Aggravating

..... farce ........

Propitious

Just curious, the negative responses why is that?

If I knew how to do it, this post would be the first one. However, I'm still a Rookie. :bonk:

Just curious, the negative responses why is that?

That is a good question. I was wondering that myself. Could it be that there are some non-believers among us!!?? :biglaugh:

That is a good question. I was wondering that myself.

Likewise.

Could it be that there are some non-believers among us!!??

I figured it was to highlight those amongst us who are on the Dark Side. ;)

I would like to nominate the single word:

Perception

Dave

That's what I meant! I've purchased some "Quality" tools only to have them not meet the definition of "Excellence". ;)

Why the negativism against negativism? :vfunny:

As an antonym, I would suggest "floccinaucinihilipilification" :eek: (an act of estimating something as worthless, lacking quality), as in, I couldn't give a sheep's fleece for something that lacked quality!

Of course, those on the 'dark side' might consider it a synonym.

p.s.

I originally used the one word 'quality', because I didn't feel like reinventing the wheel. :rolleyes:

Why the negativism against negativism?

;) That's your perception. :p

I don't think we're being negative about it...we're just curious. We're like the Starfleet of the Quality Universe....

Quality...the perceived frontier. These are the voyages of the online site The Cove. Her continuing mission...to seek out new SPC methods and new continual improvement techniques ...to boldly question what has not been questioned before...

I know, I know...no more coffee for me today...

That's what I meant! I've purchased some "Quality" tools only to have them not meet the definition of "Excellence". ;)

Why the negativism against negativism? :vfunny:


Well I say why so negative about my negativism towards the negativisim? :truce: Sorry couldn't help it.

Actually I was not surprised to see Quality being associated with negative words, for the most part if you look aroundmost places Quality is seen as the enemy why is that? I have my thoughts what do others think?

Maybe this should be a seperate thread?

Just curious, the negative responses why is that?

Some people cannot be hypnotized? :vfunny:

Actually I was not surprised to see Quality being associated with negative words, for the most part if you look aroundmost places Quality is seen as the enemy why is that? I have my thoughts what do others think?

Maybe this should be a seperate thread?
Yes, I think that question is worth a thread of it's own. Go for it.... :agree:

/Claes

If quality (doing the right thing correctly the first time) were truly everyone's responsibility and everyone adopted it as their own, then there would be no need for a "quality department" with no policing activities required.

But the fact of life is that not all organizations (and not all personnel) have accepted this responsibility. The responsibility for quality is then in many companies passed on to the "Quality department" to enforce/assure (a policing activity). And whether we like it or not (sorry Randy) sometimes folks don't take kindly to the police telling them what their doing wrong - and "Quality" becomes a negative thing.

JMHO anyway.

Yes, I think that question is worth a thread of it's own. Go for it.... :agree:

/Claes
Sorry Claes, I was splitting the thread at the same time you were replying. So you ended up here. Can't split you back without starting another thread. :agree: I really tried to get ISO Guy as the thread starter, but the negativity came before the inquisition. ;) :agree:

Could it be that some of those out there that might have this negative perceptions come from a production / manufacturing background? "Ship it, Ship it, Ship it" type attitude?

OR

Big picture (positive thinking) compared to small picture (negative thinking)?

Go ahead take your shots!!!

Quality should be embraced and nurtured, not spit upon and discourage!!! (SOAPBOX).
:smokin:

No worries, Energy,
It happens to me as well all the time :biglaugh: I obviously don't type fast enough.

/Claes

'scuse me, but Propitious means "favorable"

As to the "why". I think it comes down to people not wanting to give up their individualism by having to follow procedures. They don't like the fact that we like to use facts, and measurement, to prove our point. So instead of getting away with driving by the seat of their pants, their seat sometimes gets a swift (and well-earned) kick and we have the evidence to show why.

Finally, in this day and age we still have fiefdoms, kingdoms, and silo dwellers who resent our percieved intrusion into "their" domain, no matter how hard we try to work with them.

The derisive nature of comments (here and elsewhere) from those within the profession often have to do with the way that the basic techniques are marketed by some in the industry, and the notion that we have to have a standard to force some companies to get at least part of a clue.

JMHO, of course.

Craig

'scuse me, but Propitious means "favorable"
Craig

You are right on, of course. After I split the thread and saw that Claes was inserted, I did a Thesaurus on that word. It just looked bad. :vfunny: Hey, too late now. You would bring it up. ;) So, while this is the place to discuss negative perceptions of Quality, should we nuture and embrace it? Oh, I just hated changing diapers! :cool:

Ok, if people wrinkle their noses at Quality issues, maybe it's because we're not good enough at selling Quality issues to them? Generally speaking, I very much doubt that we are good enough at PR... Our product needs promotion just as much as anyting else. We have lots of improvement potential in that area... We think quality is such a good idea that it will market itself.

Well, I'm sorry, but it will not. :eek:

...and while we're at it we need to learn the proper language too: M-o-n-e-y.

I suggest a look in the thread The Elusive Culture Change (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=4422&highlight=missionary) in the Philosophy, Gurus, Controversy and Evolution (http://elsmar.com/Forums/forumdisplay.php?f=55) forum...

Speaking of which: Maybe we should move this thread to that forum. Your call, Energy...
/Claes

Excuse me while I get up on my soapbox:

I like the business aspects of Quality and Continuous Improvement. I dislike the requirement to have a Quality Manual (I feel that the standard is the QM and MOST companies copy the thing almost verbatim anyway)

I don't like the requirement to have some procedures and not others. I'd rather our company decide for ourselves. I'd like an auditor to come in and ask anyone (for example) how we control NC not ask them to show them the procedure. I'd rather have people trained than those that act as parrots and squawk answers to satisfy a guy that usually knows nothing about our business.
I dislke auditors (registrars) that want my system to be the same as everyone else's. If it was that easy QA systems would come in a can and we would not have a job. I don't like ambiguity.....because it sounds like a silly word :vfunny:

Sorry the boards in the box are sagging and I'll have to get off.
(PS. it is 7.34 am and I just started work. It's going to be another LONG day)

Greg B

Sorry the boards in the box are sagging and I'll have to get off.
(PS. it is 7.34 am and I just started work. It's going to be another LONG day)

Greg B

Good morning! Remeber the BRASS method when shooting off. Breath, Relax, Aim, Squeeze and Shoot. This will help you hit your target, especially early in the morning. ;)

Since the soapbox was vacated...

From what I've seen, the true friction between the quality department and manufacturing or engineering (or any other department really) comes from the fact that most quality systems are a template that worked really well for Company X, a leading manufacturer of widgets, which employs 200 people and has for the last 30 years. Then the template is dropped "as-is" into a 20 person software company.
We tend to implement procedures and quality systems we're used to, rather than truly examining the needs of the company we're with. Of course there's tension. And if we're not clever enough to develop systems that aren't
A. Compliant and, B. A true fit for the company, then we deserve all the negativity we get.

Yes Claes, I think it's about money too. Isn't everything that shouldn't be?

We tend to implement procedures and quality systems we're used to, rather than truly examining the needs of the company we're with. Of course there's tension. And if we're not clever enough to develop systems that aren't
A. Compliant and, B. A true fit for the company, then we deserve all the negativity we get.
Well put and absolutley true, Linda :agree:

/Claes

Would most of you agree?

Quality professionals that have a negative feeling usually have had road blocks or resistance to implementation of what we perceive as quality, and

Quality Professionals that have a positive feeling usually have support and general buy in to the quality philosophy???

Frustration is a good one word answer from those of us that have hit these road blocks and this resistance to improvements.

What do all of you think? Is it more the lack of understanding by others that gets us frustrated or is it truly our disbelief in what we are trying to do?
:confused:

Would most of you agree?

Quality professionals that have a negative feeling usually have had road blocks or resistance to implementation of what we perceive as quality, and

Quality Professionals that have a positive feeling usually have support and general buy in to the quality philosophy???

Frustration is a good one word answer from those of us that have hit these road blocks and this resistance to improvements.

What do all of you think? Is it more the lack of understanding by others that gets us frustrated or is it truly our disbelief in what we are trying to do?
:confused:I think a lot of negative feeling about Quality and Quality "theories" in general (both within and without the Quality profession) stems from 2 root causes:

the "bad old days" when Quality inspectors were viewed as policemen
the incessant proliferation of Quality theories (TQM, zero defects, re-engineering, 6 Sigma, etc.) which were poorly executed as "flavor of the month" and added no value to the organization.
IMO, we as a profession must erase the "us versus them" mentality which exists in many organizations.

I worked at a military warship builder in the UK during the formative years of my early real world employment.
I was involved for some time with, the British quality standards implementation and compliance within the military ship yards. Well, I can tell you, I experienced more structure, standard conformance and good management practices back then.
What the $#@^ has happened to quality practices since?
Thank God we have sources such as the Cove to forward the cause of Quality understanding.
Now, to where I work now (Ford of Canada). The negative connotations that quality has within a manufacturing environment is IMO FWIW, caused by well intentioned engineers, who have much book knowledge and not enough practical experience and communications skills..
Wallace.

I worked at a military warship builder in the UK during the formative years of my early real world employment.
I was involved for some time with, the British quality standards implementation and compliance within the military ship yards. Well, I can tell you, I experienced more structure, standard conformance and good management practices back then.
What the $#@^ has happened to quality practices since?
Thank God we have sources such as the Cove to forward the cause of Quality understanding.
Now, to where I work now (Ford of Canada). The negative connotations that quality has within a manufacturing environment is IMO FWIW, caused by well intentioned engineers, who have much book knowledge and not enough practical experience and communications skills..
Wallace.

Wallace, a question, if I may.

I have no idea, other than what I have read here, about the workings of the automakers. Would you say that many engineers start their automotive careers in quality? If so, is that why you see the lack of practical experience?

Just curious.

Craig

Craig,
It is the nature of the auto industry to demand short term gains from all area's of business. After you walk through an auto assembly plant, you'll get the big picture regarding engineering, Internal system compliance, final assembly and pre-delivery. All of these systems are snapshots of how engineers are thrown to the dogs when it comes to making all of the systems work together as a large interdependent system of manufacturing.
I see all of the well intentioned newbie engineers come in and attempt to apply their great knowledge to the an auto environment and, when they get stuck in the mire between educated knowledge and practical applications of their engineering knowledge they see that, it's clear much of the knowledge that was learned didn't prepare them for the real world of the auto industry.
"Give me the production numbers today", "Fix that process", "I don't care about the conditions, measure it now", yeah this is what they'll hear and the book knowledge never prepares then for that.
Many engineers start their career within the auto industry because they are indeed advised to by their university professors who say, "If you can survive for a short time in the auto industry, you'll be bale to take on any type of engineering situation", I tend to agree. The quality part of their experience is something that many auto based engineers have great issues with regarding accepting QMS validity to making their job more productive.
Wallace.