3 Surprising Results from Our Layered Process Audit Benchmark Report
EASE.io’s Layered Process Benchmark Report has just been released, and with it, some noteable insights about the state of layered process audits (LPAs) today.
The report analyzes data from more than 2.3 million LPAs conducted by EASE users, from sectors spanning automotive, aerospace and defense, industrial machinery, and more. While it reveals notable progress and potential in LPA programs, it also uncovers execution gaps that carry significant implications for quality and risk.
Let’s look closer at some of the most surprising findings from the report, and what the data shows about the true drivers of LPA success.
Download your free LPA Benchmark Report to see how your plant compares and get practical strategies for improving LPA results
1. Plants Are Completing a Huge Number of Audits, Just Not On Time
Manufacturers completed an average of 8,702 audits per organization over the course of a year, with nearly 1,500 findings closed out at each site.
Those numbers alone are proof that LPAs work, and that teams are showing up to do their part. Companies are committing to getting LPAs done, and they’re using them to uncover thousands of risks before they reach customers.
But while nearly two in three companies achieved an overall audit completion rate of 80% or better, that number drops to just 27% when you look at on-time completion.
On-time audit completion is a core measure of LPA maturity, because it reflects the extent to which the entire team sees LPAs as a priority. When audits consistently slip past their due dates with no accountability, the message to the frontline is that leadership doesn’t really care about them.
2. Frontline Audits Result in Low Rate of Findings
Layer 1 auditors complete the vast majority of LPAs—more than 1.4 million per year. The real insight, however, comes from comparing the rate of findings across different auditor layers.
While nearly half of upper management audits result in at least one finding, 84% of frontline audits result in zero findings. This suggests that frontline auditors are rushing through or “pencil whipping” audits, raising questions about quality risk and frontline engagement in LPA programs.
The core issue this reveals is that, rather than being a priority, LPAs are often a check-the-box activity focused on bare minimum compliance. The reason: the frontline—or even leadership, in some cases—doesn’t truly understand the value of LPAs and how they make work easier in the long run. Communicating that value effectively is management’s responsibility, as is being a visible presence in completing audits on time to communicate their importance to the team.
The opportunity here for manufacturers is significant, as Layer 1 conducts the bulk of audits. Leaders must create an environment where teams can dedicate the appropriate time and resources to audits, even if it’s just 15 minutes a day. Continually reaffirming the importance of LPAs to the operation and taking operator feedback to heart are also critical to gaining buy-in and amplifying the effects of your LPA program overall.
3. Leadership Engagement Is What Makes the Difference
One notable finding was the shift towards higher overall audit completion rates within two years of implementing digital LPAs, evidence that LPA software helps plants improve audit consistency and coverage.
What the data shows, though, is that maturity comes down to more than just tools. Rather, it’s engaged leadership that makes the difference between organizations that complete their audits and those that complete them on time. In fact, the report shows that companies with the smallest gap between organization-wide and leadership audit completion rates—a measure of leadership participation—are 20% more likely to complete audits on time.
That number is statistically significant (P<0.0001), meaning there’s nearly zero probability that this finding is simply due to chance.
The key takeaway: When leaders consistently complete their audits on time, the entire organization is more likely to do the same. Strong leadership participation signals to the team that LPAs are a shared responsibility, not something forced on the frontline alone by management.
The Path Forward
Layered process audits are one of the most effective tools manufacturers have to prevent defects and drive operational excellence. The only caveat is that manufacturers must execute them with discipline to achieve their full impact.
While LPA software can make the process more efficient, technology can’t replace ownership and culture. This essential truth underscores the importance of the People-Process-Tools framework, where tools at the tip of the pyramid must be supported underneath by engaged teams and stable processes.
Leadership’s commitment to LPAs, communicating results, and being a presence on the plant floor are what make the difference. When plants have that, all the pieces are in place for success. The rest of the plant completes more audits on time, the frontline sees their value, and the team uncovers more findings to drive continuous improvement.
