Elsmar Cove Forums Index - TS 16949 Process Interactions Map

Pages: 1

TS 16949 Process Interactions Map - Examples and a Spirited Discussion
(View the original discussion thread with full colors, attachments and images)

Posted by: Mustang

Help Marc!!! (Please?) I made the mistake of showing your "Typical Operations Flowchart" to our General Manager, he then turned around and said to me "looks good, lets make this our flow". And he's serious. I think I'm in trouble....

Posted by: SilverHawk

Whis one was that? I guess you have make some minor changes to reflect your key business process flow.

After all, there is no one perfect process flow chart!!!

Posted by: Marc

I don't see a big issue. You know the details. You showed a diagram to the GM but I bet the GM saw a flash. So - You take the base, alter it to fit your company and there you have it. I doubt that the GM is going to ask for the diagram you showed originally and the one you make and point out any differences.

Posted by: Mustang

Marc,
I did create a diagram of our business based on what processes we have (in the same general format as the example you gave, in fact), and he did just that. In fact, he pitched mine out and wants yours. Verbatim. He even went so far as to tell management to change the titles of their processes to match. To top it off, all the management team did (and always do anyway) was sit silently.

I think the flash was from the oncoming train, and I'm ready to lie on the tracks.

Posted by: Mustang

This is the chart I am referring to:

http://Elsmar.com/pdf_files/Operations_and_Support.ppt

Posted by: howste

I thought maybe you were talking about this one:

http://Elsmar.com/Forums/attachment....achmentid=1905

Posted by: Marc

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mustang

This is the chart I am referring to...

Wow! That's an old one I just used as a 'thought' model.

Umm, well, I'm not sure what to tell you except that I would be surprised if it fit any given company precisely. I won't even say that's the best way to represent an organization.

I simply don't know what to say about the top person taking that specific chart to heart like that. As everyone knows, my 'motto' is "One size does NOT fit all". I see these things as idea resources, not particularly applicable to any specific company or organization. Just like 'canned' procedures, they are meant to help people think - not used 'as is' in any company.

Quote:

Originally Posted by howste

I thought maybe you were talking about this one:...

Good one! Much newer than mine!

Any ideas folks?

Posted by: howste

I agree with you, Marc. I've never been a fan of "canned" anything (especially SPAM

).

It looks like maybe the GM didn't like the one he created, and saw the generic one as an improvement. Maybe if you tweak the one that he likes now to better fit the organization, he might like it even better???

Another option is to run the diagram past your registrar. Chances are, they will be critical that it's too generic. This may give you some leverage to put more into it.

Posted by: Mustang

Howste,
I actually started with the one you referenced about a year ago (I got it at MMTC at a 16949 overview I attended). He hated it too.

I am going to have to rely on the registrar for this one. He's not going to like it, I can tell already. Problem is, it will me my rear end on the line regardless.

I don't know what to do at this point, short of look for another job. I'm tired of doing management's jobs for them at a peon's salary.

Thanks for your help.

Posted by: howste

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mustang

I am going to have to rely on the registrar for this one. He's not going to like it, I can tell already. Problem is, it will me my rear end on the line regardless.

Your rear end is not on the line (at least as far as an audit NC) if you bring it to your registrar before the audit. Like right now...

Posted by: Mustang

Thanks, howste for the vote of confidence, but it isn't the registrar I'm worried about. My company is notorious for setting people up to fail, then berating them when they do. I need to seriously consider a career change, but it's not easy in this economy, where I live.

Posted by: D.Scott

I must be missing something as usual.

The chart is good in that it shows a path through a business. If the GM likes it and says "carve this in stone" then fine. Just associate your system with the chart. Using your planned system, develop the inputs and outputs showing a relationship to the chart. I think even the most complex business system could, without too much trouble, follow the generic process described.

I can't see how it portrays a failure by following Marc's model. I think it is reasonable to use the model yet define the relationships of the support processes on an additional chart which can be as complex as you like in defining inputs and outputs.

Like I said though, maybe I'm missing something.

Dave

Posted by: Mustang

It's not so much the general flow chart that is the problem, it's everything else on the page. He wants to keep ALL of it. Totally irrational, since some of it doesn't even apply to us, but this is what I have to deal with on a regular basis.

Posted by: db

We use the map howste posted as a tool to get companies to think about processes, and their interrelationship. We've used one similar to Marc's for the same purpose. In both cases, the intent is to give a company a starting point from which to build.

In your case Mustang, I see some real danger. It is kinda like buying one of those on-line quality manuals and then trying to change how you do business to match what you paid for.

But there is another way. Perhaps the issue is lack of faith in you. I've seen many, many cases where the local person is perceived as not having any credibility. Your boss likes the Cove map better because it came from an "expert" (Mustang and Marc -- I'm not saying you are not an expert). Perception might be the real issue.

Try this: Develop something you think will work. Plug in your titles, processes, etc. Then post it on the Cove, and download it again. Present it as "something new" you found on the Cove, which may actually work better. See what the boss does then. If the response is that it is exactly what he is looking for, then you know he has an issue with you. Go ahead and implement it, and once you are finished, then show him that it actually came from you.

Perhaps this will help, perhaps not.

Posted by: Mustang

DB,
I'm the first to admit that I am no expert. Far from it. I think it is partially a lack of faith (not in me personally, but in my gender, sad to say). The other part is a simple lack of logic. Usually anthing from the MMTC is seen as gospel around here. Our GM has a tendency to grab onto something (logical or otherwise) and force the rest of us to bow down to it. A good for instance is when he saw photos of the CART racing garage with everything in gloss white. I now work in a gloss white stamping plant. Nice, in theory.Tough to keep up with no custodial staff.

I like your plan. It would probably work. I will keep it in mind if things get desperate. Right now I'm trying a distraction technique that usually works pretty well (look! over here at the nice pretty colors...)

Posted by: Mustang

Well, I just nodded my head when necessary, and bided my time, while creating a flow that makes sense "on the sly". Turned out to be a great move, they canned the GM (and a couple of other managers) this week! My life just got a whole lot easier....

Here's what I have. Any opinions?

Posted by: db

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mustang

Well, I just nodded my head when necessary, and bided my time, while creating a flow that makes sense "on the sly". Turned out to be a great move, they canned the GM (and a couple of other managers) this week! My life just got a whole lot easier....

Here's what I have. Any opinions?

Not sure if that is good news, or not...time will tell. Looking at you map, it looks okay. I am assuming the outer ring (?) are your support processes, and CP stands for Core Process (or COP), the SP is Support Process, and the MP is Management Processes. But what does SR and MR stand for?

Posted by: RosieA

Mustang, When in doubt, try subterfuge.

Use Marc's chart as the top layer, and then do sub-flows that reflect what's truly going on in your company.

It's ok to be generic at the top as long as what's beneath it matches reality. And the beauty of it is, most GMs don't care about the sub processes, so he'd never know.

Ain't life grand?

Posted by: Mustang

Quote:

Originally Posted by db

It's good news, trust me. This guy would walk around and score us every Friday on the organization/cleanliness of our desks (he deducted points from an associate for his desk area being "not user friendly". The next day several of us labeled everything in and around our desks. I almost printed one that said "employee"...). Meanwhile, our Sales team was seriously floundering without direction, and morale here was horrible. His priorities were a bit scrambled. The current Quality/Engineering manager (my boss) is becoming the new GM. He really knows his stuff and has some great ideas. The somewhat bad news is I've gotten a whole lot of new responsibilities as well. I've developed a reputation as a "jack of all trades", so now I am helping Sales with some things (on top of running the QS/TS conversion, overseeing Document Control, running our MRB program, writing/updating our Quality charts and several others, tracking attendance for two departments, designing and maintaining our sales presentation and any other graphics needed, and now I have become the "turtle diagram expert". Not to mention, writing Access Database programs and Crystal Reports as needed. Plus stuff I can't remember at the moment) Whew! Oh, and raising an 8-month-old son, who, of course, is my top priority.

You are correct in your other deductions. SR is "Support Required" and "MR" is "Management Required", these are part of the required 7 procedures. I designated them separately to let people know that they need to double-check with me before they propose changes to them, as I need to bounce them off the Standard first.

Posted by: Mustang

Quote:

Originally Posted by RosieA

Mustang, When in doubt, try subterfuge.

Use Marc's chart as the top layer, and then do sub-flows that reflect what's truly going on in your company.

It's ok to be generic at the top as long as what's beneath it matches reality. And the beauty of it is, most GMs don't care about the sub processes, so he'd never know.

Ain't life grand?

It definitely has it's moments....

I have flows (I'm using a variation on the turtle diagram on page 187 of the AIAG Implementation Guide) for each box on the diagram I've posted above. I've kind-of turned the "documentation pyramid" form QS into a "Documentation Bullseye" for TS, with the center being the overview of all processes (the above diagram), the next ring out being the turtle diagrams for each process, then the ring outside of that is supporting work instructions and forms. Question for everyone: Does that make sense?