Target setting by the blind

[nedwards@ntlworld.com]

Thanks to everyone who commented on my little story. The senior manager at the organisation that I currently work in, has just come out with yet another shot in the dark. He wants to reduce the percentage defects on the products being built from ??? to 0.5%. The defects are currently found by in-process audits (inspection really) & end of line product audits (opps! inspection again). I obviously do not like this method of just capturing process concerns, but it is hard for my Quality manager to change the method that has been in-grained in the work norms for so many years.

I have been working closely with some of the assembly lines in the factory for approximately 8 months now and through some simple process understanding training have developed a good rapport with the people & the issues they have to face day after day. My colleague & I developed a qualatative questionnaire to draw out the issues and were able through insight to get them to see the benefits of collecting data from the process in real time.

Although some process issues have been through the cycle of improvement (PDSA) & some are still in progress (these have been pushed by me & my colleague) the assembly supervision & management have really not got that involved in the issues that affect the line. I have been trying to explain that it is our job has a team to improve product quality - not just the job of the quality team in isolation. The Management & supervisors are so into quadrant one,three & four that they  have completely lost the plot regarding what is truelly important(quadrant two - time effectiveness - improving the process continuously)S.Covey.

The data has shown special causes in the Process Behaviour Charts over time and therefore instability in the assembly process. The pareto charts from month to month vary greatly in type of occurence & frequency - issues come & go & come & go again (What a SURPRISE - NOT!!!) Coming back to the initial target setting - "its pointless" the 'SYSTEM is doing the best it can', the system will only improve if we begin to understand the special causes first - remove them & then start to really improve by reducing 'common causes' of varaition.

I am currently working on a plan of attack to try & explain the data & information gained so far so that everyone involved will start to understand the REALITY of the situation. This of course will not be easy - I will be preaching to the unconverted & from the text already written, little or no understanding of process varaition & the effects on the system. It is not a perfect situation but this is life in REALITY at the grass roots of a non- transformed organisation. I am trying the best I can within my 'circle of influence' & my main driver 'begin with the end in mind' keeps me focused on the drive to a Deming based organisation.

I have also given my feedback into the company appraisal process & the data used on the core business brief that is shown every month in the company. I just had to point out the mis-use of data through a better/worse month by month (binary world view) analysis!!! This should feedback to higher levels of Management within the company - I wander what reply I will get back??? Thanks for reading this, replies will be welcome & help appreciated. 

Best regards, Nigel Edwards.

PS: I am doing the best I can with the knowledge & learning gained so far - but realise I have a long way to go. The only way to learn & grow is through making many mistakes - I hope I make many more!!!!

Message posting through the Clemson CQI Web Server.