|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Link to: |
||
|
The ASQ Learning
Institute™ Is Now Live - Learn Skills That Will Help Make Your World
Better Quality: The Cause of Good Things in the World Quality techniques from
ASQ enable doctors like Dr. Manu Vora, an ASQ Fellow - and the Blind
Foundation for India, which he co-founded-to help cure and prevent blindness
for approximately 90,000 people in India. "The quality
discipline has helped us manage the foundation from the beginning," said
Vora. "By implementing the PDSA model at BFI, we were able to hit the
ground running." Using the plan, do, study, act cycle, a basic quality
tool, Vora also played a major part in providing vaccinations and vitamin A
to tens of thousands of children in With your ASQ membership,
you belong to an organization of continuous learning and improvement, making
quality the cause of good things in our world. Primary Benefits: The ASQ Learning
Institute™ will help you to plan, manage, schedule, and track ALL of
your professional development needs anywhere in the world while guaranteeing
the same high-quality training and instructors you expect from ASQ. The ASQ Learning
Institute™ allows you to create a user profile so you can build your
learning plan, track your success, and boost your career-all starting today. Tools: These tools are available
to Full, Senior, Honorary, and Fellow members now:
|
|
Volunteer for Engineers Week
Activities at Every
year during Engineers Week, professional engineering societies set up
activities at We
need volunteers to sit at the IIE table and basically watch kids play the
game (it’s pretty simple). Also, if you have children in grades 9 to
12, they can come help you man the table (and will also have free admission
into Objective: To provide educational exhibits and demonstrations
during Engineers Week to supplement the science center’s existing
permanent displays. Volunteers are
needed in 2-hour shifts to cover the weekend. This is an opportunity for
students and teachers to gain hands-on math and science experience by working
with local engineers - people who uses those subjects every day. Proposed Schedule: Saturday, February 18, 2012 = 10:00am – 4:00pm Sunday, February 19, 2012 = 12:00pm – 4:00pm Proposed
Activities: The following
activities were sponsored by member societies last year and were enjoyed by
over 500 students during the weekend. We
are planning to repeat some of the same activities, but are also looking for
new ideas and suggestions. Chemical
Engineering (AIChE) – making polymers Electrical
Engineering (IEEE) - building electrical circuits Civil
Engineering (ASCE) – tangrams Highway
Engineering (ASHE) –toothpick bridges Industrial
Engineering (IIE) – playing efficiency games Packaging
Engineering (IoPP) - making candy packages If your society is
interested in participating in this program again this year, please fill out
the attached form and send it to Sue Benjamin by February 11th. If your society has not participated in the
past, but would like to join us this year, please let me know, and we will
find an activity suited to your specific engineering discipline. Email: mailto:sbenjamin@hersheys.com Phone: (717)534-6512 Fax: (717) 534-4632 Note for volunteers: Please
click this link to fill in and submit this form if you are interested |
|
Volunteer We are looking for two
volunteers to help judge science projects at the Capital Area Science Fair on
Thursday, March 1st from 8am to 12noon and/or give out awards on Saturday
March 3rd at 1pm. Interested parties can contact Bill Schuck at wppschuck@te.com. Here is a brief outline of
what is involved: There
are Official Judges who must decide which projects are worthy of a First,
Second, Third or Honorable Mention awards, and eventually the Grand Champion
awards. The only monetary awards they make are the Grand Champion awards
which are the top (3). They have experts in each discipline who review each
project in detail, and then interview the students in the afternoon to see if
they actually did the work. We
are one of several Special Awards Judges. We select (4) individuals who's
projects involve IE related topics and award monetary awards of $50 each. We
are looking for students with an interest in IE type projects to encourage
them to study IE later in college (we include a copy of the IE magazine along
with the award, so they learn about IE as a major). Only a small percentage
of students who participate in this competition actually receive more than a
ribbon. That's why IIE sponsors this, along with other businesses and
organizations, so more worthy students receive something for their efforts. We
meet at 8 am at the Please consider taking
part in one or both of these opportunities to inspire the younger generations
and spread the word about IE! |
|
REPORT FROM THE WORLD CONFERENCE MAY 22-26, 2010 BY: G. M. Gurican, Chair, Section 503 My Fellow Members, This was my first ASQ World Conference in the nearly ten years that I have been a member of Section 503, or any ASQ conference for that matter, and I must say that I was extremely impressed. First, there were four (4) embedded conferences wrapped into one event, including: 1.) The World Conference on Quality & Improvement; 2.) The Institute for Continual Quality Improvement; 3.) The Institute for Software Excellence; and 4.) The Quality in Sustainability Conference – with topical tracks which could meet the needs of a wide variety of members both nationally and internationally. While the sessions which I attended personally were from Conferences 1 & 2 above and involved Healthcare topics and Quality tools, what was most impressive was the high caliber of Keynote Speakers. Let me relate to you two of four presentations, which if you were there would have blown you away! First up, was Ford’s “Comeback Kid” Mr. Alan Mulally, President and CEO of Ford Motor Company, who spoke openly and candidly about how
his 37 years of quality experience at Boeing Aircraft company helped him at
Ford. Mr. Mulally a disciple of
Jurand, Drucker and Deming for many years and student of the Toyota Production
System applied his “lessons learned” which enabled Ford to start
making some of the highest quality passenger vehicles even produced in
America affordably and profitably. He
applied the “Stop-light” color coding charts long used in heavily
regulated industries for reporting within the corporation, as well as Lean
6-Sigma principles. He was also very
proud of the fact that Ford did not have to rely upon any Taxpayer dollars in
the form of support or bailout, and the audience was very appreciative of
that fact, as well. Now Ford’s
past success in its truck line has resulted in similar success in passenger
vehicles including hybrids which far exceed the mileage and capabilities of
its competitor’s products.
Alan’s key to success is that all stakeholders know the business
plan, and that communications is such that everyone knows it by way of using
every form of media available across the enterprise. Alan is convinced that while Highways
of Another Keynote Address was from Sister Mary Jean Ryan, FSM the Chair and CEO of SSM Health Care, which was the first H/C system recipient in the nation of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award for performance excellence and quality achievement in healthcare. A Franciscan Sister of Mary for more than 40 years Sr. Mary Jean Ryan related the founding of her order of nuns and discussed SSMHC’s 23 year history in its commitment to Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) leading up to the receipt of the award. The mission of SSHMC is to provide every patient with “Exceptional Care.” To achieve the award took the submittal of 5 applications, but Sr. Mary indicated that it was the first that was the most revealing and helpful to their journey as it uncovered many gaps in the kind of care delivery which would eventually become an outstanding exceptional care experience. THE MEMBER LEADER SESSIONS (Sat.
5/22/2010): Saturday started with the "Ideas to Action" gathering (ITAG). I estimated that about 500 member leaders gathered to address strategic issues in a structured, but informal way, with everyone in the group focusing its collective energy on two big topics: 1.) Collaboration; 2.) Global Presence, and, 3.) The ASQ Business Strategy as it relates to Innovation - each having a set of questions to spur on the group in thinking about solutions. Collaboration: The questions –
As you might imagine, several themes emerged. Success comes from: Ø Solid and understood goals, teambuilding, mentorship, and active member and leadership participation. Ø A sense of urgency that the goal is worth undertaking, with a focus on collaboration with cultural sensitivity and diversity of opinions; and, Ø Good marketing for acceptance of the resulting ideas and plans. It was clearly understood that our ASQ member leaders still have a long way in perfecting these principles. Barriers include lack of transparency and poor communications, both of which can create distrust; and additionally time constraints, understanding roles, and training issues. ASQ has had the tendency to use the top-down leadership models (often called command and control) to implement projects and resulting change. However, our member expectations have changed with technology advancements and a more collaborative effort is needed that builds consensus with operational goals to achieve strategic results. Global presence: Our Executive Director, Paul Borowski, reminded us of the top three areas of focus for our limited Society resources: Delivery of Education – everywhere and many ways, thus the creation of the ASQ Knowledge Center; Delivery and stewards of knowledge – to make theory and tools available to all, in part through the ASQ Learning Institute (browsable LMS catalog and website); and, expansion to meet the needs of a Global community – to better embrace the world. ASQ Business Strategy: The questions –
The answers, of course, were quite varied; however, there seemed to be a central theme – ASQ needs to be involved at the grass roots level in America educational processes to make quality more transparent, more easily accessible with respect to available tools, less expensive for members, and with an expansion of educational methodologies, e.g., consulting services for solutions assistance, an “Annie’s List” of professional available, more webinars and on-line tools. Some of the top “innovations” included: “Q-Tube” (an ASQ U-tube); Certified Speakers; a seat at the table in resolving global events/crises (Gulf Oil Spill), an improved Vision statement that is easily remembered and recognizable; and, improved training tools for everyone. HEALTH/CARE DIVISION (HCD) MEETING (Sun. 5/23/2010) While I am a member of both the Quality Management Division (with 28-29,000 members), it was a pleasure for me to spend 4-hours attending the HCD meeting (3800 members and growing) on Sunday afternoon. The meeting was lead by Dr. Joe Fortuna, retired, and the current Division Chair. The goals the HCD are as follows: Ø Focus on Patient-Customer systems to improve efficiency and efficacy of Global Healthcare systems; Ø Dissemination of information related to applications, research, and innovations in quality theory and practice in healthcare; Ø Formation of learning partnerships to advance knowledge of H/C quality and promotion of vigorous education and training programs for all providers; and, Ø Support of all members and especially those in allied fields. Meeting Highlights: 1.
Overview of 2009-2010: The
Good, The Bad, and The Ugly a.
The Good
i.
Launched Process to Develop a HC Quality Manager Certification Exam
(John Harrision, Laura Kinney, Rod Munro) with QMD and ASQ HQ support
ii.
Division was part of ASQ’s health Reform Effort 1.
Wrote HR White Paper And Comments on Stimulus Regulations 2.
Organized the 21st Century HC Caucus Mtg in DC
iii.
Maintenance of membership numbers
iv.
Nominated Don Berwick (IHI) for ASQ DSM award
v.
Executed MOU with QMD for mutual support (Jim Levett)
vi.
Filled Leadership positions for 2010-2011
vii.
Kudos (Other than those above) 1.
Carla Konzel and Rod Munro: HCD World Conference Booth setup and
staffing & organization of multi-divisional reception b.
The Bad
i.
Minimal growth in membership
ii.
Timely communication with members
iii.
VOC: low survey response rates
iv.
HCD Conference attendance
v.
HCD QMP – did not make goals last year c.
The Ugly:
Overall Division Operations and Infrastructure – work is needed on
improvement. 2. HCD
Goals for 2010-2011 A. Develop and implement an implementable HCD business plan B. Improve the infrastructure of the HCD to improve its value to all of its customers Improve and coordinate member and partner communications 3.
Planned HCD Activities for
2010-2011 a
Certification (Kinney/Munro)
CMQ/OE to be modified for HC, new certification. Survey responses
support certification. Will do focus groups using third party of job
analysis. Then create BoK. Approved by ASQ certification board 5/22/10 to go
forward. Target maybe available in 2010.
b
QIHC (Leano)
2011 – back to QIHC with World Qual Conf. Develop conference
committee.
Possible Theme – Do no waste
Separate (from WCQI) call for papers by mid-June c
HCD Officers’ Retreat (Fortuna)
Small, many by phone d
HCD Gap Analysis
Rod Munro to conduct gap analysis between the HCD and other sections.
Will report to HCD retreat in June. e
HCD QMP:
Janice Tucker will assist HCD QMP Co-Chairs M. Carbonne and Y.Claudio as
they develop this important document f
Regional extension centers (RECs) to help primary care practices with
health IT implemetntation and achievement of meaningful use of information
technology. May be a role for the HCD in working to prepare the RECs for
their roles. g
Section/Division Synergies (Fortuna)
Fortuna and Konzel are working with Joni Judd to first survey section
chairs in re: how they believe the HCD can assist them and then develop tools
and methods to do that. One problem: the HCD does not know who their members
are in sections, sections don’t know who HCD members are h
HCD Partnerships (Fortuna)
– fortuna is exploring relationships with other health
organizations such as the American College of Health Executives (ACHE) and
the American College of Physician Executives (ACPE). |
|
Two New Certifications Poised for Release ASQ will be offering new lean and Master Black Belt certifications in the coming months. The lean certification has three levels: bronze certification emphasizes the tactical aspects of lean; silver is based on integration of lean; and the gold focuses on lean's strategic facets. The first administration of the lean certification will be May 23, prior to the ASQ World Conference on Quality and Improvement. The Master Black Belt certification is currently being finalized by the ASQ Certification Board. ASQ’s Friday Fast Facts will provide for more information regarding these new certifications in the future. In the meantime, check out ASQ’s website for other certifications that are offered. http://www.asq.org/certification/index.html ASQ has joined the Lean Certification Alliance, enabling your society the opportunity to offer the certification exam. The Lean Certification program was launched in 2006 by the Society of Manufacturing Engineers, the Association for Manufacturing Excellence and The Shingo Prize for Operational Excellence in response to the market need brought forward by their members and constituents. |
|
Members Reaching Out to Haitian Citizens The recent earthquake in |
|
Congratulations
to the 0503 As I'm sure you
know... Total Quality (TQ)
reflects the section's ability to achieve its goals. Gold / Silver /
Bronze Excellence reflects the section's having achieved above average
results regarding the key goals of: a) Retention (as
indicated by the period end Section Growth report)
b) Member Satisfaction, and c) Member Loyalty --
both as indicated by results of the Customer Measurement Survey (CMS) ·
Above
average on all three = Gold ·
Above average
on any two = Silver ·
Above
average on any one = Bronze For Information,
results for all of Region 05 are: v 0502 v 0503 v 0508 v 0510 Reading TQ/Gold Again,
congratulations. Eric J. Eric Whichard,
Regional Director – Region 5 Our Section was one of 77 sections with this
honor out of 250 sections in ASQ. Four Sections in Region 5 received this
award. Total Quality Award is achieved when a Member Unit reaches at
least 75% of the goals set forth in the Member
Unit’s Annual Business Plan from the previous year. Required documentation needs to be submitted to the
Member Unit Leadership Committee, the Regional Director for Sections, QMP Committee
Representative for Divisions and QMP@asq.org by September 1. |
|
Sustaining a Business, Securing
a Future ASQ is the As activities are realigned to better deal with the economic
pressures of the day, organizations are looking for best practices that will
help secure their future. Of course many of the activities and programs they
are researching relate to cost reduction. Those activities can lead to short
term gain, it is not a long-term solution—for instance, instituting
short cuts and supplier changes lead
to rejected product, re-work, and customer loss—it is not systemic and
it doesn’t lead to innovative problem solving. You can read more in the ASQ News Media
Room. |
|
ASQ, Thought Leaders Offer
Perspective on Future of Quality Business, industry, and non-governmental organization leaders
addressed quality opportunities and crises in the 21st century in a dialogue,
hosted by ASQ and the Baldrige National Quality Program at the National
Institute of Standards and Technology in Gaithersburg, Md. A full report of
the June 2009 event is now available at www.asq.org/knowledge-center/future-of-quality-dialogue.html |
|
Keystone
Visit the website at www.keystonealliance.com for current information. |
|
|
|
|
|
Also Called: milestones chart, project bar chart,
activity chart. Description A Gantt chart is a bar chart that shows the tasks of a
project, when each must take place and how long each will take. As the
project progresses, bars are shaded to show which tasks have been completed.
People assigned to each task also can be represented. When to Use Gantt Charts
Gantt Chart Basic Procedure Construction
Gantt Chart Example The figure below shows a Gantt chart used to plan a
benchmarking study. Twelve weeks are indicated on the timeline. There are two
milestone events, presentations of plans for the project and for the new
process developed in the study. The rest of the tasks are activities that
stretch over periods of time.
The chart shows the status at Thursday of the sixth
week. The team has finished seven tasks through identifying key practices,
measures and documentation. This is a hectic time on the project, with three
time-consuming activities that must happen simultaneously:
They are behind schedule for the first two of these
tasks and ahead of schedule for the third. Perhaps they need to reallocate
their workforce to be able to cover the three activities simultaneously. There is a fourth activity that could be happening now
(develop benchmark questions), but it is not urgent yet. Eventually the team
will have to allocate resources to cover it too, before visits can begin. Gantt Chart Considerations
Excerpted from Nancy R. Tague’s The Quality Toolbox, Second Edition, ASQ Quality Press, 2004, pages 271-274. |
|
Failure Mode and
Effects Analysis (FMEA) Tips & Tricks FMEA is a step-by-step approach for
identifying all possible failures in a design, a manufacturing or assembly
process, or a product or service. Keep in mind the following tips to make
sure you and your organization succeed when applying FMEA. §
Give initial FMEA training on an object that is common
to the students and not part of their work processes. That way they can
concentrate on the concepts. Move on to actual work processes when the
concepts are understood. §
The logical sequence is to do Design FMEA training
followed by Process FMEA training. It is actually easier to grasp the
concepts by doing the Process FMEA first and then transfer the concepts to
the Design FMEA. §
Failure is the inability of the item or activity being
studied to perform its intended function. This can happen even if the part or
process does not 'break.' §
FMEA evaluates potential failures. An FMEA does
not mean that the failure has occurred in the past or will occur in the
future; it means that it could occur. §
The cause of the failure is often given as the
potential failure mode. This creates a problem and results in confusion when
identifying the cause. Example: People see a tire without air and state
that the failure mode is a nail in the tire. The tire losing air pressure
slowly is the potential failure mode and a nail in the tire is the cause. §
Better definition of the requirements of the design or
process make the rest of the FMEA easier. For
more hot topics and resources on quality in manufacturing, visit the ASQ Knowledge Center . These tips first appeared in the ASQ Automotive
Division's Automotive Excellence summer
2008 newsletter. |
Quality professionals must cultivate success
in their ‘organizational gardens’
--Excerpt from Quality
Progress, November 2008— Quality
professionals are constantly confronting practical questions that are always
specific to the organizations they serve: How do we grow our quality efforts?
How can I keep my organization’s approach to quality vibrant? How do I
keep the leadership focused on quality? Should we be changing the focus of
our quality program? How do I transplant a successful quality endeavor from
one part of the organization into another? Many
quality professionals understand that the answers to these questions require
the ability to envision their organizations as living entities, existing
within their understanding of systems theory. This requires quality
professionals to function along the lines of organizational gardeners who
cultivate their organizations so they can produce beauty on many levels. A basic approach
Regardless
of whether an individual is an organizational gardener in a manufacturing,
healthcare, service, government, education or not-for-profit setting, the
task of tending to an organization can be difficult because it’s easy
to lose sight of four basic gardening principles: 1.
Expect the seasons. Start with the premise that everything changes and that
no action you or your organization takes will ever be permanent. Your task is
to study your organization as it exists right now, to think about how it can
be improved, and then to perform the necessary pruning, spraying,
transplanting and other actions. 2.
It is all an interconnected ecosystem. Each organization is a complex
system of interconnected parts that exists within an even larger ecosystem of
social, economic and political conditions. The term "unintended
consequences" is just another way of saying we didn’t think things
through from a systems perspective before we implemented change. 3.
Don’t spray everything. Just because you own a set of garden tools does not
mean you are a gardener. It is important to have a variety of tools and even
more important to know when to use them and when not to use them. Don’t
spray the herbicide on everything in sight just because you have it. 4.
Get dirty. Organizational gardening requires a lot of hard work and the mastery
of a complex body of knowledge (BoK). This mastery only comes through a
process known as praxis, in which we use our understanding of theory to
inform our practice and use our practical experiences to reflect on and
refine our understanding of theory. Alter your perception
We sometimes get in a rut when it comes to how we
approach organizational issues and the perspective from which we understand
organizational gardening. Research into how the mind functions suggests our
perceptions about quality and our preferences for approaches might be
influenced by our brain preference, leading us to ask whether we are
left-brained or right-brained gardeners. For the
purposes of helping quality professionals think about getting dirty as
organizational gardeners, it could be useful to look at quality methods
simultaneously from two dimensions. One dimension would organize principles
and methods according to whether they establish and promote order or whether
they engender change, as Whitehead might suggest. The other dimension
considers whether the principles and methods are linear and orderly (the
left-brain preference) or relational in terms of complex systems (the
right-brain preference). Figure 1 provides a matrix of the BoK from this
perspective.
The greatest challenge for the quality practitioner as
organizational gardener might be facilitating the movement from one quadrant
to another when the needs of the organization require a change in thinking
and action. While the detailed, day-to-day digging in the organizational dirt
in the conformance quadrant is essential, it is equally important at times to
move over to the assessment quadrant and evaluate the relative beauty of the
garden and decide what to uproot, trim or fertilize next. When it comes to promoting change, quality professionals
show a marked preference for working in the orderly change quadrant.
Remember, the orderly introduction of change (improvement) needs to be balanced
by the work in the conformance and assessment quadrants. So where does the
right-brained, relational approach to promote change fit in? Ethical dilemma
When quality professionals are dealing with macro-level
quality issues in their organizations while functioning as organizational
gardeners, there are some ethical considerations to ponder. When working within a system, there is no neutrality.
Quality practitioners cannot park themselves in a safe, neutral part of the
system. That’s because they are part of the system. From
Whitehead’s perspective, every action we take is either going to
promote greater order or promote change. Don’t be afraid to dig in
There is no shortage of quality practitioners who can
conduct an audit, lead a group through a Six Sigma process improvement
routine or plot control charts, even though these specific areas require
expert skill and knowledge. Today’s challenge goes back to the issues
that prompted Philip Crosby to establish the Quality College, that motivated
Joseph Juran to establish the Juran Center, and that called Deming to teach
countless workshops at George Washington University. All three of these quality leaders were trying to help
everyone see quality from a systems perspective and impart a breadth of
understanding that could enable us to nurture and grow quality in
organizations for the betterment of society. The garden is calling, and it
won’t wait. You probably have some organizational gardening of your own
to do. Dig in. |
|
Scatter Diagram When to
Use a Scatter Diagram
Read more
about Scatter Diagram on the ASQ website in the Quality Tools section. It’s an excerpt from Nancy R.
Tague’s The Quality
Toolbox, Second Edition, ASQ Quality Press, 2004, pages
471-474. |
|
Spaghetti Map The spaghetti map is a simple Lean Six Sigma visual tool that provides a powerful overview of a process. It helps in mapping the flow of people and material, delivering care or service in an organization. The pathways taken by people working in the process and the use of supplies when drawn on a paper often resembles cooked spaghetti, hence the name. The spaghetti map helps in quantifying the distances traveled, in addition to helping to surface the bottlenecks, poor layout, workarounds and inefficiencies in the process. You can find the complete article at: http://www.sixsigmaiq.com/article.cfm?externalid=1874 |
|
QFD – Under One Roof One of the guiding principles of quality is cross functionality. This principle is embedded in many current quality management standards. For instance, ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2000 says the following: “The application of a system of processes within an organization, together with the identification and interactions of these processes, and their management, can be referred to as the ‘process approach.’ “An advantage of the process approach is the ongoing control that it provides over the linkage between the individual processes within the system of processes, as well as over their combination and interaction.” How do you audit interaction? In Figure 1’s example, the columns are the general departments at most companies (or they could be specific processes). The roof becomes all the interactions between any two departments.
There are eight departments in this example, making the number of two-way interactions 28 (8C2). With eight departments, the roof would be made up of 28 interactions. Is it necessary to audit all 28 interactions? Probably not. You can always do a Pareto chart and audit the six vital few interactions. Which six? Probably by consensus we can agree on four or five interactions of the six vital few. Not only do we have four bad (–) interactions, we also have four good (+) ones. You can audit for objective evidence of the bad interactions to begin a process of determining root cause and implementing effective corrective action. We can audit the positive interactions to collect “what we do well” information (the appreciative inquiry method). For example, you can audit the bad interaction between the engineering and production departments to objectively shed light on the problem. You can audit how the engineering department produces and delivers standards to the production department. You can audit the production department on how useful it finds the engineering department’s standards. A revealing exercise is to see if the supplier output is equal to the customer input, as illustrated in Figure 2.
As a positive example, you can audit the interaction between the HR and production departments to identify something you want to continue and perhaps replicate. You can audit HR on how it hires production workers. Perhaps you would find that HR goes to observe the actual work environment. You can audit how the production department’s new hires perform. Per-haps you would discover that HR receives feedback one month later on how a new hire is working out. Auditing interactions would require you to expand the scope of audits to include more than one department or process. Auditing several departments or processes might sound impossible with time and budget constraints. But remember, scope down audits of suppliers to a specific commodity in the main process you are auditing. If nothing else, make sure all your audits cover at least two departments or two processes. You must begin auditing the way the business actually operates—a system of processes, including interactions. Another use of the roof is to determine how to build cross functional teams, perhaps to tackle a Six Sigma project. If you know there is a weak relationship between two functions, why not put representatives from these areas on the same team with a single purpose? I have seen a weak relationship become strong through a team building process. Moreover, this strong team relationship might have a spillover effect on day-to-day business operations. Whether forming cross functional teams or auditing process interactions, you will provide value added information for management review of the effectiveness of the quality system. Using the house of quality for cross functionality and interactions makes sense. After all, aren’t your departments and processes under one roof? RONALD L. SEDLOCK is the principal
consultant and trainer at the quality Catalyst in |
|
Root Cause Analysis—Not Always an Answer One of the more useful and popular methods used by quality professionals is root cause analysis (RCA). But, there are instances in which RCA isn’t the best choice. One such situation is when working to reduce the chance and cost of recalls and especially product liability lawsuits, according to Randall Goodden, chair of ASQ’s Product Safety and Liability Prevention Interest Group for the past 12 years (the group was established in 1981).
Goodden says RCA and failure mode and effects analysis, which is in the same category, help design engineers not only determine why a product might not last as long as intended, but also predict what could fail. “In those cases, you’re looking more at product reliability. But, preventing hazards that will ultimately lead to recalls and possible lawsuits requires a different type of analysis,” Goodden explains. “This analysis is much more in-depth than RCA and includes all the ways the product is likely to be used, as well as misused," and how anyone who comes into contact with the product could be injured. Another point Goodden makes about RCA and FMEA is that they’re commonly conducted by design engineers on their own designs. But, the unfortunate fact, according to Goodden, is that the majority of products that are being recalled involve issues related to design defects. “Prevention of design defects requires an independent analysis of what would lead to faulty designs,” says Goodden. “Product safety teams should be made up of a small group of specially trained people, such as safety and quality engineers, who have a very in-depth view as to how a product will be used and who will use it. They must analyze the proposed design on behalf of the entire company and become specialists in this area.” Goodden believes product safety teams should be comprised of these independent positions, as opposed to manufacturing or engineering personnel, that are likely to face timeframe pressures. What tools are available to product safety teams? In addition to software packages that perform hazard analyses and risk assessments, Goodden says these teams can use data from previous products, including customer feedback, warranty returns, and customer returns from the field. Brainstorming sessions and checklists that feature previous problems with a product are also quite helpful. Most importantly, however, Goodden says product safety team members need to have special training in how to recognize potential hazards. “RCA and FMEA help determine whether a product will be reliable and do what it is intended to do, and lead to satisfied customers,” concludes Goodden. “Hazard analysis and risk assessment by a product safety team will go beyond just ensuring the product will be reliable and live up to the customer's expectations, by reducing the chance and cost of recalls that could then lead to product liability lawsuits.” Goodden is principle of Randall Goodden International and Goodden Enterprises LLC and the author of Lawsuit! Reducing the Risk of Product Liability for Manufacturers (Wiley, 2009).
For those interested in learning more about this topic, contact Randall Goodden at randygoodden@yahoo.com. |
