RE: Quality Checks

["David Craig" <david.craig@dsl.pipex.com>]

Good morning/afternoon to all 

I'm new to this network (thanks Jim) and I do hope to make a valid
contribution whenever I can. 

I find this whole question of Quality checks very interesting. Chris
suggests that, in certain circumstances, we cannot trust the individual to
'care'. The example of the UK car MOT check is a good one. However, this
argument surely cannot apply to in general to free markets as it is the
market and competition which 'cares' and this has driven some organisations
to move beyond quality checking.

The relationship between 'care' or ownership and quality checking is
interesting. I have just spent about 7 years working to improve the
standards of product and service quality for a major UK House Builder (those
in the UK will know of the industry's poor reputation). I succeeded in
implementing a number of important process changes to build improved
standards into the construction process. Some of these changes were true
innovations in which the construction of the house shell floors and roof
were revolutionised - all being factory made and shipped to site. However I
could not get away from the need for quality checking for the fit out and
finishing stages of constructing the home.

The transient nature of labour in the house building sector makes ownership
of quality standards difficult. Where the 'care' was proven to be inadequate
my solution was independent checking, self certification in other cases.
This worked very well and was, of course, followed by learning and
improvement. I introduced visual management devices as well as quality
circles to this end.  

Importantly this solution was sold as an interim step until we could move
step by step, through process improvements and cultural change, towards 100%
self certification. The dilemma for me was, the sometimes justified, call
that this was taking pride in the job away from site managers. But it was a
line in the sand from which the business had marked the start of
organisation-wide improvement activity. The driver for improvement was of
course the desire to improve customer satisfaction and remove the wasted
costs of quality checking whilst recognising that it was a necessary evil -
better than the status quo.

For those who continued the call that this was removing ownership my
response was  "work with us to build quality in and remove the need!"


Dr David Craig CEng MIET