Do Quality Systems really "run themselves"??

[SteelWoman]

In Reply to Parent Post by Kevin H

About the 3rd or 4th time someone does something wrong (as defined by the system) I become the read & follow the procedure ogre.

"Read and Follow the Procedure Ogre" - I would accept "Ogre" over what I usually get called in such situations!

[Steve Prevette]

I think the word that is missing in the discussion is "leadership". No system runs itself. There has to be some sort of aim, and a leader or set of leaders (if self-organized or "learning organization") that maintains the system.

[Wes Bucey]

In Reply to Parent Post by SteelWoman

I'm curious about what other Covers' experience is with this...

The other thing here is I've seen a lot of postings lately for "consultants" and even "short-term Quality Managers" where companies seem to be buying into the thought that you can hire someone for 6 months to put a system in place and then send them on their way - the thing will run itself, right?

Is this a new trend or ??? What are your thoughts?

Just my opinion, of course, but there are two categories of "consultants."

The first category I liken to a "temp" or "contract employee" who comes in and does a limited task for you. This kind of consultant whips through your operation by himself with a gap analysis check sheet in hand. When he's done, he cranks up his trusty laptop, pulls up templates on everything from Quality Manuals to Work Instructions, inserts your company name and grinds out electronic copies. Either you print them or he does (at extra price) and he's gone until a week or so before the registrar's auditor comes. He takes another quick whiz through, suggests some "tinkering" and finally comes back to walk through with you and auditor. If the auditor finds some blips, he hangs around to help fix and then he's gone.

The second category is more like "trusted advisor" and "guru" who helps EVERYONE in the organization understand the underlying theory and basics of Quality, not just how to fill in blanks on somebody else's forms. He helps them create their own documents or blesses ones they already have. He takes special care in training a cadre of folks who will carry on once he's gone. If he's done his job right, he may not need to be anywhere near when the Registrar's auditor comes calling. He builds a friendship and relationship that may last for years. His clients call him FIRST in confidence he will have an answer when they come across a problem.

So, if the "six month wonder" is in the second category, the organization may have found their miracle.

[Caster]

In Reply to Parent Post by SteelWoman

I spend an inordinate amount of time chasing people around to make them do what they have to do for the Quality system - update CI plans, mark up procedure changes, provide required training, etc. Geeze, if there's a way to make this "run itself" I'll WELCOME IT with open arms, but more and more I'm confused over whether I'm a "Quality Systems" person or an over-titled babysitter.

CAUTION - Rant Begins

I think the basic problem is that we have a document called a "Quality" management system.

Why would anyone not in the department called Quality care about such a thing. I wouldn't!

ISO2K gave us the best chance to fix this in a long while. We (I) moved away from the elements and we now have Business processes.

We have a Business Manual (TS16949 compliant)

I just did a top team session where we went through our list of processes and I asked them to decide which ones belong to "Quality". It was about 20% meaning we have a Business System pushed by Quality.

They also rated what processes they would not do if they owned the company and there were no requirements of any kind. Less than 5%.

It's about Business - not Quality.

Quality is the result of doing things that make Business sense.

Corollary - The level of Quality is determined by the sense of the Business owners.

The business process owners are audited, Quality acts as a guide. They are responsible for the performance of their system and people - not Quality.

Quality stands ready to help in any way they want - if they ask!

Push it back if you can - It is amazing what happens when people realize they are going to be accountable.

<Rant ends>

[ddunn]

[QUOTE=Caster]CAUTION - Rant Begins

Well Said!

[Wes Bucey]

In Reply to Parent Post by Caster

CAUTION - Rant Begins

I think the basic problem is that we have a document called a "Quality" management system.

Why would anyone not in the department called Quality care about such a thing. I wouldn't!

ISO2K gave us the best chance to fix this in a long while. We (I) moved away from the elements and we now have Business processes.

We have a Business Manual (TS16949 compliant)

Quality stands ready to help in any way they want - if they ask!

Push it back if you can - It is amazing what happens when people realize they are going to be accountable.

<Rant ends>

Perhaps some organizations DO need the "six-month wonder" I described in Category two above. Especially if they can't find a full time worker with the same understanding and ability to influence an entire organization.

When you write
Quality stands ready to help in any way they want - if they ask!
many folks don't even know WHAT to ask, let alone WHO, without the proper grounding and background education in the "best practices" interaction between Quality and Business Processes.

An excellent Quality Manager is not just someone who knows the Standards backwards and forwards and how to do all the Statistical calculations to track processes. The excellent Quality Manager is able to educate and inspire his organization from the top down about the value of using Quality tools to maintain and improve the Business processes.

[cncmarine]

An excellent Quality Manager is not just someone who knows the Standards backwards and forwards and how to do all the Statistical calculations to track processes. The excellent Quality Manager is able to educate and inspire his organization from the top down about the value of using Quality tools to maintain and improve the Business processes.

Wes, very well put !!!!

[Kevin H]

This might be more appropro over in the jobs sections of the forums, but I'll post here first. I believe that an efficient/effective quality (business) system must be based upon top management committment to and leadership in using it.

When educating employees to effectively use the quality system, one needs to have a plan and management committment on a consistent companywide approach. Based on those thoughts, one of the questions I intend to ask the next time I change jobs will address that issue. Something along the lines of how are your employees trained in changes to the quality sytem, or what sort of training are you planning for your employees to implement your new system?