Hi everyone. sorry for being incommunicato for so long. I get home around 7:30pm or later and then take care of homelife and then up again at 5:30. You know the drill. Big no-no getting onto the internet at work. They make us log in (!) with our network password and everything just so they can track what we do and where we go. Anyway, I'm being toasted with this new job. Everything is going fine with daughter BTW and we hope to have her home later this month. Fingers crossed.

Here's what I've got: For our corrective action system we have to list the immediate and basic causes, and then choose a "Lack of Control". The three choices for Lack of Control are : Inadequate Program, Inadequate Standard, and Inadequate Compliance to Standard.

Question is about the difference between Program and Standard. I have my own idea about what they are, but I want to hear what everyone else says. I've started a series of classes to teach our reporting and investigation system, and want to be sure that I'm telling everyone the right thing.

Help?

Hi everyone. sorry for being incommunicato for so long. I get home around 7:30pm or later and then take care of homelife and then up again at 5:30. You know the drill. Big no-no getting onto the internet at work. They make us log in (!) with our network password and everything just so they can track what we do and where we go. Anyway, I'm being toasted with this new job. Everything is going fine with daughter BTW and we hope to have her home later this month. Fingers crossed.

Here's what I've got: For our corrective action system we have to list the immediate and basic causes, and then choose a "Lack of Control". The three choices for Lack of Control are : Inadequate Program, Inadequate Standard, and Inadequate Compliance to Standard.

Question is about the difference between Program and Standard. I have my own idea about what they are, but I want to hear what everyone else says. I've started a series of classes to teach our reporting and investigation system, and want to be sure that I'm telling everyone the right thing.

Help?

I will venture a guess and suggest that "program" possibly is referring to the "process". But, that's just my interpretation. Is there someone there who may have had some involvement in authoring this system, who may be able to shed some light on their intent? :bigwave:

Here's what I've got: For our corrective action system we have to list the immediate and basic causes, and then choose a "Lack of Control". The three choices for Lack of Control are : Inadequate Program, Inadequate Standard, and Inadequate Compliance to Standard.

Question is about the difference between Program and Standard. I have my own idea about what they are, but I want to hear what everyone else says. I've started a series of classes to teach our reporting and investigation system, and want to be sure that I'm telling everyone the right thing.

Help?

First welcome back. Glad to hear things are going good as can be expected. :agree:

I assume you mean "Internal Standard"? Why make the catagories subject to interpretation? There is really only two, IMHO. 1. Your process may be inadequate. 2. Not working to the standard means basically the same thing, except that when the Internal Standard was developed, it wasn't in compliance with the "Standard". Am I reading right? You appear to be avoiding the use of the word "Procedure". Any particular reason? :smokin:

Question is about the difference between Program and Standard. I have my own idea about what they are, but I want to hear what everyone else says. I've started a series of classes to teach our reporting and investigation system, and want to be sure that I'm telling everyone the right thing.



I agree welcome back! :bigwave:

I also see the program as the process, but see the standard as the criteria. They may be saying that if the standard is wrong, perhaps you are using the wrong metrics. But I'm just guessing.

To say that the standard is inadequate is silly.IMHO. A standard is what you work to. It sounds like taking an exception to the standard. Whoever coined the terminology is exhibiting a lack of knowledge in the CA process. Yes, I'm saying that!:(

To say that the standard is inadequate is silly.IMHO. A standard is what you work to. It sounds like taking an exception to the standard. Whoever coined the terminology is exhibiting a lack of knowledge in the CA process. Yes, I'm saying that!:(

Energy, I'm assuming that their reference to a "standard" is in-fact referring to their documented procedure. If that is the case then the possibility of the "standard"/procedure being inadequate is very real. As an example: Many years ago I witnessed an assembly operator who was responsible for attaching 8 wires to a bare radio chassis. She needed to attach 4 wires to each side panel of the subject chassis, which she accomplished by attaching 4 wires to one side panel, then rotating the chassis to attach the other 4 wires.

In reviewing the written procedure I found that she in-fact was supposed to attach 1 wire, rotate the chassis, attach 1 wire, rotate the chassis, attach another 1 wire, rotate..., until she had attache all 8 wires.

Although she wasn't following the procedure the process as she was performing it was quicker, more effecient (increased productivity) and was accomplished with less chance of error than that prescribed by the Manufacturing Engineer/process writer. Corrective action consisted of rewriting the procedure to reflect the operator's process; and ensuring that the operators were trained to handle such improvements through proper channels, prior to implementing them. :bigwave:

To say that the standard is inadequate is silly.IMHO. A standard is what you work to. It sounds like taking an exception to the standard. Whoever coined the terminology is exhibiting a lack of knowledge in the CA process. Yes, I'm saying that!:(

And that might be where the problem is (the terminology). I worked with a company that used the term "standard" in place of "specification". So if the specification is in inches, and you build to mm, then you can say you built to the wrong standard, or the standard was inadequate. It can easily cause confusion. Besides didn't JW say that there is no standard?

Energy, I'm assuming that their reference to a "standard" is in-fact referring to their documented procedure. If that is the case then the possibility of the "standard"/procedure being inadequate is very real.

I agree, Dave. That's why made the reference to the lack of the word procedure. Or course a "procedure" may be inadequate. After all, we write those! :vfunny: It has been my experience that when people call a procedure a standard, they don't know what the word Standard means to most of the world. Your procedures are usually written with your product and a "Standard" in mind. I'm sure it wasn't Lucinda's choice of terminolgy. Sounds like she is laboring under somebody else's idea of a CA reporting.

There was a discussion regarding what a Standard is and I know you can call it that. However, if you are working to "The Standard", using that word to describe processes or procedures, who knows what you are referring to? Of course, we don't know if Cinda is working to "The Standard". So, if she isn't, I guess they would know what their "Standard" is. :bonk:

Hey Cinda... Welcome back :bigwave:
I'm really glad to hear that your daughter is getting better.

/Claes

(this is so wierd. There's no box around the reply space)

This is an in-house software program. Meaning it was developed and continues to be developed by an in-house IT group. Major bucks, major time. I'm on the technical advisory group that helps with the development and supports our HSE software tools and we've just spend over 90 hours just spec'ing out the next version of this one software. Can't wait to see the estimate we get back.

This program is shared between the Quality side, and the HSE side. We all report incidents into this, so there are things that we have to live with that we might not otherwise want/need if we were strictly looking at QA or HSE alone, savvy? I haven't yet brought this question to the other HSE members to see how they were using the terms because they've disappointed me in the past with other things. There is zero, zip, zilch, nada, documentation that discusses these three choices of Lack of Control. And frankly, there have been other things getting my attention that were more critical. My company is still in the infancy stage of using CA so this part of our reporting software wasn't stressed. Now, I've trained enough people one-on-one that those individuals can be pushed further to do this part correctly.

Here is one take on what they may mean:

Let's say you're trying to make a pair of drapes. You measure the window and determine that they should be 45" wide. (Your standard). You go to the store and get fabric and a pattern that should produce a 45" drape. You lay out your pattern, cut around it and set your sewing machine to sew seams to a certain size. (Your program). But when you hang your drapes, you find that they don't fit. Why not? Was your standard inadequate? (should have been 48") Was your program inadequate? (you didn't get the right size pattern or you didn't have a way of making sure the seams would be straight) Or did you just screw up and not comply with the standard (the pattern was great, everything was set up great, but you sewed crooked because you're an idiot).

Another version would reverse "standard" and "program" and consider "standard' to be the written procedure that tells you how to meet the Program: You have a vehicle safety Program. Part of the program includes a written procedure for Journey Management. Let's say someone doesn't make it to their destination when they're supposed to and the customer doesn't get their product/service. Was your vehicle safety program inadequate (it didn't account for the type of problem that was encountered?) Or was the Journey management procedure (standard) inadequate (it gave bad or incomplete information). Or was the program Ok, the standard (procedure) OK, and the failure was that someone didn't follow the procedure (inadequate compliance to the standard).

So there you now have two types of choices. What makes the most sense?

Big no-no getting onto the internet at work. They make us log in (!) with our network password and everything just so they can track what we do and where we go.


Lucinda

My work classifies the cove as 'research and networking'. I showed my boss the site and he says I can venture in anytime (within reason) :bigwave:

Greg B

Yeah, my boss at the last job was that way too. He was proud that I was networking with everyone. Unfortunately, at this co. there is a pop up that reminds us every morning that the network is a company resource and we can be terminated for using internet resources. It makes me paranoid.

Anyway, is everyone here scared to discuss "program" and "standard"? I did sent an email this morning to everyone in the different divisions of my company to ask for their interpretations of these choices, and no responses so far. What I expected from them. But not from ya'll.

What's up???? :confused:

Not scared, just don't want to add to the confusion.
In your example of the drapes; IMO the Window opening is the Standard (what you need to match), the measurement and sewing is your process to meet the standard (compliance), the drapes are your product.
So the "process" and "program" are similar and the names can be changed to protect the innocent (especially since the curtains don't fit!).

Not scared, just don't want to add to the confusion.
In your example of the drapes; IMO the Window opening is the Standard (what you need to match), the measurement and sewing is your process to meet the standard (compliance), the drapes are your product.
So the "process" and "program" are similar and the names can be changed to protect the innocent (especially since the curtains don't fit!).

I say that your Program is the methods that the company has employed to get the order and perform all the necessary functions to operate profitable, efficient and correctly for that product. The standard would be the specifications to do the installation correctly.:bonk:

Yeah, my boss at the last job was that way too. He was proud that I was networking with everyone. Unfortunately, at this co. there is a pop up that reminds us every morning that the network is a company resource and we can be terminated for using internet resources. It makes me paranoid.

Anyway, is everyone here scared to discuss "program" and "standard"? I did sent an email this morning to everyone in the different divisions of my company to ask for their interpretations of these choices, and no responses so far. What I expected from them. But not from ya'll.

What's up???? :confused:

Lucinda, Perhaps in lieu of defining your specific terms we should be attempting to define the categories of contributers to a "non-control" issue, and then view your companies specific terms against these categories.

As an example:

From my viewpoint the major contributers to an out-of-control/non-control situation would be:

1. Ineffective process (the process being the actual steps taken to produce your product (to be reviewed separately from the documented procedure).

2. Ineffective/inadequate/inaccurate procedure - the documented procedure may be too vague (may not provide enough direction), may be filled with incorrect information/process steps, or may be too difficult for the user to understand/follow, etc.

3. Non-compliance with the documented procedure. The user may have chosen to disregard the documented process for multiple reasons including: The repetiveness of the function may lead to a sense of familiarity, and belief by the operator that they can get by without refering to the procedure; the procedure may be too cumbersome for use (see #2); the user may have developed a process improvement, but cannot get support for change; the user may have been having a bad day; etc.

Just some food for thought. :bigwave:

Ok, well I didn't get a response from the other company divisions, and I questioned our corporate guy specifically on the telephone and HE didn't know. Great. What a super pulled-together organization we have.

The corporate guy did say that he thought the terminology came from our registrar, DNV. So the next step is to track that down. Sid? Are you out there?? :bigwave:

My feeling is in line with using "Program" as the upper level process part. "Standard" as the written procedure. That seems to fit best with the third choice :"Inadequate compliance to standard".

I don't know why the dingbats who put it together didn't define what they meant, or use plain language. If they meant procedure, why didn't they just say so? If they meant management system or process, why didn't they say so? What a headache. And the scary part is that no one has questioned this before! No one in the company knows enough to provide an answer, but it has never bothered them?!?!

And the scary part is that no one has questioned this before! No one in the company knows enough to provide an answer, but it has never bothered them?!?!

To me the questions that this this last statement brought to mind would be, Is anyone else even using this process? If so, How? If not, Why?

Have you checked with other users to see how they have interpreted the terminology? Does anyone else even care? If not, Who really owns the process? Afterall if you are the only one who cares and the only one who is actually using it, then aren't you in-fact the real process owner?

And if no one else cares, can you request a revision to the process using terminology that is more understandable.

'Cinda, welcome back, your answers have helped me greatly over the years!
I think you had it with the drapes. Standard is the width of the window. Program is the process, procedure, equipment, operator, etc. that you use to make drapes that fit the window. Compliance is if you actually do the program.
D2,
You listed three major contributors to out-of-control, and I agree with them, but I would add a 4th: inadequate standard. Eng. sets limits for Mfg. If a limit on a subassembly (the cut length of the drape) is too short, the final assembly (drape with hems and rod holder) may not be able to to meet the final length limit. Or would you list that under inadequate procedure?

You listed three major contributors to out-of-control, and I agree with them, but I would add a 4th: inadequate standard.

Thought you would enjoy this.
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=58763&postcount=5

Before something becomes a standard it has to be approved. Until then it's just WIP-Work In Process. Once the standard is finalized, test driven-validated, it becomes the "Standard" and is the Bible. JMHO :agree: :smokin:

Big E,
The feathers are my YMCA Indian Guides chief's headdress. I saw your previous post, I read the whole thread before responding (sly dig at energy). Standards are not always correct. I know it's unbelievable but some mistakes do make it through the process. I remember one observant supplier that called and asked if we really wanted the wire harness 1,000 feet long. Our cut list system listed it as 1.000 feet but the decimal point was a comma on the process instruction.

I've got the DNV document where these terms come from! Mystery solved. That comment about these terms coming from someone who doesn't understand quality is soooooo funny now. :vfunny:

Here is what the document says: Inadequate Program- a safety/loss control program may be inadequate because of too few program activities...... Inadequate program standards- A common cause of confusion and failure is standards that are not specific enough, not clear enough and /or not high enough. (sounds like procedures..)....Inadequate compliance with standards- lack of compliance with existing standards is a common reason for lack of control.

So there it is. I am so glad to have this settled because I have to teach a class on it next week!

So there it is. I am so glad to have this settled because I have to teach a class on it next week!
This one falls under the QMS headache category? Now me 'n energy can quit arguin' 'bout whut means a standerd! Thank you!