COQ (Cost of Quality) - Would someone review this doc and offer feedback?
- Thread starter qualityce
- Start date
N
Natalie1974
I think on the whole this chart basically shows what you want it to. I would, however, ask if any of your cost is associated with any suppliers or sub contractors etc that you re-claim cost from and if so I would definatley show that information. I think your target being set at <5% is reasonable, however is depends on what constraints you or your customers which to impose upon you!
Jan,
Great tool!
Could these costs be divided into:
- Price of Nonconformance (PONC)
- Price of Conformance? (POC)
Stijloor.
jkuil
Quite Involved in Discussions
Yes, you could. However, some substantial elements of price of conformance, like costs for quality control activities (inspections and testing) and control of monitoring and measuring devices (calibration and maintenance) I think are lacking in the data.
You could also make a distinction between costs that are dependent on the sales (e.g. NCR's, testing, inspections) and costs that are (more) independent of the sales (e.g. Quality Audits, calibration, maintenance). For the first a presentation in percentages is the most valuable, for the latter a nominal presentation. E.g. you have to calibrate an instument commonly within a specified time period irrespective of the use frequency. Unless you can put it out of use, because you have more than one instrument or you can demonstrate that you can safetly reduce the calibration frequency these costs are more or less fixed. Such discussions management may have and the graph is helpfull in that.
You could also make a distinction between costs that are dependent on the sales (e.g. NCR's, testing, inspections) and costs that are (more) independent of the sales (e.g. Quality Audits, calibration, maintenance). For the first a presentation in percentages is the most valuable, for the latter a nominal presentation. E.g. you have to calibrate an instument commonly within a specified time period irrespective of the use frequency. Unless you can put it out of use, because you have more than one instrument or you can demonstrate that you can safetly reduce the calibration frequency these costs are more or less fixed. Such discussions management may have and the graph is helpfull in that.
C
Craig H.
This is a great tool!!!
The calibration issues mentioned should be included, IMO. We have saved a lot of money by adjusting outside calibration intervals, while monitoring measurement processes internally.
One thing that would be nice is to have the numeric values centered above their respective points on the graph.
This is a powerful format. One might be tempted to scale the charts by percent of sales, but including sales on the graph does that already. Show me the money!!!!
I have some questions based on the data presented, but that would be a different thread.
Well done!
The calibration issues mentioned should be included, IMO. We have saved a lot of money by adjusting outside calibration intervals, while monitoring measurement processes internally.
One thing that would be nice is to have the numeric values centered above their respective points on the graph.
This is a powerful format. One might be tempted to scale the charts by percent of sales, but including sales on the graph does that already. Show me the money!!!!
I have some questions based on the data presented, but that would be a different thread.
Well done!
Last edited by a moderator:
Everyone thanks for the help and feedback. I have included Calibration and testing. I added dummy numbers in the the calibration as a place holder until I pull the data for it. I also added a main title header to break it out into:
Appraisal Costs
Internal Failure
External Failure
Prevention Costs
I tried my best to line up the chart labels with each column label. I am also building this page out with YTD (monthly) data with dashboard pie charts and gauges so that the organization can get as realtime exposure to the information as possible.
Any other thoughts or comments are welcome.
Thanks again,
Appraisal Costs
Internal Failure
External Failure
Prevention Costs
I tried my best to line up the chart labels with each column label. I am also building this page out with YTD (monthly) data with dashboard pie charts and gauges so that the organization can get as realtime exposure to the information as possible.
Any other thoughts or comments are welcome.
Thanks again,
B
Bill Pflanz
Maybe the best COQ graph I have seen. Quality professionals always are asking how to get management attention for quality. It helps your company stay focused on where the problems are but more importantly is great financial information for management. They like pictures better than words on what needs to be done and what has been done in quality.
Bill Pflanz
Bill Pflanz
A
ACIQualityGuy
A couple of questions for you:
1. What is CAPA referring to in the attachment?
I'm pretty new to Quality as a whole and my company doesn't have any good means to capture the costs of quality. This is the first COQ "dashboard" that I've ever seen and I'm having a hard time seeing any value to how this is displayed except to note differences between years (no insult intended).
2. Can someone explain to me how this format is helpful?
Logic would tell me that management would be more interested in knowing what product defects are costing the company (I see the warranty costs in the attachment) compared to a proposed solution (ie currently sample testing product at 10%, 100% testing may cost X, but if implimented we would likely see a reduction in returns by X resulting in saving X per year.
3. Can someone please educate me???
Thanks for your pateince with this noob!
1. What is CAPA referring to in the attachment?
I'm pretty new to Quality as a whole and my company doesn't have any good means to capture the costs of quality. This is the first COQ "dashboard" that I've ever seen and I'm having a hard time seeing any value to how this is displayed except to note differences between years (no insult intended).
2. Can someone explain to me how this format is helpful?
Logic would tell me that management would be more interested in knowing what product defects are costing the company (I see the warranty costs in the attachment) compared to a proposed solution (ie currently sample testing product at 10%, 100% testing may cost X, but if implimented we would likely see a reduction in returns by X resulting in saving X per year.
3. Can someone please educate me???
Thanks for your pateince with this noob!
