Scott Dalgleish, columnitst for Quality Magazine, wrote an article on the "health" of ASQ. The article can be found on line here….

http://www.qualitymag.com/CDA/ArticleInformation/features/BNP__Features__Item/0,6425,105764,00.html

I frequently agree with many of Mr. Dalgleish ideas. His columns are, if nothing else, thought provoking. Give it a read and post your thoughts.
CarolX

Scott Dalgleish, columnitst for Quality Magazine, wrote an article on the "health" of ASQ. The article can be found on line here….

http://www.qualitymag.com/CDA/ArticleInformation/features/BNP__Features__Item/0,6425,105764,00.html

I frequently agree with many of Mr. Dalgleish ideas. His columns are, if nothing else, thought provoking. Give it a read and post your thoughts.
CarolX


Carol:

Thanks for pointing us to an excellent article.

First off, I agree that there needs to be less "fad of the moment" and six sigma emphasis, and more Juran/Deming. When the first Six Sigma article came out in Quality Progress, was I the only one who sensed a sea change in the magazine and ASQ as a whole?

Also, the perception that consultants have a lot of influence within ASQ is shared by many, I believe. Is ASQ's mission to advance the state of the quality profession, or just drum up business?

Finally, it is disheartening that the very approaches and techniques used by many Q practitioners are ignored by the ASQ. This point alone is the most important in the article.

I hope the ASQ brass is listening.

Craig

Good article,
IMO, ASQ is not the only one experiencing this problem.
Many companies are pushing these "tools" with no practicle knowledge of how or why they worked in another company or area.

We've been discussing the "AIM" and "Vision" of a system in the SoPK thread. One thing is certain, all the supporting functions must have an aim or vision that aligns with the overall aim and vision of the whole. If they don't match or align you're setting yourself up for failure.
You can't have flexible vision to respond to changes. The vision has to incorporate the changes or all you are doing is constantly changing direction.
Set a course and steer for the destination, storms and winds will challenge your strength, but don't lose sight of the objective!

I communicate with Scott occasionally about the state of Quality and his articles. Though we don't always agree, we speak and respect our unbridled opinions. In this case, however, I am in complete agreement with all his comments.

ASQ in its current state is as non-value added as the registration process. Capturing lost sales by promotion of more new, exciting and costly programs for the moment’s symptoms, never conducting the necessary analyses to move Quality back to an even respectable entity. It’s a sham. :frust:

Were we not happy with the unparalleled results from TQM ? Fundamental, proven, effective and easy to use, yielding the optimum customer satisfaction. ;)

It’s just too easy for most to understand and didn’t generate enough revenue for consultants and societies. It’s a shame. :(

Carol-

I agree with your assessment of Scott's work. I've also found him thought provoking.

I think part of the problem is that ASQ is going through an identity crisis. Are they a statistics oriented organization? Are they the ISO kingpin in the US? Are the focused only on mfg? Are they focused on all age groups (ex. Koala Kids)? Is training a primary objective? If so, should it be at the local or national level?

The other part of the problem is that I believe people and organizations are slowly coming around to the idea that "quality" isn't just for groups labeled "QA", "QC", "QE", etc. Quality is everyone's responsibility. For example, the last company I was at dismantled their whole quality organization several years ago and melded these people and their responsibilities it into manufacturing, engineering, and the development groups as appropriate. In some cases their responsibilities remained the same, in other cases their responsibilities were evenly distributed to process and development engineers and were reassigned as process engineers. If other companies are making similar shifts, ASQ's target audience is becoming more diluted.

One final thing that has bothered me, is that lately I get the impression that ASQ is always looking for a quick buck. For example, they have recently created a certified six-sigma black belt with training programs that are quite expensive (like Scott eludes to in his article) and they charge somewhere around $100 I believe for a copy of the ISO 9000 standard, even for the soft copy. Are you kidding me?

Tom

My experiences with the ASQ have for the most part been bad from when I joined back in the 1980's. I won't hash out the details, but I've never been impressed with the organization and from when I first joined in the 1980's felt they were interested in little more than my money.

I believe a few years ago there was an attempt to start a new 'quality club' but it failed. I don't remember any details, but I remember there was some dissent.

I keep a membership because some people expect it.

I keep a membership because some people expect it.

Same here. I have had my membership since 1982.
I seem to recall way back then that they didn't accept advertising in Quality Progress.

CarolX

This is interesting. I had to really think about renewing my membership. I probably would not have done it except my boss still thinks it is a good idea. I'm not convinced myself, nor my company, nor the quality profession is getting their individual or collective money's worth.

I haven't had a chance to read the posted article yet, but this topic is a little disheartening...
In another post of mine it was recommended as a possible "good" idea to join groups like the ASQ if you a new to the Quality field.
In this post I get the impression I'd be wasting my money...
*shrug*

I wonder if in a few years at my current small company if my "quality manager" position will just be one resposiblity among many other (assuming I'm still here and our quality problems/issue continue to remain extremely low). Heck if I wasn't so computer literate and everyone else wasn't so busy (small office of 6 people), we probably could do with out a "quality manager" right now... *eeek*

Could it be that they have evolved into a huge beast that is overall very hard to manage at a small level and they have therfore become a conglomerate giant that is actually less efficient than several smaller groups? Does it sound at all like government.

The government does many great things but in many ways they are too big. Privitization is not really a good anwer either because there always will be favors owed and price gouging. So what is the solution?

You could all try joining the IQA.

Although membership appears to have little recognition in the work place they do appear to have a balanced and healthy scepticism of quality fads, and have recently started a Deming special interest group !

I have thought about this quite a lot. I keep thinking back through the ages and group (tribe) identification.

The guilds of the middle ages approximate the unions of today. Of interest is: http://www.new-tradition.org/

Definition wise, this is just one of many - all basically the same:

guild
n : a formal association of people with similar interests; "he
joined a golf club"; "they formed a small lunch society";
"men from the fraternal order will staff the soup kitchen
today" [syn: club, society, gild, lodge, order]

Guild \Guild\, n. [OE. gilds, AS. gild, gield, geld, tribute, a
society or company where payment was made for its charge and
support, fr. AS. gildan, gieldan, to pay. See Yield, v. t.]
1. An association of men belonging to the same class, or
engaged in kindred pursuits, formed for mutual aid and
protection; a business fraternity or corporation; as, the
Stationers' Guild; the Ironmongers' Guild. They were
originally licensed by the government, and endowed with
special privileges and authority.

2. A guildhall. [Obs.] --Spenser.

3. A religious association or society, organized for
charitable purposes or for assistance in parish work.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Why am I posting this? The ASQ is supposed to be a unifying body.

My question? Why is the ASQ really failing? The article gave a few reasons. One statement was local ASQ meetings are typically a bunch of folks 'looking for work' get togethers (ummm, networking??). Now I don't attend in my area, but I did stop by a meeting about a year ago and I sorta half way felt that way. Do you agree? What can be done to improve attendance and interest?

Do you believe the folks who 'control' the ASQ are so far beyond reach that we cannot reliably communicate with them or influence them? This is a major complaint about the RAB (Registrar Accreditation Board) - which is, of course, the ASQ. Surely the ASQ does not resemble Enron...

This is 2003. Familys have things to do. Born in 1950, my father, as far back as I can remember, spent eons of time with the local medical association and the Lyons Club when I really would have liked part of his schedule.

Is a lot of the alienation from our upbringing - our memories - as contrasted to the reality of two working parents, often one out of work, and we just don't have time for local ASQ meetings? We're not happy with the ASQ. Why?

I guess what I am asking is this: As we complain about the ASQ, what is our role in the failure of the ASQ?

I'll be honest and say that I joined the ASQ primarily as a networking tool. I was also looking for some fellowship in a peer group. As with many others that visit the Cove, I work alone being based out of my home. To say that I've been disappointed in both the organization and the group would be an exageration.

My primary disappointment in the ASQ is the magazine....it's more of a scientific journal than an actual help aid or information source. I'm an educated man, but I cannot begin to understand all of the E=MC2 stuff that is printed between the covers.

My feelings about the group...I've never been invited to a section meeting, I've had to find them. I know that my information has been forwarded, but never a call. When I have made a meeting the folks are nice, but they are so inwardly focussed that communication is a novelty.

I'll probably not renew next year because I have generated no net gain and I don't anticipate too do so.

My experiences with the ASQ have for the most part been bad from when I joined back in the 1980's. I won't hash out the details, but I've never been impressed with the organization and from when I first joined in the 1980's felt they were interested in little more than my money.

I believe a few years ago there was an attempt to start a new 'quality club' but it failed. I don't remember any details, but I remember there was some dissent.

I keep a membership because some people expect it. You would be surprised, how many companies pick a consultant based on membership to ASQ and their certification programs.

The company I'm at has a sustaining membership and I haven't seen any advantage to it. I've scanned the magazine a few times and haven't been too impressed with it. The local group is not that active, and the couple meetings I have gone to have been a waste of time. It was basically a bragging session for people.

The only advantage I've seen to it so far is the membership discount on items :p

The company I'm at has a sustaining membership and I haven't seen any advantage to it. I've scanned the magazine a few times and haven't been too impressed with it. The local group is not that active, and the couple meetings I have gone to have been a waste of time. It was basically a bragging session for people.

The only advantage I've seen to it so far is the membership discount on items :p

I just took a QUICK look at the site and the info about signing up...
Does anyone else (especially new people) feel like they are PAYING to join the Quality IN CROWD? I had to pay to join a special interest group? If I want to participate in more than one region its more? Based on the comments here I'd proably want to go to muliplte area meetings just to get my money's worth...

*sigh*

If ASQ is dying/lacking what else is there for new/young quality people (no offense to anyone)?

Some of you may or may not be aware of my name if you ever visit the ASQ website Discussion Forums.

Currently, several of the more prolific posters in that venue are struggling to get ASQ executive staff to "repair" the Discussion Forum to make it more customer-centric.

If you are an ASQ member, won't you please lend your voice to "light a candle" rather than curse the dark?

P.S. I belong to two ASQ sections. Each one has a regular newsletter and frequent meetings and training sessions. Section members seem to have their heads screwed on tight - some whining about job market during past two years (good reason, I believe) Attendance rarely approaches 10% of membership due to work and family conflicts.

Every meeting has at least one formal presentation on a topic applicable to our membership. All in all, I think the Section membership is worthwhile. I'm dedicated to change within the system, rather than giving up.

I agree Division membership has never wound MY clock!

Some of you may or may not be aware of my name if you ever visit the ASQ website Discussion Forums.

Currently, several of the more prolific posters in that venue are struggling to get ASQ executive staff to "repair" the Discussion Forum to make it more customer-centric.

If you are an ASQ member, won't you please lend your voice to "light a candle" rather than curse the dark?


Hi Wes and Welcome to the Cove,:bigwave:

We have had many discussions about the state of ASQ. What suggestions do you have to "light the candle"? Can you provide some suggestions.

Regards,
CarolX

Some of you may or may not be aware of my name if you ever visit the ASQ website Discussion Forums.

Currently, several of the more prolific posters in that venue are struggling to get ASQ executive staff to "repair" the Discussion Forum to make it more customer-centric.

If you are an ASQ member, won't you please lend your voice to "light a candle" rather than curse the dark?

!

Hi Wes and welcome :bigwave:

I've written to the ASQ a number of times about their krappy forum (I've even been nice). I've never received a response. In fact I've never had a response to anything I've asked about. The organization has such a swollen head it's got to be bigger than some of the butts that are on display in rap videos on MTV.

There are others like me here in the Cove that have opportunity to recommend organizations and things to lots of people (I've taught over 2 dozen ISO related training courses this year alone) and guess what these guys get from me...not much there pard!

The leadership and management just doesn't get it and don't seem to want it.

If you recall John Dew's article in September 2003 Quality Progress entitled "The Seven Deadly Sins of Quality Management," you can see that practicioners are writing about real life and the ASQ is publishing their work, but somehow the guys we elect as our UNPAID leaders in ASQ don't have the gumption to overcome these 7 sins in the entrenched PAID bureaucracy which is ASQ.

The only employee who tried to make a difference, Edwin Thaves, found himself on the outside looking in and we now have some bureaucrats who ask inane questions like "tell us your browser and operating system."

My thesis is that, somewhere among our ASQ membership, there must be individuals who have the ear of a senior elected ASQ official who would have the courage to act as our "Champion" (excuse the 6S lingo from a Demingite.)

I'm not a quitter. I certainly agree with many of the comments I've read both here and on the ASQ site that the PAID staff at ASQ have no respect for the members except as the fools who fork over money to keep them in jobs paying far more than they would earn in most other companies.

So - who among this august assemblage personally knows and has the ear of one of the senior elected ASQ officers?

Let's start from there and formulate a plan based on who and how we can use that person to acquire more Champions.

A former President of the ASQ, Mike Jones, is a friend, but I don't know what type of influence he has.

So, could you ask? then report. The longest journey begins with a single step.

Give me some specifics and I'll give Mike a shout.

Give me some specifics and I'll give Mike a shout.
Thank you for following up.
Ask your friend, former President of the ASQ, Mike Jones, to take a quick [sorry - didn't mean to make a joke about speed in reference to ASQ site - it hurts when I laugh]
look at the ASQ Discussion Forum entitled Discussion Board Suggestions, particularly these two threads:
Where I am told we are by Steve Prevette
and
Broken Stuff that really ought to be fixed also by Steve Prevette
After Mike has had a chance to read those and struggle himself with the crippled site, he will have a fuller appreciation of the problem. If, in addition, he has previously had the opportunity to work with Marc Smith's COVE, he may just be ticked off enough to become one of the Champions we need.

Once he's had an opportunity to view the situation, I'm sure several of my fellow senior members (Steve Prevette, Kevin Mader, Carl Keller, etc.) and I can provide any further input he may want.

I'll do the email thing. He's been spending a good deal of time out of the country doing 6 Sigma training. It'll probably be a few days.

I certainly agree with the article. I've been on the Board of my local section for 8 years and we've been very vocal with the regional leadership about the failure of headquarters to serve their clients. I've seen them support one consulting firm over another in the whole Six Sigma mess, increase the fees for certification without ever giving a credible reason as to why, and solicit (strong arm) sections to support their new building. They have done a hard sell on Six Sigma to the point where companies think this is something unique and special. A fellow Board member, who has a Masters in Stats, was told by one company that he wasn't qualified for a job as a statistician because he didn't have a "Black Belt". Who convinced them of that? ASQ.

When looking for information on a quality topic I would expect ASQ to be the best resource and give information freely to their members. Of course, that does not happen. They charge for everything. When I stumbled on The Cove, I was delighted, because I've learned more from the Cove members than I ever have from ASQ.

I still support my local section, because the networking has been wonderful over the years and I've certainly learned from them as well. But has headquarters helped us in any way? Nope. They wouldn't even do a mailing for us a year ago.

It's been a while since this thread was started and since it was responded to. Any new responses?

BTW - I noticed in the log files that someone from the ASQ's network read this thread less than 45 minutes ago - so someone there is having a looksie. As I look back on the responses in this thread, I'm not too sure we offered much in the way of solutions.

It's been a while since this thread was started and since it was responded to. Any new responses?

BTW - I noticed in the log files that someone from the ASQ's network read this thread less than 45 minutes ago - so someone there is having a looksie. As I look back on the responses in this thread, I'm not too sure we offered much in the way of solutions.I suggest the ASQ members among us take the time and considerable effort [they are really archaic compared to the Cove] to visit the ASQ Forums and read the various discussions there which are very current and reveal a general current of at least a minority dissatisfaction and the attempts to remedy. There is a list of contact information to reach elected ASQ officers directly. Especially look at the threads from past two weeks in the Quality Progress Forum.

I want to emphasize Wes's response above. He and I are trying to a little good-cop bad-cop play here. I have been on the phone with several ASQ staffers, and although they mean well, untill we can get a ground-swell of ASQ members we won't get noticed.

ASQ can be forced to change its course. We finally did it with the Six Sigma Academy alliance. Read the "Partnership Study" sometime - if you can find it. It was difficult, but ASQ did finally respond to its members.

So, I need your help. Look at the "Email Campaign" message in the ASQ Quality Progress Discussion Board.

Steve Prevette
ASQ CQE
Chair Section 614 2004-2005

Steve, Wes:

Now I remember why I rarely visit the site - it is designed so that it is HARD to navigate. I could not find the discussion you mentioned. Maybe a roadmap is in order?

Craig

Steve, Wes:

Now I remember why I rarely visit the site - it is designed so that it is HARD to navigate. I could not find the discussion you mentioned. Maybe a roadmap is in order?

Craig

Try this URL:

http://www.asq.org/perl/members/forums/get_msg.pl?topic_id=17

Thanks for the link, Steve.

I am even more grateful that we have the Cove. The comments about the software at the ASQ site were right on target, especially the one concerning lost opportunities because of the way the DB is run. I was determined to get in. A casual user likely would have just left out of frustration.

Although I have not had any business with the on-line ASQ people, I certainly remember when I took the CQM a few years ago and "the printer's down" was the response when I called because the pass/fail notification was late. When I asked if I did pass or fail, I got a gruff "we can't tell you over the phone" and a bunch of attitude.

All too often the attitude from some ASQ staffers is worse than that of the worker at the average burger joint.

Of course, that is just my opinion from admittedly anecdotal experience.

That said, good luck getting any response, much less any change, from them.

Craig

I agree with Craig:agree:
I joined ASQ last year and visited the site quite frequently in the beginning. I found it very difficult to navigate and my visits began to decline as I became frustrated with the difficulty in finding information. Once I found the Cove, I quit visiting ASQ. The cove offers real time responses and the information is easy to access.

I agree with Craig:agree:
I joined ASQ last year and visited the site quite frequently in the beginning. I found it very difficult to navigate and my visits began to decline as I became frustrated with the difficulty in finding information. Once I found the Cove, I quit visiting ASQ. The cove offers real time responses and the information is easy to access.What would you (or any other ASQ members who are also Covers) be willing to do personally to implement a change at ASQ?

Alternately, is it too far gone to fix and the easiest route is to just quit?

Please see
http://www.asq.org/perl/members/forums/get_msg.pl?msg_id=17689

From
Steven Prevette

Date
Feb-19-04 12:02 PM

Subject
I volunteer to be a Moderator



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This message is a follow-up to a promise I made to Neal and Pat.

I volunteer to be the Moderator, data collector, or whatever in an effort to collect issues from members. I will help to formulate those issues into "issue statements" and am willing to champion them to whomever at ASQ staff. A specific suggestion is to establish a Discussion Board called "Talk Back to ASQ" of which I (and hopefully I can get some help here, but if not so be it) will serve as moderator.

In return, I do not expect to be "the stuckee" for these issues. I do not expect to fulfill the role of "apologizer" for ASQ. I expect that someone in ASQ staff or board will provide a thoughtful response to said issue statements, and the issue statements and any responses will be compiled and posted for all to see.

I believe this is in keeping with the corrective actions set forth by the "Partnership Study".

Steve Prevette
Boy I've really stepped in it now.

I have never been one to take the easiest route. I would be willing to navigate/search the site and offer feedback on the difficulty and/or ease of navigation, the content of the forums and other materials available through ASQ. I would also be willing to fill out an on-line survey and/or questionnaire concerning the current service.

Perhaps they should follow the guidance of ISO 9001:2000 Section 8.2.1 Customer Satisfaction and find out what things are important to us (the customers). This would certainly help to identify improvement opportunities.

Don't get me wrong, ASQ is not all bad but they could definitely improve their services.

I have found some useful information through the site (a link to the cove being one). It is just not as user friendly as some other internet sites and we are all looking for faster, easier and better.

Something that may have been mentioned earlier....

You can only browse the ASQ boards if you are a memeber.

I applaude the efforts of Wes and Steve to try to "fix" those boards....but how much we limit ourselves when we keep our discussions to "memeber only".

CarolX

>You can only browse the ASQ boards if you are a member.

True. This is kind of a side discussion for some ASQ members. I did post the full text of my posting on ASQNET, but figured I should also include the URL for ASQ members to be able to find the original, and hopefully for them to post at least an "I agree" message so we can show some groundswell.

Something that may have been mentioned earlier....

You can only browse the ASQ boards if you are a memeber.

I applaude the efforts of Wes and Steve to try to "fix" those boards....but how much we limit ourselves when we keep our discussions to "memeber only".

CarolX


Hi, Carol

Assuming you are not an ASQ member, that point was one of the main ones (to me, anyway) that was made in one of the posts. That and the "clunky" software, and the maddening site layout. The idea was (is) that the site could be used to promote the ASQ as THE place to go for quality answers (kinda like the Cove, ya think?). Unfortunately, in its present state, it is best for the ASQ if it remains difficult to get to the discussion boards, IMHO.


Everyone:

Not wanting to throw cold water, but...

It seems to me that the discussion board situation is but a symptom of much larger, systemic, problems. Has anyone here visited the ASQ HQ? If so, what was the atmoshpere - how did the people act in person? Did your "auditing antenna" pick up any strange vibes? If so, do the problems come from the staff, the elected officials, or both (or neither)?

Craig

My first comment will be on this thread's title: The Current State of the ASQ.

Actually, I think the ASQ is a wonderful organization. It has helped me immensely throughout my career; from providing peer recognized certifications, and continual education from their seminars and from their magazine "Quality Progress", to their publications catalogs (SIDE NOTE: The customer service of their publications division "Quality Press" is far superior to any other source I've dealt with).

ASQ has done much to promote quality awareness through sponsorships with Baldrige and other awards programs. And they have expanded in helping healthcare, education, and other service related industries. So again, overall I believe ASQ has been outstanding in keeping the "Quality Movement" going.

THAT BEING SAID...

...their "Discussion Boards" are abysmal. I sympathize with Craig, Mshell and others. I used to read/write there regularly, but its improvements have been negligible. They do not respond to suggestions, and I believe the reason why (as I have stated on their discussion board) is that it simply is not a profit center for them; there is no incentive for them to add resources to it. So, as Wes asked. "is it too far gone?" - I say, YES.

Abandon it, and let quality professionals use THIS SITE, Elsmar Cove Forums, as the place for us to discuss and bandy about quality subjects. Why compete. I have just enough spare time for one forum, let alone two. This site is ideal: it is fast, has great search capabilities, and is organized well. When you have little time available (working full time and most of us do), this forum is the best choice.

And as far as Wes' suggestion, "what can we do personally (to help ASQ)", I say, NOTHING. We shouldn't have to. ASQ has paid personnel responsible for those things. I commend Wes, Steve, Andrew, and Jennifer for their compassion and their efforts to get ASQ moving on the discussion board issue, but I simply do not see any real R.O.I. in the near future.

Maybe I'm a bit cynical, but my thinking has been molded over the years to focus of 'efficient use of time, yielding the highest quality'. Marc's got it - ASQ ain't (at least in the discussion board arena). :rolleyes:

Hi, Carol

Assuming you are not an ASQ member,

Craig
Hi Craig,

Been an Memeber since...1982....OUCH!!!! LOL

Carol

P.S......Rob....you, also should be applauded for your efforts on the ASQ boards....Thanks!!!!

Hi Craig,

Been an Memeber since...1982....OUCH!!!! LOL

Carol




Er, well, uh. Sorry. :o

I should have remembered about making assumptions.

Craig

I have to admit that I’m surprised so many Covers have had bad experiences with the ASQ. I’ve been involved with the ASQ since the early eighties primarily for the training offered by my section. I can’t remember having one bad experience when dealing with the people in Milwaukee or at the section level. Overall I’ve gained a lot from my association with the ASQ. It is true the monthly section meetings are used as a job-hunting venue for unemployed members, but networking is one of the benefits of membership.

I’ve never used the forums until today and they do need help. Maybe the Cove can become one of the ASQ’s “Strategic Partners” and they can dump their forums.

Are there issues with the ASQ other than the forums?


Bob

One other thing that I just noticed. Even if you are a member you are still required to pay an additional fee to access articles and things of that nature.

I have to admit that I’m surprised so many Covers have had bad experiences with the ASQ. I’ve been involved with the ASQ since the early eighties primarily for the training offered by my section. I can’t remember having one bad experience when dealing with the people in Milwaukee or at the section level. Overall I’ve gained a lot from my association with the ASQ. It is true the monthly section meetings are used as a job-hunting venue for unemployed members, but networking is one of the benefits of membership.

I’ve never used the forums until today and they do need help. Maybe the Cove can become one of the ASQ’s “Strategic Partners” and they can dump their forums.

Are there issues with the ASQ other than the forums?


Bob
Hi Bob,

As the starter of this thread I can say absolutely YES...this thread wasn't started as a rag on the ASQ Forums, but a general disucssion of the direction the Society as a whole has taken over the last several years. I, too, have been a memeber since the early '80s. Remember when QP didn't accept advertising? Remember when 6 Sigma wasn't forced down our collective throats?

Just perpetuating the discussion from a former Quality Professional.

CarolX

Hi Bob,

As the starter of this thread I can say absolutely YES...this thread wasn't started as a rag on the ASQ Forums, but a general disucssion of the direction the Society as a whole has taken over the last several years. I, too, have been a memeber since the early '80s. Remember when QP didn't accept advertising? Remember when 6 Sigma wasn't forced down our collective throats?

Just perpetuating the discussion from a former Quality Professional.

CarolXMy original certificate of membership still reads "American Society of Quality Control." I voted YES on many of the changes which brought us to the current status.

Many complaints seem to center on these points:

Elected Leadership and paid staff make unilateral decisions to the benefit or detriment of the Society and its members without notifying or conferring in advance with dues-paying members. These changes in many cases have the same weight and effect as Constitutional changes.
Emphasis on revenue-producing activities seems to outstrip and overshadow all other activities.
The Society has entered into a mutually lucrative alliance with Six Sigma folk despite the fact a large number of dues-paying members are unhappy with the alliance.
The Elected officials and top paid staff selectively ignore communications from individual members and only barely try to appease members who may represent a constituency (like a Section President.) In most cases, the responses treat members with arrogance and imply the members "don't know what we know or they wouldn't ask such stupid questions" without ever bridging the so-called knowledge gap. (This is particularly the case with the ASQ Forums. Several members pointed the way to free or low-cost software similar to the Cove. Some even volunteered to help implement such software. The stone-wall response was "you don't know what we know about our needs; there is no way your advice could be helpful.")

Are there issues with the ASQ other than the forums?


Bob

My word, yes. :mad: Here is my "short" list

1. Single minded focus on Six Sigma. Six Sigma month. Six Sigma in speeches to Washington DC and oversees.

2. Lack of consideration of impacts on members outside of HQ. This is pointed out in the "Partnership Study". I was especially "burned" as an ASQ section chair in the AQP "merger". AQP came in and took over the section, now less than 6 months later they are all resigning and I am left to pick up the pieces as Section Chair again. This is a very long story.

3. Use of the ACSI. Upon asking questions about the ACSI, the official ASQ answer is "I teach PhD students . . . Buy my Book".

4. Certification Exam prices were doubled a few years ago with no explanation other than "benchmarking said we could do it".

5. ASQ made a plea for "dialogue" on the Living Strategy. This turned into non-dialogue - the expectation was that members would kick ideas amongst themselves, but there was no need for ASQ leaders to participate in the dialogue.

6. When asked about anything the stock answer is "best practices". The web pages shifted to micro-font the other week. When asked, customer relations responded "best practices". My response was "show me One web site, just one, that is structured like the ASQ website is now". So far, no response.

Have any of you seen the new "Living Community Model" that was presented at the regional meeting this month? It's described at the following link

http://asqgroups.asq.org/SectionVolunteerCommunity/

I got this animated email from our Regional Director about how innovative it is, but I got left cold. It certainly didn't address any of the issues I've had with ASQ. (see page 2 of these posts)

Have any of you seen the new "Living Community Model" that was presented at the regional meeting this month? It's described at the following link

http://asqgroups.asq.org/SectionVolunteerCommunity/

I got this animated email from our Regional Director about how innovative it is, but I got left cold. It certainly didn't address any of the issues I've had with ASQ. (see page 2 of these posts)


Rosie, I sure don't see anything there that appears to address the problems we have discussed. In fact, I predict that an already lengthy yearly renewal/application is going to get even longer, which may prove to be a little counterproductive.

Is it just me, or does anyone else smell some sort of "revenue enhancement" going on? Maybe I am just being cynical.

Craig

Rosie, I sure don't see anything there that appears to address the problems we have discussed. In fact, I predict that an already lengthy yearly renewal/application is going to get even longer, which may prove to be a little counterproductive.

Is it just me, or does anyone else smell some sort of "revenue enhancement" going on? Maybe I am just being cynical.

CraigRudy Giuliani, when he was a U.S. Attorney, always said, "Follow the money if you want to understand the true nature of organized crime."

Perhaps the question should be:
"Who is getting enriched by the revenue enhancing schemes?"
Quality Progress still doesn't pay authors and doesn't even give them back copyright, only reprint rights, so it isn't the authors who benefit from the sale of advertising.

When ASQ doubled the rate for its courses and tests, where did the extra revenue go?

It sure appears a lot more effort goes into creating employment opportunities for 6S certified practicioners than for CQM.

ASQ even seems to be leaning away from the ISO bandwagon and leaning more toward 6S philosophy "in place of" as opposed to "in addition to" ISO registration.

Soon, a company will have to have a Baldrige application countersigned by an ASQ-certified MBB to be eligible.

I just want to mention that my experience with the "grass roots" local chapters of ASQ is great. They are a dedicated bunch of people, volunteering time and energy for the greater good, without (many times) recognition.

The Orange County chapter has one of the best attendances I have ever seen. And I do participate in many So-Cal chapters. In average, we have anywhere between 60 and 120 people attending our monthly dinner meetings.

In my opinion, the biggest disconnect is at the National level of ASQ. Who are they accountable to? Me too have an impression that the agenda promoted by National ASQ is questionable. For example, in the links section available at the ASQ website http://www.asq.org/links/index.html, I see links of FOR-PROFIT organizations, some my competitors. I sent an email asking how one goes about linking their website to theirs. No response yet. If I conclude that my membership money is being used to maintain this site that promotes my competition, I will certainly consider dropping my membership (after 12 years).

As a suggestion, for those of you who might be receiving email, faxes, and other unsolicited correspondence from ASQ, you can edit your preferences online to change that.

I just want to mention that my experience with the "grass roots" local chapters of ASQ is great. They are a dedicated bunch of people, volunteering time and energy for the greater good, without (many times) recognition.

The Orange County chapter has one of the best attendances I have ever seen. And I do participate in many So-Cal chapters. In average, we have anywhere between 60 and 120 people attending our monthly dinner meetings.

In my opinion, the biggest disconnect is at the National level of ASQ. Who are they accountable to? Me too have an impression that the agenda promoted by National ASQ is questionable. For example, in the links section available at the ASQ website http://www.asq.org/links/index.html, I see links of FOR-PROFIT organizations, some my competitors. I sent an email asking how one goes about linking their website to theirs. No response yet. If I conclude that my membership money is being used to maintain this site that promotes my competition, I will certainly consider dropping my membership (after 12 years).

As a suggestion, for those of you who might be receiving email, faxes, and other unsolicited correspondence from ASQ, you can edit your preferences online to change that.I absolutely agree with you, Sidney. Instead of quitting, what can we do to reverse the flow?

In all the years I've attended Section meetings, I never witnessed anyone receiving anything but perfect courtesy from our local officers. Some of those guys with 30, 40, and more years of membership were excellent teachers and adapted with the times with smoothness and agility. I don't want to give up membership with them because some staffer or crew of staffers is leading our elected leadership around by the nose (similarly to what happened with the AMA when the paid staffers cut a deal with Chainsaw Al at Sunbeam.)

I noticed, too, that the recent flap at United Way was caused by paid staffers who had years and years of experience and knew just how to manipulate the elected officials who were there for a short spurt of glory in the limelight, then out the door with no real impact on the inner workings.

Why are things so secretive? Trade secrets? Competitors? Hah!

We're not the first Association to find itself with a disconnect. The question is "What are we going to do? Give up? or Take it back!?"

There is some visible evidence of action at ASQ. A staffer I have been talking with admitted that many of the ASQ Discussion Boards had been discovered to be "orphans", that no one was even named to read them let alone do anything with them. I had the staffer read a message that had been posted where the member was highly disgusted that ASQ could not bring itself to create a Metrology board.

A metrology board has been added, and I notice one of the little used boards (Volunteer Opportunities) has a note saying it will be closed down next week.

So we have imparted some motion. :agree1: There is momentum. :applause: Whatever you are all doing, keep it up please. :thanks:

I just received an e-mail from ASQ with this link in it. I thought you guys might be interested. This is another chance to offer customer feedback. ;)


http://www.asq.org/enews/new/23FEB04/asqwire_survey.html

I just received an e-mail from ASQ with this link in it. I thought you guys might be interested. This is another chance to offer customer feedback. ;)
http://www.asq.org/enews/new/23FEB04/asqwire_survey.htmlI just want to reinforce a point Steve Prevette made. I only play a "bad cop" on ASQ Forums.

My end goal is to have responsible, responsive elected leaders and paid staff at ASQ to help support the infrastructure of education, training, certification, and publicity that a professional organization requires to support its members.

I want to work within the system to do that. I also believe we need to be extremely vigilant to prevent ideological or financial corruption from getting a foothold and destroying us from within.

I am continuing to follow through with ASQ staff on issues.

ASQ did add a metrology discussion board and is moving to clear off some old boards.

I am told that ASQ staff have just started reviewing replacement software for the discussion boards and they are excited about it. I did place the suggestion that it would be a good show of faith to set up an area for ASQ members to go and play with the proposed software and comment. Beta test. They had not considered that, but it will be brought up as an idea.

ASQ is also looking at a way to foster two-way communication and is in the consideration phase of setting up some form of "Ask ASQ" discussion where ASQ staff would participate.

Baby steps, but steps nonetheless. I have promised I would call every week or two to see how things are going, and yes, I have a case manager of sorts assigned to my case. Now is the time to keep pressure on ASQ HQ to provide some action on these issues, primarily of which is the two-way communication issue I believe.

Steve,

I appreciate your mediation efforts.

Folks,

I do not mind the failures of the ASQ being discussed in these forums (actually I'm rather bemused in some ways), but it makes me feel uncomfortable. And in some ways it makes me feel like some weird kind of 'go between' where one wonders why the 'interface' is even necessary. Maybe I'm afraid that I'll become, in some way (if I'm not already), a target for the ASQ to shoot at for allowing dissent to be aired. Dissent is a BAD word in today's business world. I'm just one fellow - not a 'company'. I'm really not in a position to take on an organization as large and powerful as the ASQ - For any reason.

Please feel free to carry on with your discussion, but I wanted to address that issue. And I'm adding my (admittedly somewhat lengthy) thoughts. I will say I believe it is telling that failures of the ASQ are being discussed in these forums.

A number of folks have e-mailed me asking why I allow the ASQ to be discussed when they snub this site. I guess I've gotten a 'Big Head', but I've been to a lot of forums myself and I believe mine (ummm, well, I do 'own' the domain name and keep things 'moving' so I guess I can refer to these forums as 'mine'...) is one of the openest, far reaching, honest and unbiased (with respect to quality assurance and related issues - let's keep political bias out of this discussion) forums around. The ASQ should have this site in their magazine every month! I honestly believe this site offers people quite a lot. March 2004 Quality Progress Front Page "How to Write a Quality Manual". Ummm, that and more - including editable examples - here. For over 7 years we're discussed, critiqued and shared QMS manuals here. Of course for the ASQ, this was a selling issue - a Promo for the book by the author. You can get the same information here for free here. Imagine that... People helping people without charging them. In a way, this forum represents 'Open Source' quality help. No copyrights, no charges - people sharing with each other. Theory is great, but when it comes to one's specific situation that fellow's book doesn't come close to the knowledge, as it pertains to an individual company's situation, as one can (and many do every day) get here. Free procedure examples. Free QMS manuals, free examples of forms, free spreadsheets for R&R - you name it. These forums are real world and attempt to address the specifics of individual situations in individual companies. The Elsmar Cove Forums are - let's face it - free, individualized consulting by people who enjoy helping others as well as the academic aspects. Kevin Mader is the resident Philosoph. Hanging around here for how many years now? Wes Bucey is recent - but Wes has become an invaluable resource - he responds to anything and everything - and he does it (as is obvious) because he is INTERESTED. I'm not paying Wes to help people. He's interested in the field and in communicating with people from around the world. WALLACE {somewhat new} is another unabashed contributor - always trying to help folks out. db and barb have been around for a long time because the field interests them - their interest is far beyond financial renumeration. When one reaches the point where one gives of themselves freely to help others without some sort of 'I'll give you this but what will you give me in return?' requirement, one has reached Nirvana. In the science field (my background - biology-chemistry), I believe it is referred to as Entrophy to the System. In the business world it is translated as 'No one made a profit - I gave something away'. And that's no way to make a profit! The failure mode with that is in business 'give aways' and 'free samples' are now expected staples of their advertising campains. Coupons, whatever.

I wish the ASQ good fortune. But I fear the ASQ has gone far afield of being a resource to all members - if that is even possible. This is the type of e-mail I receive:

> Hi Marc! First of all, love you, love your forum! Thank you for all you do
> for us.
>
> I have a question for you. I rec'd ASQ's Quality Progress (March 2004) in the
> mail today. Page 17 has a "Web Watch" of quality related websites that are
> "noncommercial". This issue refers to *** Link Removed to avoid trouble *** and says "if you have
> any questions about ISO/TS 16949:2002 ... this site should direct you to your
> answers." Well, Marc, if you go to that site it is actually sponsored by SRI
> Registrar. (So much for noncommercial). The site does like to the IAOB and
> to the AIAG but the rest are links to quotes from SRI, more info from SRI,
> etc.
>
> So here's my question. I would love to write a very politely written letter
> to the editor of Quality Progress and/or the contact on "Web Watch" stating
> that I find that your site, The Elsmar Cove, is by far more of a source of
> information because different users from vast backgrounds and industries
> contribute.
>
> Would you have a problem with me doing this? Has your site been in that Web
> Watch area before?
>
> Let me know what you think -- I won't be offended if you tell me not to write
> it. Just ticks me off to no end that a registrar just got free advertising
> and you're doing all this work, as are all the contributors to this site.

If one is recommending people to a 'non-profit' site and then sends them to one which is obviously financially tied in, I believe it is called fraud. There may not be direct financial ties, but what do you want to bet there's a 'sweetheart' tie in? But - with business as it is today, that's to be expected as the norm. 'Little lies' and sweetheart deals are commonplace. I admit they are a part of life in general and have been for centuries if not for as long as humans have been roaming the earth. Enron was nothing new. Unbridled greed is out there. Those who embrace it call it 'survival'. But it's mostly a matter of their 'lifestyle' where only a Castle will do.

When added to the recent conversations about the ASQ venturing into other fields such as health care and abandoning its core base (manufacturing) in pursuit of - whatever it may be (I'm not sure) - other areas, it appears the ASQ is more of a facade and is not addressing it's members. Joining is 'necessary' for many in the quality arena, because of reputation. That's why I joined and I bet that's why many join. I'd bet many do not even expect anything from the ASQ - but they DO need an association with the ASQ because many companies hiring have the perception that legitimacy comes in part from being an ASQ member (and in many cases this relates to ASQ 'certifications' the 'true' value of which is routinely questioned).

I read the above posts, and many other posts here and there about the ASQ forums (not to mention the ASQ as an organization), and I really have to wonder. When I see words like: "Baby steps, but steps nonetheless" I have to chuckle. The ASQ has been getting complaints for years. Now it's taking 'Baby Steps' towards listening to its customers. The ASQ is obviously much too busy with other things. To repeat what seems to be a very common question today - if business (and the ASQ is DEFINITELY a business) is about Customers, why does the ASQ continue to 'fail' ITS customers year after year?

I'm sorry to say this folks, but I believe by the time the ASQ is done they'll have a nice forum - and will abandon it as they have the one they now have just as so many businesses abandon 'improvement programs'. I don't think it is in the ASQ's 'personality', myself. If the ASQ wanted to, in two weeks they could have decent forum software online and running. This is not magic stuff. And it doesn't even take much computer power - I ran my forums on a Virtual Server from Verio for years - until last fall - for only US$250 a month for server fees. I do admit I do all the admin work and such, but the point is if they wanted to put a good, fast running forum online they could do so quickly. Has the ASQ become so bloated that to accomplish simple things takes years? Has the ASQ become such a convoluted organization that to get anything done, even something as cheap as this, requires many, many signatures and a 'profit' check?

In defense of the ASQ I will say that I really don't see forums as the ASQ's niche. They are not interested in forums and I do not think it is a big part of their customer 'Wants', if you will (sort of like the Chat Rooms here - they were asked for long ago. It finally became feasible so I put 'Chat' online. It's rarely used). Nor is it, apparently, seen as the potential profit center (they have advertisers out the yazoo) which it could be. That may change in the future. This may in part happen because of the internet. IF the ASQ would open their forums to the world the potential is out there. As is, by restricting entry as they do they, in my opinion, essentially end up with an inbred situation where a small group of folks discuss limited topics.

The ASQ would probably be better off just asking me to set up special forums for them here and arranging some sort of management deal. But - That would approach blasphemy because, as I think we all know, these forums are not 'professional'. It's not quite Howard Stern, but a bit above Rush in the frankness here. We get off track from time to time. Now and again there are quite brutal, frank conversations. Many of us have discussed our medical and other quite personal information here. These forums have, from time to time, been that personal to people. From time to time there's the occasional flame war and personal attacks. Some people complain that I 'pick on them' - the unfortunate side effect of keeping a forum running and in control. Just like everywhere in every group setting there is at least one person who doesn't feel they're being treated fairly. I am trying to keep the forums under control here, and I believe things have greatly improved, but in the open, world-wide environment of the internet this is not easy to control. It has amazed me how many folks here take these forums Personally! I have even been accused of 'Restricting Freedom of Speech'. Umm, yeah. Welcome to Mars.

I will be so bold as to challange the ASQ's customer model and objective(s). If one looks at these forums, everything here was free for years. When things got tough for me in 2000 - 2001 I did start charging for some things. On the other hand, I started taking advertising late last December (2003). I watched and as I saw that simple text ads - only 5 per page - would pay the expenses for the site I withdrew from charging people to download attachments. I have also tried to continue compensate users who did financially contribute financially. I watched for 2 months and I now have a relative degree of security that the advertising revenue from this one, small source, will continue. In addition, when I moved to a Dedicated sever last November bandwidth issues were overcome as well as server response issues. This morning I opened up downloading of attachments to all visitors - not just those who register in the forums. While I am still requiring registration to participate in discussions, downloading attachments to posts is now open to everyone (except in the Contributor's forum). Registration must stay (registration to participate has always been free - and still is) because it is the first and major control I have over keeping trouble makers out. For those of you who remember Jim Wade (aka Nosmo and various other personalities), you'll understand the need for that control. I think the perception of the ASQ as greedy and interested mainly in their own 'good' is very common. I haven't looked at the books, but where is the money going? Who is getting it? What are they doing to 'earn' that money? Why can't they quickly get a decent forum online when doing so is so cheap and easy? Is there a point where the ASQ can say 'We've reached our proifit goals and the rest goes to members 'wants'?" (NOT like the somewhat recent 'tax breaks' in the US...)

I long ago read in Forbes (when Daddy Malcolm was alive and at the helm) that the ability of a company to survive was in large part dependent upon the company's ability to adapt rapidly to the changing conditions in the world. If this is true, the ASQ as it is today will continue to survive only upon its being an 'institution'. But even that too will eventually fail as sooner or later some other organization will over come it. Add in the internet - which equils Choice - and the ASQ is doomed to continue to loose relevance in the world. I believe the ASQ has 'lagged' for years and just cannot keep up with the times. I forsee their relevance fading.

I remember joining the ASQ back in the late 1980's - because it was 'expected' of me. While I do keep 'current' now (send in my money), I didn't pay several years and let my membership lapse. I saw no value in paying the ASQ. But my first 'real' encounter with the then ASQC soured them for me for - well, I'm still soured. I remember ordering a copy of Juran's book about 1989. The lady on the phone was very curt and the ASQC system was sad. I could call MacWarehouse and get whatever I wanted next day delivery. I could call The Beaner and get Next Day. I could call Barnes and Noble and get next day. The gal at the ASQC said 3 to 4 weeks. Yes - the book was in stock. I asked about over night or Second Day. Sure she said - IF I wanted to pay TWO extra charges - one for the extra freight charge and another to the ASQC (US$25) for 'fast processing'. I asked what fast processing was and she said "We'll process your order within 2 to 5 business days instead of 10 business days." It seemed to me these folks must be operating out of someone's basement. It takes them up to 2 weeks to simple process an order? The bottom line was the ASQC was so far behind the eight ball, and so profit oriented, that I was then, and to a large degree still am, 'turned off' by them.

I finally received that copy of Juran. It was stolen off my desk a few months later. I ordered another copy - which I still have - it is here on my shelf right now - but I didn't buy it from the ASQ.

To me the ASQ is US$100 a year for which I can tell folks I'm a Senior Member and I get a decent 'professional field' related magazine once a month. That's all I want from them. I'm a happy camper.

As to the charge that the ASQ is out of touch and spreading its self out to other fields, I see that as normal evolution. Quality used to be mainly associated with manufacturing and it's drift from that path is the process of reinventing, renewing its mission. When the ASQC changed to the ASQ it was a defining point in the organizations life. It reduced the focus it once had and in the process, as happens in cases like this, alienated a lot of people who see this as a loss of relevance to them (often personally). As more and more 'groups' are included they see their perceived importance as diluted.

As a last thought... If you look at this forum and define it as 'successful', look at the history. It really started as a 'fun' place to chat about quality topics and to some degree I owe the ASQ because many of those who came here - and, of course many still do - did so because the ASQ 'drove them away'. If you define these forums as a 'success', it has succeeded only because of people like Dawn, Don Winton, Kevin Mader and several other folks wanted to chat and discuss 6 to 7 years ago. How many of you remember Steven Sulkin or Jim Stewart or Vicki Horner or Martin Ambrose? Back in those days I was more involved. It was fun and educational and thought provoking. I will readily admit that over the years on my end it has evolved from something to do for fun and in part my own education to something I have to maintain every day. It used to pretty much run its self years ago. But then again I didn't have thousands of visitors in the forums every day as I do today. Many times these days I see myself mostly as 'The Man Behind the Curtain' (Over the Rainbow - The Wizard of Oz) rather than the involved participant I once was.

If you define these forums as successful, the Cove continues to succeed because people like Keven stay around, because Claes welcomes just about everybody. Howard is always ready to help out. Atul even helps me with some site related problems. Moderators donate their time and help keep control (how long has Sporty been helping out?). Lucinda holds her own. I can never thank Jerry Eldred enough for his long time participation and help in addressing calibration and related laboratory issues. From Craig C. (who was kind enough to share parts of his book) to Wes Bucey (more recently a 'livein' - almost always here and always helping people and sharing his views) to CarolX to Al Dyer to Rosie to Randy (Oh. my!) to RCBeyette from up north to 'I have a question' little__cee to SteelWoman to ralphsulser to Al Rosen and Mike S. - We also have Rockanna (love the 'handle') to SteelMaiden (where is that from?), db (The Other Dave?) to JRKH, barb butrym (a LONG time contributor both through participation AND financially , Raffy, energy (he'll be back...), BadgerMan, Jim Biz, Michael T and Randy Stewart - well, there are a lot of folks - I could run a trailer like in the movies - credits - these people have become the Cove! They take time to help, they share what they have.

Now you can take my last comment however you want to. I will say that maintaining these forums and this site has become a pain in my butt. But advertising has proven - so far - to adequately compensate me for the time I now have to spend to keep things together (one guy contacted me and offered to do it for me - for US$80K a year...) including 'dealing with personalities' (I've had people call drunk wanting to discuss 'their cut' and Mike S. is pissed at me on an 'ongoing' basis in general for being a 'liberal', 'not liking' him and other assorded personal childish complaints {Yes Mike S., your 'friends' have copied me on a number of your personal comments and 'complaints' about me - Geez.... Imagine that! Thing is - you're a significant contributor post wise - you help folks - so you're validated, so to speak. I just figure you're a mad, sour individual and hope in the future some personal vendetta doesn't cause you to pop a vein. I've been 'Shot in the Back' before - You're not the first}...).

To Mike S. I can only say you got the war you wanted... You probably still believe in the Domino Theory.
http://www.sfexaminer.com/article/index.cfm/i/031004op_editorial
"THE CHIEF OF THE CIA, in a Senate hearing Tuesday, contradicted statements made by Vice President Dick Cheney about the relationship between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and the al-Qaida terrorist organization. The disagreement uncovered a new facet to the ongoing squabble between intelligence agencies and administration officials.

Some months back, we wrote that the question of what was behind administration claims before the invasion of Iraq about supposed stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in that country came down to two basic and ugly possibilities, one of which must be true.

One possibility was that the president or people very close to him had intimidated U.S. spy services into bending the actual intelligence into a form that would favor a preemptive war and administration claims that Saddam Hussein was building a great store of weapons. The other possibility was that the intelligence agencies were so grossly incompetent they couldn't tell the difference between when another nation had a massive weapons program and when it didn't, and the administration based a decision for war on good faith but bad information.

Now, it appears, there may be a new twist to the question -- regarding the involvement of Iraq and Hussein with al-Qaida, Osama bin Laden and Sept. 11.

On Tuesday, CIA Director George Tenet told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Vice President Dick Cheney was wrong to say that the government had proof of an Iraqi biological weapons program. He also disputed assertions from the vice president that Iraq had cooperated with al-Qaida."

March 10, 2004 | LONDON (AP) -- All four men who were arrested on their return to Britain from U.S. military detention at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, were released Wednesday without charge, police said. Ummm... Biggo Mistakeooooo. But hey - What's 2 years in a US Military detention 'camp'???

I will continue to play the roll of the 'Man behind the Curtain' as long as people keep stopping by and I'm reasonably healthy (I smoke and I'm over weight so I could go tomorrow). I will continue to play an active role in defeating pResident Bush in 2004 - selected by the 'Supreme Court' in 2000 {Goodness, STOP Counting Votes! The Other Guy Might actually WIN!!!!} and a recent fav (Let's Go Duck Hunting Together so I can explain why you must rule in my favour! While we're at it, Clear Channel needs Tax Breaks, too!).

The thing is, I've sorta become proud of this site - of these forums. It is a personal interest the ASQ cannot duplicate by its very nature. That is why I do not see any forums the ASQ has, or will have in the forseeable future, as 'competition'. We're MANY galaxies apart.

:2cents:

OK - Your Turn. Have at me! Even you, Mike S. - You Back Stabbing Little Snot! (Please do excuse my harsh 'evaluation of Mike S., but in my opinion Back Stabbers deserve what they get...)

One other thing that I just noticed. Even if you are a member you are still required to pay an additional fee to access articles and things of that nature.
Total profit motive.

Hi Marc,

When I first joined a couple years ago, I found you through a link from the ASQ website. I'm sorry to hear that the link has disappeared, because that link was the best thing ASQ ever did for me.

In some companies there are large departments full of people who share your job function. But for many companies, the QA Dept is one person. When you want to chew over an idea or research a problem, there aren't any other quality thinkers around to discuss them with. That's where the Cove has been a godsend.

I understand your concerns about ASQ bashing. They do fill a need, but it's an impersonal need. I'm forever quoting the Cove to my management team. I never quote ASQ. Yesterday our Controller asked me for aid in addressing the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and if not for a discussion on the Cove, I would not have known anything about it.

So thank you Marc for starting this and continuing to host it, and thanks to all you forum participants, whose discourse on the issues is far more "real" than the stiff stuff I've read on other forums. :applause:

I have posted the following message at the ASQ Discussion Boards (ask a quality professional). This is an unfortunate outfall of another round of a newcomer posting the same message in multiple locations, and an escalation of an attempt to self-police the ASQ Boards. I believe this is applicable here with the ongoing discussion of the status of ASQ.

=========


From Steven Prevette
Date May 28, 2004
Subject Where we are at


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It may be time for a reflection once again at where we are at.

Today we have had a fairly negative outcome, we have turned off a newcomer to the Discussion Boards. It has been noticed by ASQ Staff and I even received a phone call enquiring as to the situation from a staff member. It is unfortunate that it takes a bad event to initiate such communications.

Yes, I am as frustrated as are several members at trying to stay up with the messages, but only to find duplicates of the same message. This is a system problem, as there is no way for a newcomer to know that this is not good etiquette, and no easy way to correct the problem. Still, this is not an excuse for rudeness on any of our parts.

There have been ASQ staff starting to interact with the boards, which is good, and as the phone call I received indicates, there are ASQ staff watching what we are doing. I personally try to maintain a balance. I am a critic of ASQ at this time. I am hanging on, and am even resuming a position as a section chair in the hopes of having a positive effect. On the whole, ASQ has been very unresponsive to its members. That is my opinion, and I believe I can back it up with at least personal experiences, and I have previously documented the ongoing saga in various "where we are at" messages. I have had various phone calls in the past 4 months with ASQ, today was a first - an ASQ staff member did initiate a phone call to me asking for advice. I have also offered to talk with the ASQ member who we have turned off.

Questions on ACSI and Living Strategy remain unanswered. It does appear that the focus on Six Sigma is declining somewhat, though I do not know if that is a conscious decision, or just a normal cycle. I did send a note asking why there were no Board of Directors minutes since Feb 2003, but have not received an answer.

I will cross-post this on the Cove, since many of us our also participating there.

There have been indicators of a change occurring. We are seeing some staff actively participating. Ken Case actually did write a response on the "Living Strategy" board (which is in another location on ASQNET outside of these boards). We have had some incremental improvements in these "antique" boards. There is also a plan in the works to convert these boards to "Jive". I will state I was given access to a test area to play with "Jive", but either the combinations of my firewalls at work, or the limitations with the test site capabilities made it rather frustrating. However, none of this has yet been officially communicated to the members nor (to my knowledge) has any one else outside of staff participated in beta testing.

Some discussion also indicates there is confusion over the purpose of the Discussion Boards. Senior ASQ leadership assumes that these are an area for the members to network in, but there is no need for ASQ itself to participate. The question remains - how do we open up a true dialogue between membership and the leadership?

Steve Prevette
ASQ CQE
incoming Section 614 chair

I have posted the following message at the ASQ Discussion Boards (ask a quality professional).

How can I find this ASQ discussion board?

Jaime

How can I find this ASQ discussion board?

Jaime

If you are an ASQ member, you can log in at http://www.asq.org/perl/members/forums/welcome.pl

The boards are then listed on that page. "Ask a Quality Professional" is the first one.

It is somewhat harder to get to through the www.asq.org home page, you definitely need to know where to go to look on the page.

Marc,

What sets you apart from most quality consultants is the willingness to provide something of value without expecting a direct monetary return. As successful as your site is, you could turn it into a for profit forum. I would hope that you never have to do that. It is refreshing to see both you and the Cove contributors providing assistance with no expectation of pay.

ASQ wants to change their image so that when you say you are from ASQ than you will be recognized as a quality professional immediately. It is a noble goal but being executed poorly and may even be a flawed strategy. That leaves us with trying to improve ASQ, getting a new organization formed or abandoning the entire idea. As much as I like your forum, I am not sure that you are in a position to represent the profession by providing an international organization with more than 90,000 members that puts on major conferences, publishes a high quality monthly magazine and provides certification for its membership. It is easier to explain membership to ASQ than saying I am a Cover.

Personally, I would like to see your site be added to the ASQ website, pay you a salary to continue to maintain it and let us continue our assistance to each other. I don't think it will ever happen due to greed and jealousy - not you but others trying to make money off of it or criticizing how it is done. If you ever joined ASQ in this way, the forum would not be successful because the sheer weight of the bureaucracy of ASQ would destroy it. You are successful in the same way the Internet is successful - it is self policing, self sufficient, totally free and sometimes politically incorrect and opinionated. Total freedom is great but it also involves personal responsibility.

In the ASQ forum, I have talked about a new revolution. It is intimately tied to the wide spread ease and use of the Internet. Manufacturing can be overseas now since communication is basically free. You can manage it from anywhere. Whether you can manage it in an honest, ethical way is yet to be determined. In addition, the same technology is removing jobs from all industries through automation. We are going to have to re-invent ourselves the same way we moved from an agricultural society to an industrial society. Some will win and some will lose. Over the long term, it will not be good or bad only different. Quality professionals need to figure out how they want to participate.

Thanks for your help in this continuing journey. :applause: :agree1: :thanx:

Bill Pflanz

Even if the ASQ does get its forum up to 2004 technology / software, I will say this:

The ASQ further limits its self by limiting access to members. This skews reality as there tends to be more theory than substance. In the Cove forums one experiences life outside the ASQ society.
Today we have had a fairly negative outcome, we have turned off a newcomer to the Discussion Boards. It has been noticed by ASQ Staff and I even received a phone call enquiring as to the situation from a staff member. It is unfortunate that it takes a bad event to initiate such communications.

Yes, I am as frustrated as are several members at trying to stay up with the messages, but only to find duplicates of the same message. This is a system problem, as there is no way for a newcomer to know that this is not good etiquette, and no easy way to correct the problem. Still, this is not an excuse for rudeness on any of our parts.
As old timers here know, that is, always has been, and, considering human nature and personalities, in my opinion always will be a problem to some degree. A couple of times newcomers here actually e-mailed me requesting that "all traces" of their registration be removed - which I did. As I remember one was because people started bickering in a thread. Amother was because someone in no uncertain terms answered saying the question was a stupid question.

I mention this because unless the ASQ wants to arrange for moderators who want to put in the time the moderators here put in to respond to people, it's a loosing battle. This is only one of many related threads: http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=7759 And we tried to (mostly successfully) set some standards here: http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=7171 While this second thread mostly deals with the Coffee Break forum, it really applies across the board especially with respect to profanity and acceptable topics.

In part I cite this as I want to express that I do have an appreciation of the problems the ASQ forums have - even considering they limit visitors to ASQ members.

There are threads in the moderator forums here about frustrations with people who ask the same question for the 100,000 millionth time (or so it seems) and how to get people to do a search before they ask. Folks, "Trust Me" - This has always been an issue. I've had many people who even e-mailed me asking me to "...send me everything you have on ...". And I myself have gotten frustrated and sorta blown people off, sometimes gruffly, so I am as guilty as anyone else here. I have replied by saying "...I do not do unpaid research..." when I could have been much more diplomatic.

To all this I say Thank You to the Moderators - Past and Present. It takes a lot of patience...

I think we are beyond the major problems here. As I was fixing some broken links the other night I came across http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=3607 I remember that thread because I was - well, I felt good. Yet - while there were a lot of good things happening, there was bickering and intolerance not to mention a general lack of manners in many threads. So it was hard for me to accept the accolade.

I think much of that is behind us and the forum has reached a point that I would call semi-professional. The bickering is gone. The 'Readers Digest' standard has chilled the profanity and, IMHO, brought some manners.

Forums are not the ASQ's forte. I offered help at one point but got no respose. I could even set up a special forum here for ASQ stuff if someone there wanted to call and discuss how they could offload their forum to this forum. I doubt we could import the threads from there but they could 'get out of the forum business' and concentrate on their core function.

EDIT ADD: I could probably get an importation script written for a few hundred bucks

Just some thoughts... My :2cents:
Marc,

What sets you apart from most quality consultants is the willingness to provide something of value without expecting a direct monetary return.
I will put this accolade in the Moderators and 'Regular Visitors' purse - Not mine. They are the ones now who do all the 'work'.

The reality is this has gotten expensive and time consuming so for several years now - since 2001 - I have been looking to do a bit better than break even on fixed costs - mainly because it has ended up taking up so much time. There was no advertising before 22 Dec 2003, but I started asking for Contributions in March or April 2003. Advertising eliminated the need for that - at least so far.

Don't get me wrong. I appreciate your commments. But I do have a bit of capitalism in me...

Marc,

The June 2004 issue of Quality Progress includes the Elsmar Cove forum in their Web Watch for members looking for quality related websites. Besides being featured in this month's magazine, the Cove is now on the ASQ's online Web Watch listing under Forum. Someone must have asked for it to be featured.

The listing does say it is "set up by a for-profit consulting firm". I don't know if that is usually included as an editorial comment or if they just wanted to acknowledge your honesty. It will be interesting to see how many ASQ members introduce themselves in the Cove over the coming weeks due to the new listing.

Bill Pflanz

Marc,

The June 2004 issue of Quality Progress includes the Elsmar Cove forum in their Web Watch for members looking for quality related websites. Besides being featured in this month's magazine, the Cove is now on the ASQ's online Web Watch listing under Forum. Someone must have asked for it to be featured.

The listing does say it is "set up by a for-profit consulting firm". I don't know if that is usually included as an editorial comment or if they just wanted to acknowledge your honesty. It will be interesting to see how many ASQ members introduce themselves in the Cove over the coming weeks due to the new listing.

Bill PflanzThe exact citation (off ASQ's website):

FORUMS
http://elsmar.com/forums
The Elsmar Cove discussion forums are set up by a
for-profit consulting firm, but registration to them is
free. Visitors can browse messages posted in the last
24 hours and search archived postings. Registered
users can participate in the discussions. Forums are
divided into several topics, including ISO 9000, auditing,
consulting, statistics, Six Sigma, training and job
opportunities. Users may also post events, including
personal birthdays, on the forum calendar.
There is a strong possibiliity that a constant barrage of "Why can't the ASQ Forums be as good as Elsmar?" from Andy Nutt, Tim Folkerts, Bill Pflanz, Steve Prevette, Hershal Brewer, Rob Nix, and other recent Cove members may have had something to do with the squib. Good eye, Bill. Now, how come I, who live only 50 minutes from ASQ HQ, don't get my hard copy issue until after even some off-shore members? Typically, I don't get my copy until the 10th or 15th of the month.

Now, how come I, who live only 50 minutes from ASQ HQ, don't get my hard copy issue until after even some off-shore members? Typically, I don't get my copy until the 10th or 15th of the month.

It could be, Wes, that Bill pulled the information from the ASQ web site. I do not have my (June) copy yet either, but I generally read what interests me early by going to the web site, where it is posted before hard copies are available.

It could be, Wes, that Bill pulled the information from the ASQ web site. I do not have my (June) copy yet either, but I generally read what interests me early by going to the web site, where it is posted before hard copies are available.

Rob, I got my hard copy issue over the weekend. The only reason that I checked the ASQ website was to verify if the Cove web link had been added to it. As soon as you get listed in Web Watch, ASQ lists you in the website quality reference links.

Wes, I have no answer to why my copy arrived already. I have never paid any attention to the time of the month it arrives for the past issues. Maybe we are seeing normal variation and next month my copy will be late. Either that or they like me better. :biglaugh:

For the record, I am not the one that sent the Cove description to ASQ. I find it hard to believe ASQ proactively did it on their own. If ASQ did add the site to Web Watch then maybe it is a precursor to dropping their own discussion forums.

Bill Pflanz

Note that listings in the Quality Progress Web Watch column do persist beyond the current month, and in a public area.

From the ASQ (http://www.asq.org/) main page
Scroll down the left side navigation menu to LINKS & click on it.
Click on Forums (http://www.asq.org/links/forums.html) -- guess which internationally known forum is at the top!

(Since the Web is dynamic, here is a disclaimer: Data valid on 2004-06-02 @ 17:03Z only.)

Quote from the article:
"ASQ needs to shift from its manufacturing focus and develop programs to deploy quality in engineering, project management, marketing and customer support. It has done this in the healthcare industry with great success. These areas offer tremendous opportunities for ASQ."

WAKE UP!

In the last three years the nation lost 2.73 millon manufactring jobs.

With out manufacturing we don't have engineeering, project managament, etc.

Shift focus......How about the ASQ, the RAB ,and Washington DC shifting focus towards manufactuing.

Without it all we are going to need is the WAL-MART employee manual.

they like me better. :biglaugh:
Bill PflanzNot only them at ASQ, but my Mom, too!:lmao:

YES!!!! Let's hear it for Wal-Mart, a fine old Arkansas tradition :agree1:

For the record, I am not the one that sent the Cove description to ASQ. I find it hard to believe ASQ proactively did it on their own. If ASQ did add the site to Web Watch then maybe it is a precursor to dropping their own discussion forums.

Bill Pflanz

I have mentioned the Cove on the phone to ASQ staffers and strongly suggested they look at this thread. So, perhaps one may have liked it and took it upon themselves to post it. I believe we have either here or at the ASQ discussion boards also chided ASQ for failing to list the Cove as a resource. There are minor indications of cracks in the wall . . . And a hearty hello :bigwave: to any ASQ staffers lurking here :bigwave:

Sounds like another OOPS! to me. . . the manufacturing base is shrinking (And so are ASQ revenues probably) so they will have to spread out and capture other markets. There is project management, engineering, customer support and marketing outside of traditional manufacturing.

Could you imagine a Cable TV channel being ISO certified? a funeral parlor? A telemarketing firm? How would THEY measure customer satisfaction? I know they are regulated to some degree. . .

Here's a few questions for you. . . has anyone ever seen an ASQ commercial on TV or heard one on the radio?? Have you ever heard ISO or even TS mentioned in a TV or radio advertisement?

Has anyone ever shopped for a car and have the salesman state that the car was made from parts that are made by companies that conform to QS-9000 or TS-16949? Do you even think they know what is going on in their industry? Are their service centers certified to an international standard? Are the micrometers they use to tell you that your rotors are worn too much ever calibrated?

Just some fodder for thought. . . :topic:

There is a VAST population out there to tap and confuse. . .

Sounds like another OOPS! to me. . . the manufacturing base is shrinking (And so are ASQ revenues probably) so they will have to spread out and capture other markets. There is project management, engineering, customer support and marketing outside of traditional manufacturing.

Could you imagine a Cable TV channel being ISO certified? a funeral parlor? A telemarketing firm? How would THEY measure customer satisfaction? I know they are regulated to some degree. . .
Just some fodder for thought. . .
There is a VAST population out there to tap and confuse. . .

Separating the issue from ISO (which as I have posted elsewhere that I don't believe in even for manufacturing) there are a number of industries out there that could make use of Quality tools. For example, I myself
<b> :modcop: Do not work in the Quality Department
:modcop: Do not work at a Manufacturing site</b>

So, I have no problem in general with ASQ reaching outside of manufacturing. Of course, if they are going to foist off the same old same old and expect to rake in lots of member dollars, then that is a different matter.

And if they wanted to, why couldn't a cable TV firm get ISO certified? I sure hope they measure and respond appropriately to customer satisfaction! :confused:

Steve. . . 2 measureables. . . Ratings and Advertising Dollars. . . they are linked

... Could you imagine a Cable TV channel being ISO certified? a funeral parlor? A telemarketing firm? How would THEY measure customer satisfaction? I know they are regulated to some degree. . .

Here's a few questions for you. . . has anyone ever seen an ASQ commercial on TV or heard one on the radio?? Have you ever heard ISO or even TS mentioned in a TV or radio advertisement?

Has anyone ever shopped for a car and have the salesman state that the car was made from parts that are made by companies that conform to QS-9000 or TS-16949? Do you even think they know what is going on in their industry? Are their service centers certified to an international standard? Are the micrometers they use to tell you that your rotors are worn too much ever calibrated?
...
There is a VAST population out there to tap and confuse. . .
Very good questions and observations ...

One of the education efforts that would need to be made is to educate the masses that ISO 9001, TS 16949, and the myriad other standards we discuss on The Cove primarily deal with management systems and management or production processes. Too many people - even ones who are in a registered company and therefore should know better - believe, imply or say that their products conform to ISO 9000 (for example) which is flat out wrong. Yet is is an incredibly easy mistake or assumption to make if one has not been educated in the differences.

Yes, I would like to see mention of ASQ outside the "house organs". But isn't that true of many other professional societies as well? If one was to take a sample of the general public who are not members of any professional organization, how many could identify these and what they do:
ASQ ASTM ASME IEEE IATA ISA NCSL ASHRAE NSPE SAE ASTE ASNT ASA (both of them!)

Are any profesional societies registered to ISO 9001? If none are, then why isn't ASQ leading the way? If others already are, then why is ASQ so far behind? To at least a number of members and non-members that I have spoken with from time to time, to have the leading "quality" society not be registered to ISO 9001 seems a lot like "do as I say, not as I do". That is even worse when you consider that ASQ also "owns" RAB, and administers both the Malcolm Baldrige National Qualty Award process and the QuEST Forum.

:mad: Enough venting for one day - time to knock it off. :mad:

By the way, for the curious and in alphabetical order:

ASA Acoustical Society of America
ASA American Statistical Association
ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and
Air Conditioning Engineers
ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers
ASNT American Society for Nondestructive Testing
ASQ American Society for Quality
ASTE American Society of Test Engineers
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
IEEE Instistute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers
IATA International Air Transport Association
ISA Instrument Society of America
NCSL National Conference of Standards Laboratories
NSPE National Society of Professional Engineers
SAE Society of Automotive engineers

(and yes, I know that some of these now go only by their initials and/or have changed the words in their names recently!)


Graeme C. Payne
ASQ Senior Member
ASQ CQE, CCT, CQT
---------------------------------------------------
Knew what six sigma was before the marketing hype was invented!

By the way, for the curious and in alphabetical order:

[font=Courier New]ASA Acoustical Society of America
ASA American Statistical Association

Let's not forget the American Softball Association ;)

Bill

Clairification:

These forums and this site are not, as cited in the ASQ Web Watch, a 'For Profit Consulting Firm'. Rather, these forums, and this site, are mine - a 1 person 'Firm'. Is 'For Profit' a crime these days? I do resent the 'For Profit' label as well as the term 'Firm' because no other web site or company is labeled by the ASQ in this way and at the same time I would venture a guess that they are MORE profit oriented than I am. Last year - 2003 - the GROSS income of this site was just under US$8000. I am no more 'For Profit' than the ASQ or the sites listed in it's Web Watch. If the ASQ sees fit to label me and this site as 'For Profit', the ASQ should label all 'For Profit' web sites that the ASQ lists in the same way - Especially 'Quality Portals' such as InsideQuality.com which is nothing less than a profit center mainly offering advertisements and paid links. The ASQ its self pays people and is definitely For Profit as are all the web sites cited in the ASQ 'Web Watch', however the ASQ editor chose to describe ONLY this site as 'For Profit' and me as a 'firm' while NOT labeling all the other 'For Profit' web sites as 'For Profit'. I wonder why. If anything, I think the biggest threat is that here everyday people discuss their immediate problems and get timely answers for free from active participants rather than simply being pointed to an advertiser.

Nothing ventured nothing gained...........keep up the good work Marc.......this goes for all Covers ;)

Clairification:

These forums and this site are not, as cited in the ASQ Web Watch, a 'For Profit Consulting Firm'. Rather, these forums, and this site, are mine - a 1 person 'Firm'. Is 'For Profit' a crime these days?

Marc, I don't blame you for being a bit unhappy about this. The ASQ, as someone has suggested, hides behind it's "nonprofit" label - but I consider nice slaries a form of profit, and the ASQ seems to be concentrating on raising their revenues to pay their salaries these days.

If you were to take the time and money you spend maintaining this site, and expense it against that whopping (sarcasm here) $8000, and even add in what advertising advantage the site brings you, your salary from this "for profit" venture is what, $2.50? If you further subtract from revenue the value of the excellent advice available here (don't know how we would arrive at a cost for that, but I suspect that $8000 would not last long), suddenly the "for profit firm" is in the red.

Heck of a way to run a railroad.

:rolleyes:

If being a "for profit firm" is what you are shooting for.

Thanks, Marc

Note that listings in the Quality Progress Web Watch column do persist beyond the current month, and in a public area.

From the ASQ (http://www.asq.org/) main page
Scroll down the left side navigation menu to LINKS & click on it.
Click on Forums (http://www.asq.org/links/forums.html) -- guess which internationally known forum is at the top!
(Since the Web is dynamic, here is a disclaimer: Data valid on 2004-06-02 @ 17:03Z only.)
It's listed alphabetically.

... If being a "for profit firm" is what you are shooting for.
I guess I'm not really all that upset, but that For Profit and Firm label got to me. As I told barb in a thread in the moderator's forum, I don't get much consulting business from the site. The conversation was in regard to barb considering an advertisement here - which I told her I would do for her for free because she's contributed so much here. I did get a lot of business back before 2001 but since then very little.

The problem here became the hours I spend to keep the machine going, so to speak. Anyway, I guess I am 'For Profit'. Oh, well, on with the show.

I did a quick random sampling of the links in the ASQ WebWatch listings. Most of the links were for non-profit organizations such as engineering societies, universities, and government agencies. There was one glaring exception. The section showing the Six Sigma web links were all for-profit consulting companies.

My suggestion is to change the name to Marc's Six Sigma Forum, get instant credibility as a knowledgeable quality source, charge lots of money and retire wealthy.

Bill Pflanz

Marc. . .

For profit or not. . . this site GIVES ALOT. . . and whatever the actual profit (if any) number is, it's too low!

JMHO!!!!!!!

I just used several Quality Progress magazines I have here as my sample - didn't visit the web site. Thus my response was biased by the sample limitations.

Were the Six Sigma links labeled For Profit?

None of the Six Sigma links in the ASQ Web Watch specifically used the term "for profit" when describing the companies. A couple did acknowledge that they were consulting firms. A non-profit consulting firm is probably an oxymoron.

Bill Pflanz

None of the Six Sigma links in the ASQ Web Watch specifically used the term "for profit" when describing the companies. A couple did acknowledge that they were consulting firms. A non-profit consulting firm is probably an oxymoron.

Bill PflanzThere are a lot of consulting firms today that may be "nonprofit" - they just din't PLAN it that way.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm?

Does ASQC think of you are profitable group for a reason (as they said, you are a for profit consulting group)? I think that the "underpaid" staff of ASQC were sent to gather information. The first link is to the Elsmar.com, the third is to a QS.com, which is the same thing. Let's put it this way, they have no cohesiveness or productive communication if they do this. 2 of the links are to here.

Al...

There are a lot of consulting firms today that may be "nonprofit" - they just din't PLAN it that way.

Since just before 911 I agree totally! LOL

I did a quick random sampling of the links in the ASQ WebWatch listings. Most of the links were for non-profit organizations such as engineering societies, universities, and government agencies.
It's been a while, but I went to the site today. There are a lot of good links. No complaints.

If my memory is correct the link to QS9000 site has been for a long time-some years.

In other words once a link is posted no one goes back once a year or such to check if it's still there and correct or relevant, I guess.

ASQ has announced their remodeling of the ASQ Discussion Boards. Neil Eglash, at ASQ, was good enough to give me a phone call heads-up that the plan was out there, so I thought I would pass it along here.

The URL (for ASQ members) is http://www.asq.org/members/forums/admin/new_discussion_board.html

It comes up on top of the discussion boards page when you go into discussion boards. It is a good step that they are announcing what they are doing I figure. This takes effect July 1.

They are going with Jive forums.

Thanks Steve for the information. Very good news. Iam very thrilled!

I just quickly reviewed the contents. Proposed ASQ discussion board seem to match most of the features as that of Elsmar Cove.

But one question though.. Will the new moderators be effective and quick as Elsmar?
Are they looking for Moderators from Members community or ASQ staff?

Govind.

But one question though.. Will the new moderators be effective and quick as Elsmar?
Are they looking for Moderators from Members community or ASQ staff?

Govind.

I assume (not having heard otherwise) that the moderators at ASQ will be made up of ASQ staff. Unless ASQ changes its unwritten policy of minimal staff activity on the Discussion Boards, I predict that they will neither be quick nor effective. I have detected that staff members must be lurking, as answers to simple, straight-forward questions appear fairly quickly. And I get phone calls from ASQ staff now. I strongly believe there may be ASQ staff lurking on this board. . .

I would prefer not to hold the Cove and ASQ in competition. I know many folks have left ASQ boards and come over here, and I know some ASQ members are openly advocating that. Me, I intend to participate on both locations (as well as a few others, including Tom Peters, the Deming Electronic Network, and a new startup "Rattle-the-Cage"). I see these boards as more complementary goods than substitutes for each other. (Yes, I am just finishing up teaching an Econ course, so I might as well work in those concepts :rolleyes: ).

Thanks Steve for the information. Very good news. Iam very thrilled!

I just quickly reviewed the contents. Proposed ASQ discussion board seem to match most of the features as that of Elsmar Cove.

But one question though.. Will the new moderators be effective and quick as Elsmar?
Are they looking for Moderators from Members community or ASQ staff?

Govind.Yes :thanx: Steve.
Govind, you echo my thoughts! My email to ASQ after reading the squib was:
How will the existing "legacy" posts be handled?
Will they be erased or incorporated for searching?
Who will be the moderators?
ASQ sort of avoids replying to me directly. I have this nasty habit of pulling aside the curtain on the "wizards of ASQ." It will be interesting (to say the least) if I get a direct answer to my query.

Thank you both and all,

Is there a place for us all? I am a CQT from ASQC back in "89" and I don't send in my yearly tithe.

Al...

Hi, all.

As I have been quick to criticize the ASQ, I should also be quick to compliment, so here goes.


The monthly email from my section (1525) just came this morning. They have revamped the format, and what an improvement it is! Is this change being done nationally, or did someone in my section do it?


Craig

Section newsletters and E-mails are handled by the local section. You must have new personnel. My section (1004 - Saginaw Valley) has a newsletter that is still pretty pitiful.

Rob,
You may already know,section Newsletters are good source of advertisement revenue for the section. It would be a good idea to get the section News letter organized and make it informative to readers.

If you come across with good section news letters, please post the link of those sections (Or PM me). We would like to benchmark and improve our section News letter quality.

Thanks,
Govind.

ASQ has announced their remodeling of the ASQ Discussion Boards. Neil Eglash, at ASQ, was good enough to give me a phone call heads-up that the plan was out there, so I thought I would pass it along here.

The URL (for ASQ members) is http://www.asq.org/members/forums/admin/new_discussion_board.html

It comes up on top of the discussion boards page when you go into discussion boards. It is a good step that they are announcing what they are doing I figure. This takes effect July 1.

They are going with Jive forums.
One must hope the ASQ will move forwards. I was a member for over 20 years and finally left. It was mainly due to the antics and arrogance of the Milwaukee HQ people, very different from bygone days when one could visit there and enjoy a meanuingful conversation about quality issues with some folk who had been actual quality practitioners in industry. Once you had visited, they even remembered who you were. But, it seemed to morph more into a money making machine working for the prime benefit of the staff. Of course, like similar bodies, if ASQ had to pay for the work extended by the volnteers at branch, division and conference levels, it would not survive more than a few days.

Things certainly changed. Back in the mid 1980s when Quality Press was set up, you could obtain all of the eminent, relevant texts on quality tools and techniques from the bookshop (which is what Q Press was.) Nowadays, it seems it is only interested in promoting those texts for which Q Press is the publisher. And, one still rembers such events as the AQC attracting over 5000 delegates worldwide, when held in Toronto, 1989. I Understand the recent one, there, was only about 2000 strong in attendance. Or the QAD conferences of 1992, 1995 when over 500 went. Is there something wrong with the product? Perhaps so. One cannot but detect various cliques in the various divisions. Though they [probably naturally build up because of inadequate other volunteers, the conferences seem to have too many papers on well worn themes presented by the same folk who are closely connected with the cliques. So too, with Q Progress. From anecdotal evidence, it also appeared the HQ favored only those that served it first. If so, hardly a professional approach.

I welcome the ASQ new plan. Though, when I used the hyperlink, not being a current member I could not open it. And I do not intend rejoining so that