the parameters at the change itself, and extraction of those values is an anchored task where the best models drop below 1.5% error [1]. Agents only rearranges what already exists, which is why it has nothing to invent.

^[1] OpenAI paper "Why Language Models Hallucinate", 2025 — on the reliability of AI in anchored tasks.