Re: System vs Individual

[Lee Hoffman <leedna@juno.com>]

 Brian (et al) writes that a certain percentage of errors can be blamed
on the 'people', many others debate these numbers. My friend Phil Monroe
remembers personal conversations with WED, and how he changed from as
high as 15% (Juran's numbers) - to now 4% or even 'all'...  We all can
agree that the high. high majority of quality issues certainly come from
the process/system (read: management) - so lets set that aside. It is not
material if it is 0 or 4%.  What is material, and would be an interesting
thread is what causes the people to be responsible? Is it poor training -
so not really their fault? Poor attitude - so maybe still at least
partially management's fault (environment)? Inadequate time to do the job
right - and still largely management's fault? MBO - clearly management's
fault? No fail-safe inspection procedure, no poka-yok system or tool? Or
is it simply humans are incapable of being six sigma machines? 
Of the six contributors to variation (5M &E), which is the weakest link
or major contributor? If we did a Pareto analysis on these 6
contributors, which would be #1 and which #6 on the Pareto chart? I
believe 'manpower' would have the lowest bar. (Actually they usually make
up for the many weaknesses in the other 5 contributors.) 
Finally - how do we eliminate people as a contributor to variation? 
Roger Smith - of General Motors fame (or infamous) seemed to believe
workers were the primary cause, and wanted to automate everything. That
didn't work out too well. 
Lee Hoffman
San Diego
leedna@juno.com