Personal Notes on Production Floor vs. Documented Work Instructions

[sorin]

In Reply to Parent Post by Hodgepodge

There are many things that can be dangerous in certain situations. That is why training is so important. Even new employees with 20 years of experience must be trained in "the way it's done around here" at a new job.

I will not continue on the personal notes as it's quite clear that we have some different (strong) opinions on this subject and personally I will not concede the use of personal notes at any point where the process is critical to attain customer requirements. IF there are changes to be made (to documents such as WI), the changes shall be documented and controlled.

The Excel example is not good enough either. If the use of Excel is part of calculations that can have an impact on product/service and there is an update where your personal notes are not giving the same results, well...trouble. This is where software validation come in play.

Just to give an idea about small things that can go wrong, 12 years ago, I lost the equivalent of 30 hours of work because Autodesk made an update where the decimal separator was defined solely as ". = point" where in my system it was defined as a ", = comma".



As for the quote...

-I really hope training is not performed using as material personal notes.

-"The way it's done here"...that is a phrase that I really dislike because most of the time it's used in conjunction with "We did it like that for the last 15 years, why should we change it?"

[Big Jim]

This is getting really good. Time for more popcorn.

[Hodgepodge]

In Reply to Parent Post by sorin

I will not continue on the personal notes as it's quite clear that we have some different (strong) opinions on this subject and personally I will not concede the use of personal notes at any point where the process is critical to attain customer requirements.

Looks like Big Jim will be disappointed.

In Reply to Parent Post by sorin

The Excel example is not good enough either. If the use of Excel is part of calculations that can have an impact on product/service and there is an update where your personal notes are not giving the same results, well...trouble. This is where software validation come in play.

Here it is again. It seems as though I’m beating a dead horse here. As I’ve stated before here, “The proposed solution to the above problem must be reviewed to ensure suitability prior to execution.” And here, “The process parameters must yield the intended result.” And here, “If he…makes changes without looking at the current work instructions (blueprint, routing, etc.) and comparing the process results to them…then he is an idiot. It is that simple.” I would not use my new spreadsheet (thanks again to Ashok GS!) without having found another way to verify the results. If a change in the requirements is received from the customer, it will be caught by contract review initiating a chain of events to prevent error on the production floor.

In your arguments you continue to contend that the use of personal notes equates to not validating results. If this is the case then the company has far greater problems than the use of personal notes. In your example

In Reply to Parent Post by sorin

4.You forgot I banned all personal notes on the working floor…I cannot answer you that question…as for operating from memory, I can attest (documented) for at least 10000 $ CAN of scrap due to operating set-ups from memory and based on PERSONAL notes.

it sounds like several others processes were skipped as well. Was there no 1st piece inspection? In-process inspection? Following of procedures for control of production processes?

In Reply to Parent Post by sorin

Just to give an idea about small things that can go wrong, 12 years ago, I lost the equivalent of 30 hours of work because Autodesk made an update where the decimal separator was defined solely as ". = point" where in my system it was defined as a ", = comma".

This is a major bummer! Sorry about that. This is especially bad because you had no way of knowing. When you install an update, you are counting on the supplier to have it figured out. Based on these 2 experiences I understand why you feel the way you do. Personal notes are merely a tool in the worker’s tool box. The company decides which tools are allowed. If a company believes the risk associated with use of one of the tools is too high, that company can and should prohibit the use of the tool. It is also true that not all companies are equal…not all management styles are equal. To state that no company could ever find a way to control and minimize the risks associated with the use of any tool seems a bit closed minded. If it works for you and your company, then go for it.

In Reply to Parent Post by sorin

-I really hope training is not performed using as material personal notes.

Me too!

In Reply to Parent Post by sorin

-"The way it's done here"...that is a phrase that I really dislike because most of the time it's used in conjunction with "We did it like that for the last 15 years, why should we change it?"

I understand what you mean. When I stated, “The way it’s done here”, I was merely refering to the company’s formal policies and procedures. I was thinking of this post by bubonic in another thread:

In Reply to Parent Post by bubonic

…I liked the firm that has the title of their Quality Manual "How We Do Things" .......... I understand the assessment body accepted it!

and this one by Paul Simpson:

In Reply to Parent Post by Paul Simpson

…Again in earlier posts I have suggested you might call the manual 'Ethel' but maybe that's too big a step!

It isn't always possible to know all the things a person means when they write something. Sometimes a user can clarify things for himself with a note. If it works for you and your company, then go for it.

[Wes Bucey]

If I might suggest . . .
It's OK to absolutely positively ban any and all personal notes about processes and procedures in/on the workplace, BUT ONLY IF there is a workable process in place for workers to continually critique work instructions and offer suggestions for changes or revisions to aid clarity or perform an action more efficiently AND those suggestions are taken and evaluated by management AND prompt feedback given (to the person(s) suggesting addenda or amendment) of the management decision to accept, reject, or ignore the suggestion together with an explanation for the decision.

If revision suggestion is accepted, normal revision procedures take over for approval and dissemination of the change and withdrawal of obsolete documents, followed by evaluation whether the changes work as envisioned/predicted..

This method of cross-communication will assure no "good" idea will exist in a vacuum and should ensure against use of obsolete documents or personal info which had been developed by individuals because management had not bothered to evaluate whether existing documents were sufficient for each and every worker. (One size does NOT "fit all," no matter what some managers might think.)

[JaneB]

Good post, Wes. All excellent points.