Re: Specifications

["John Constantine" <thesfg1@cox.net>]

Denizens, et al...

I would hope that there is not a sense of fear in the workplace regarding
the DEN.

I also hope that one may still offer a post as a rhetorical statement, for
the purpose of continual learning. Many of the responses seem to either fall
on the guilty/not-guilty approach or else discuss process-related issues.
Both are fine, as they hopefully lead to further learning by the group.

Maybe not everyone has a library of Deming materials or Wheeler materials,
etc.

My point was of course to toss out the question for the purpose of learning,
not to prove or disprove the validity of the examples.

It's great to have flowcharts, but they don't guarantee that something will
not go wrong. If that is a failure of the specification requiring that the
blood type be matched prior to implantation, or a failure of the entire
process, the patient still died. I for one would not want to blame the
doctor for doing what he felt was appropriate at the time. He was in the
best position to know. There will be red beads now and then, and a sense of
urgency to implement new rules (specs) to deal with such things in the
future.

If missiles were allowable at 92 km, but not at 93, would life be any
better?

If a city ordinance were enacted for the purpose of enabling persons with
disabilities to have better access to new housing, but grandfathered
existing housing under old "standards", there might not be improvement in
the overall quality of life for persons with disabilities.

I'm still young enough, and old enough to say I am still learning, and hope
to continue. Let's keep the mood light. There's enough darkness out there.

______________
John Constantine
Phoenix, AZ
thesfg1@cox.net