How to sell an idea to the upper management when...

[qualeety]

Here is a situation....(note: I have changed few things but the fact remains)

Our production has gone up but the defective rate remained same.

In 2006, # of defectives = 3,000...total production = 30,000...10% defectives
In 2007, # of defectives = 4,000...total production = 40,000...10% defectives

Overall, the upper management does not seem to care that the number defective is increasing as long as the rate of defectives is constant. There is no incentives to improve the defective rate since the current defective rate is acceptable to all.

Now, how do you sell an idea that the number of defectives is NOT ACCEPTABLE?.

I got my ass kicked because of this and I am sooooooo frustrated. (Maybe i am the one who is wrong here....maybe the number of defectives is perfectly acceptable since the rate is constant )

BTW, do not mention about $$$$ since it does not matter .... yep, you heard me

thanks for your ideas in advance..

[AndyN]

It's a mistake talking about rates! You have to consider that the number of defects has gone up from 3,000 to 4,000! You're still having to make more of whatever you're making to get some good ones! Multiply that by your operational costs! But since you're saying that they (your management) don't give a fig about $$$, then you're wasting your time talking about anything.

If there's no-one there prepared to understand the missed opportunity costs - like one in ten batches is 'free' or whatever, then don't bother - get your resume up to date, start looking and hope you bail before they tank! Unless, and this is an extremely rare case, your organization has the market cornered for the time being and the process is only this capable, they won't survive for much longer.........not because of the reject 'ratio' - but because of their attitude!

[Vassilis]

How about some "reverse psychology"?Since they think that this percentage is considered acceptable ,why dont you try to scare them and make them think of a worst case scenario of sudden raise of failure rate??

Then maybe scared enough and give some second thought about continuous improvment and risk management....

Im just self-brainstorming here...!!!

[Fencick]

I’d try to delve a bit deeper into the data. Do you have a consistent process? Or is does the scrap rate show huge swings from lot to lot?

In either case a thorough root cause analysis followed by corrective proposals with costing would allow you to show a timeframe to repay any expenditure.

I’ve been in a similar situation, the key is not in showing that your scrap rate is bad, but in showing why it is bad and the benefits of being able to correct it.

Just my thoughts.

[tsmith7858]

Originally Posted by AndyN

If there's no-one there prepared to understand the missed opportunity costs - like one in ten batches is 'free' or whatever, then don't bother - get your resume up to date, start looking and hope you bail before they tank! Unless, and this is an extremely rare case, your organization has the market cornered for the time being and the process is only this capable, they won't survive for much longer.........not because of the reject 'ratio' - but because of their attitude!

I worked for a company for about 8 months the end of last year and into the beginning of this year that judged their performance by the number of credits that were issued. They did not look at the cost or production numbers at all.

I spent two months calculating data and compiling facts from the beginning of 2007 to find out that there returns per sales and per production were less than 2% which is not bad for the the wood industry which is very subjective. To top it all off most of the returns actually met the specification but the customer did understand what they had ordered/been sold and correcting that would drop the rate below .5%.

I thought it meant we needed to "train" our customers so they would understand what they were ordering but the company decided we needed to put more labor ($$ loss) into separating what they wanted at a much lower yield (more $$ loss).

That was my sign to leave and I heard they laid off 1/3 of their labor last month and 2009 does not look very bright.

Bottom line is, I agree with Andy, if you present the facts (or at least try to) and they don't want to listen, you probably won't change their minds and may want to consider your options.

[Aguas]

Sometimes the top management teams are employees or owners that they are happy on their comfort zone, and this is fine for them, they don’t want too much noise or risk, but people like you is the differences that create continuos improvement. I will provide a couple ideas:

1.- Do not rework any of the 10% of the defective parts, and storage on a specific are and store it until top manage start asking questions. Then

2.- Use power point expressing that every 10 year everybody can be rested for a full year. Try to be creative to get the point and not sound negative.

3.- Be prepare with some solution (quick wins) that you can lead and coordinate in a short period of time.

I promess you that if you prove that one penny count you will be the kid of the block.

Do not shoot them with a lot number be simple on the 1st phase.

Hope this work for you, it work for me.

[Coury Ferguson]

Originally Posted by qualeety

Here is a situation....(note: I have changed few things but the fact remains)

Our production has gone up but the defective rate remained same.

In 2006, # of defectives = 3,000...total production = 30,000...10% defectives
In 2007, # of defectives = 4,000...total production = 40,000...10% defectives

Overall, the upper management does not seem to care that the number defective is increasing as long as the rate of defectives is constant. There is no incentives to improve the defective rate since the current defective rate is acceptable to all.

Now, how do you sell an idea that the number of defectives is NOT ACCEPTABLE?.

I got my ass kicked because of this and I am sooooooo frustrated. (Maybe i am the one who is wrong here....maybe the number of defectives is perfectly acceptable since the rate is constant )

BTW, do not mention about $$$$ since it does not matter .... yep, you heard me

thanks for your ideas in advance..

Recommend new goals/objectives, like reducing the # of defectives by 5% per year and bring them to the table at the next Review Cycle.

[BradM]

Well... an interesting notion here.

Organizations have strategies, and honestly, quality may not be one of them. Consider the company that makes the little bouncy balls and costume jewelry that is sold for .25 cents when you leave a restaurant (out of the vending machine). Do you think they care about quality? Or put another way, they are substantially more concerned with the unit price going up .03 cents than defect going up 3%. After all, why should they care about defects?

I am passionate about quality and its value within organizations;don't get me wrong. But... there are costs associated with quality when discussing strategy.

I imagine you are not in a business where external failure costs are virtually zero, as my above example dictates. So, do you have a plan to lower defects, and is it less expensive than the external failure costs? If it is not significantly lower, than it may be a hard sell.

So, costs for defects is 500. Your quality plan will cost 150, but reduce 200 in costs. If you present that to management, and they don't care, I would brush up the resume and find another job.