Re: Criticism

[GrantBlair@aol.com]

In a message dated 11/19/2000 1:04:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
dhartman@phdinc.com writes:

<< The real point that I was attempting to make in my story though, was that 
many
 people are going to take offense to being told that there may be a better 
method
 than the one they are currently implementing - no matter how much we 
sugar-coat
 the pronouncement. >>
You are exactly right. That was my point, also. See if the following 
illustration gets
us together:
A situation I run into auditing corrective actions is to see many of these 
with the statement "talked to (or reminded) the operator about the importance
of (not making bad stuff, etc.,etc.)." You may even see the observation that 
"Situation improved", or "no further occurances of the problem"
When you see this, there are two things you can be sure of:
1. No one has attempted to determine the root cause of the problem (5 whys, 
etc.)
    by understanding the system which created it.
2. I can expect to find personnel issues when I do the floor audit. Operators
    (correctly) perceive that they are being blamed for problems which are  
management's responsibility.
This is not to say there can't be operator issues. For example, I always 
review
housekeeping instructions during the floor audit. Then, I stop auditing about 
15-30
minutes before the end of the shift and simply observe what people do.
If I see brooms and mops come out, and things being straightened up, no 
problem.
However, if I do not see this, or see groups huddling up to talk about 
tonight's
game, etc, then I write a CAR.

GrantBlair@aol.com
Ninety Six SC