Hi All,

I would like to ask, what should a quality engineer be doing in a company (manufacturing)?

Thanks in advance,
Taha.

Hi All,

I would like to ask, what should a quality engineer be doing in a company (manufacturing)?

Thanks in advance,
Taha.

Too general a question, Shamim. It varies from organization to organization (how they are structured or organized). The best answer I can give you is to look at your job description, letter of appointment or in the absence of both check with your superior and/or HR people.

However, if you are referring to a small set-up, you could be expected to be involved in everything.

Hi All,

I would like to ask, what should a quality engineer be doing in a company (manufacturing)?

Thanks in advance,
Taha.

Whatever your boss tells you to do.

Exceeding expectations....

Thanks to all. I am more inclined towards a quality engineer involvement as a facilitator and as a teacher. What I mean is that many a times a quality engineer is extremely involved in small issues and on day to day business. Rather a QE should be heavily involved in design and omplementation phase and in teaching about quality tools to each and every one in the company. Like a specialized trainer. His or her job should be to equipped other engineers and supervisors as well managers on how to use quality tools and when to use them to achieve their process goals.

Once a QE starts doing this training and education, there will be many junior QEs in the company looking after their own processes and departments and measuring their goals and objectives and if they feel they failing to achieve goals, they would call a QE to facilitate process improvement activities.

They should be more like a Surgeon and a professor!

I usually get involved in small matters and most of my day is consumed in trying to resolve small issues on line which I strongly think that line supervisor should be well equipped to resolve it. Engineers should be used to engineer a system to fit people and to resolve complicated problems.

So a QE should not only be teaching SPC, but rather assist even supply chain process to stream line their process to acheive set goals and help them in making goals as well. SPC should only be taught to line supervisor to make sure his or her line is in control and supervisor should be equipped to quickly react where needed and involved right people if and when required. But all this can only be done if a company believes in educating its workforce. Several companies have supervisors runing around for parts shortage issues...! how will they improve the quality of their line...?

Any thoughts against my belief is welcome...lol?

Exceeding expectations holds true for each and every employee of a company...lol

Whatever your boss tells you to do is good if there are no other jobs in the market...lol

I think QE has a responsibility to convince and educate even his or her boss on what is right and what is not right. At the end of the day it is Boss who wins the race, but at least our mind is clear!

Thanks.

What's your job?

Whatever the boss tells you is about as honest and correct an answer you can get as long as it's not illegal, unethical or immoral. It's the boss that signs the check so it doesn't matter whther you're called butcher, baker or candlestick maker.......or quality engineer. If you want the check, then do the job no matter what your title or what the job is.

The customer QEs with whom we deal are mostly employed by OEMs using us as a Contract Manufacturer, and are mostly tasked with working with vendors to sort out those quality/regulatory questions for which an engineering-level (typically mechanical/electrical + materials science, biochemistry, radiation physics) understanding of the product and manufacturing process is essential to determination of the optimum answer.

We're frequently customer-audited. Occasionally a member of an OEM customer's audit team is a QE as well as having audit qualifications.

On a related topic, what should a Management Representative do? I suspect from your second post that is more of what you are leaning toward.

In my mind, the MR isn't the guy who does everything needed for your quality management system or everything for quality.

He is a facilitator, making sure it gets done. The terms I usually use are "coach" and "cheerleader".

Additionally, the MR is the one who leads off Managment Review. He is responsible for providing the "state of the quality management system". Even here, he could be a facilitator with others providing the metrics for their department showing how they are doing.

Once the "state of the quality management system" has been presented, it should be turned over to Top Management to determine and lead the discussion of "where do we want to go from here". Depending on the culture of the company, the MR may still be heavily involved here too, either leading or facilitating.

So there is my $.02 of how things would work in an ideal quality management system.