|
|
 |
|

9th September 2002, 11:30 AM
|
|
Involved - Posts
Registration Date: Oct 2001
Location: Chennai - India
Age: 32
|
|
Posts: 293
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Karma Power: 39 Karma: 43 
|
|
Fitness for use
Deming says "Quality is fitness for use " and not " meeting customer expectations".If a customer is not willing to share the usage / function of the part with the supplier ,then what should the supplier do?
|

9th September 2002, 11:59 AM
|
|
An Early 'Cover'
Registration Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Coast US
|
|
Posts: 1,773
Thanks Given to Others: 24
Thanked 51 Times in 39 Posts
Karma Power: 103
|
|
You do what you can - make the product/service meet the customers expectations and if you can exceed them, great. Even if you knew the application it is doubtful you would be able to tell as well as the customer can how "fit for use" your product is. Perhaps Deming's contest was from an internal perspective.
__________________
Mike S. ("Gun Nut")
And they ask me why I drink....
|

9th September 2002, 12:40 PM
|
 |
Courtesy Access
Registration Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
|
|
Posts: 1,643
Thanks Given to Others: 10
Thanked 63 Times in 44 Posts
Karma Power: 80
|
|
If the customer doesnt want it it aint fit for use is it ?
|

9th September 2002, 12:50 PM
|
|
An Early 'Cover'
Registration Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Coast US
|
|
Posts: 1,773
Thanks Given to Others: 24
Thanked 51 Times in 39 Posts
Karma Power: 103
|
|
Martin,
That was sort of a curt answer, wasn't it? And I'd have to say I can recall some cases where that was not true.
__________________
Mike S. ("Gun Nut")
And they ask me why I drink....
|

9th September 2002, 03:52 PM
|
 |
Courtesy Access
Registration Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
|
|
Posts: 1,643
Thanks Given to Others: 10
Thanked 63 Times in 44 Posts
Karma Power: 80
|
|
Andrews
Could you tell us where that quote came from ?
Mike
My response was based on the principal that we need to listen to the voice of the customer. He decides what is fit for his use. If we ignore this we may well find ourselves making product that to our minds is fit for use, yet we have no customers that want it.
'Fit for use' is a very subjective and whooly concept.
|

9th September 2002, 04:08 PM
|
|
|
Another one!
Quote:
M Greenaway said:
Mike
My response was based on the principal that we need to listen to the voice of the customer. He decides what is fit for his use. If we ignore this we may well find ourselves making product that to our minds is fit for use, yet we have no customers that want it.
'Fit for use' is a very subjective and whooly concept.
|
When we do our "Contract Review" or "Product Realization", we determine and guarantee that our product is fit for use. No? The customer defines the crititeria and you meet the criteria and supply your product. No? Just think of it as fit for the Customer's use.
I agree, M. Who would make anything without customers? Am I missing something?
Does anyone think that the Customer has to tell you what he is going to use your product for? I guess you can always make that a pre-condition before the sale. You better have something good.
You won't be in business very long.
Most product warranty is voided if it is used in a manner not designed or intended for. No? What's this all about, Alfie?
Last edited by energy; 9th September 2002 at 04:11 PM.
|

9th September 2002, 04:19 PM
|
 |
Super Moderator
Registration Date: Feb 2001
Location: Wellington, OH USA
Age: 69
|
|
Posts: 1,604
Thanks Given to Others: 80
Thanked 289 Times in 172 Posts
Karma Power: 149
|
|
Quote:
|
What's this all about, Alfie?
|
Not really sure Energy, but there are some great thoughts here.
I agree that fitness for use comes down to the customer but is the customer always fair in making the judgement or just waving the "customer is always right" flag?
With the latest trend to "Zero Defects", a lot of customers will intertwine the definition Zero Defects with Zero Nonconformance. There is an obvious distinction between the two and Martin and Mike have hit on it. Every nonconcormance does not in itself create a defect.
I would like to hear from others on how you plan to address the "Zero Defects" mandate and are your customers allowing the distinction between defects and a nonconformance.
Great topic - hope it goes somewhere.
Dave
|

9th September 2002, 04:50 PM
|
|
|
Still miss your special "Day" reports
Quote:
D.Scott said:
With the latest trend to "Zero Defects", a lot of customers will intertwine the definition Zero Defects with Zero Nonconformance. There is an obvious distinction between the two and Martin and Mike have hit on it. Every nonconcormance does not in itself create a defect.
I would like to hear from others on how you plan to address the "Zero Defects" mandate and are your customers allowing the distinction between defects and a nonconformance.
Great topic - hope it goes somewhere.
Dave
|
Dave,
Are we talking about a Customer who may declare our equipment not fit for use, even though we have a Purchase Order with all the requirements, terms and conditions spelled out? Or are we talking about something wrong with the equipment? The original post was, I thought, about a Supplier not having access to the use of his product, which I feel is irrelevant. I'm not sure what we are talking about, now, and I sure as he** do not know the difference between a defect and a nonconformance. I'm sure I'm about to find out. Just like the difference between continuous and continually, I hope not!
|
Lower Navigation Bar
|
|
|
|
Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors and 1 Unregistered Guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Rate Thread Content |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Settings
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|