QC vs. QMS - Division of personnel responsibilities

[Phiobi]

I am putting together my "wish list" for the next 12-24 months. As Quality Manager I am repsonsible for a small team of engineers, who with me cover the QMS side. We have 6 dedicated inspectors doing the QC bit. Now the odd thing is that the inspectors work for our 2 production managers not me, yet i am responsible for QC and targeted / judged through customer returns.

Now I am at the stage that a decision needs to be made:

1: Inspectors come to work for me, not production I take full control and responsibility for QC and production provide my guys with £x per day of GOOD work which will then lead to production & quality figures being met

2: I drop responsibility for QC and let production guys deal with it and be judged by it, but continue to use the QMS to improve, monitor and record what they do and how they do it

I guess I'm asking what you guys out there would see as the best way forward.

I am easy either way as I will still have the last say on all quality issues, just at the moment I guess you could say I tell the inspectors why they should do things but their boss (production guys) say how and when.

Your thoughts???

[Just Askin]

Phiobi,

I've never been a fan of QC...it's just too easy to think of the function as a "safety net", which it never is. I would opt for letting the production managers produce specification product and I would concentrate on process and continuous improvement. Just my opinion.

Walt

[Jennifer Kirley]

I would prefer option #2.

[Sam4Quality]

Originally posted by Phiobi

I am putting together my "wish list" for the next 12-24 months. As Quality Manager I am repsonsible for a small team of engineers, who with me cover the QMS side. We have 6 dedicated inspectors doing the QC bit. Now the odd thing is that the inspectors work for our 2 production managers not me, yet i am responsible for QC and targeted / judged through customer returns.

Now I am at the stage that a decision needs to be made:

1: Inspectors come to work for me, not production I take full control and responsibility for QC and production provide my guys with £x per day of GOOD work which will then lead to production & quality figures being met

2: I drop responsibility for QC and let production guys deal with it and be judged by it, but continue to use the QMS to improve, monitor and record what they do and how they do it

I guess I'm asking what you guys out there would see as the best way forward.

I am easy either way as I will still have the last say on all quality issues, just at the moment I guess you could say I tell the inspectors why they should do things but their boss (production guys) say how and when.

Your thoughts???

Quite frankly, this is pretty much not about what you like or dislike, it has also a lot to do with eventual product quality, customer satisfaction and particularly raising the quality bar with the production personnel.

You have been rightfully given the responsibility of QC, as the Quality Manager, and I would strongly recommend you going for Option#1. Reasons? Both logical and ethical.

What use is QC when it is reporting to Production? The concept of Quality Control is to independently inspect the quality of product and report any discrepancies to the Manager who should be independent of Production. Needless to say, they do work collaboratively but do not have authority over each other. QC Manager simply reports to the management , while at the same time informing production.

Doing this not only constantly keeps the product quality in check, increases QC's efficiency but also greatly reduces Production's tendency to become slack in terms of product manufacture, thus raising the bar.

Even if you want to forfeit the QC profile, it shouldn't go to Production. It should be independent. But, in the real world, not many companies do that, unfortunately.

Ciao.

[blueicecube]

Similar dilemma. But here's my two cents :

Option 1 : The way its leading, Production will become more aware of Quality (because its their responsibility now to reduce the 'net catch' from QC). In that sense its good. But as some people may put it, its like putting police in the thief's house. But for me, in the long run this is the way to go, slowly eliminiting QC function later on (because they don't see it as QC but as to keep product within spec because its a production responsibility)

Option 2 : Independent. But Production will forever pass the liability of Quality to you and will not take an initiative to bother about Quality but only concentrate on producing. QC function can never be eliminated because you do not trust Production to consider Quality at all.

Extra catch : I've seen it done in a few way to keep Option 1 and 2 in check and balance. One way is not add more work to Production is by keeping the incoming raw mat. as good as it should be by the independent Quality Dept. Hence, Production Quality just need to concentrate on the process (no garbage in garbage out issue).

In addition, to assure the QC is doing their task well, the independent Quality should do finished good assurance/realiability, just in case whatever QC current task is unable to catch the long term problem (i.e failure that crept over time, etc).

What do you think? (anyone)

Just to throw some more in : any examplaries/benchmark/best practice for manufacturing in term of quality organization that we may refer to?

[Phiobi]

We are working to a system as you describe. QC is being "ran" by production, with me training and setting standards. This is reducing the "push" of blame for bad parts.

Final inspection is ran by quality to ensure only good parts go out.

We now share reponsibility for any returns.

This is working very well..... so far

[AMITRAAJSHARMA]

Phiobi - Guess we are sialing in the same boat. I am going through a harrowing time in a very similar scenario but for I am in the services industry (BPO scenario). I am sticking to Option #1 for the time being. But due to the reasons mentioned about the reporting line it becomes diff to drive changes across the QC group. I wanted to do some very subtle changes in sampling techniques which faced a lot of resistance - and required a lot of effort to be sold to the Ops team.

Option #1 is something you have to live - but nonetheless an incorrect model until and unless you have culture like Toyota.

Hope this helps.
Amit

[Randy]

My thoughts? Really dangerous ground

1st....I wouldn't change a thing if what I have is already working...Ya gonna fix it until it breaks?

2nd...Do what you want, when you want and how you want. If it don't work, change it.

3rd...Think this through...If you want to give up some of your responsibility why do I have to pay you the same?