The Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
UL - Underwriters Laboratories - Health Sciences
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Business Systems and Standards Discussion Forums > Common Quality Assurance Processes and Tools > Nonconformance and Corrective Action
Forum Username

Elsmar Cove Forum Visitor Notice(s)

Wooden Line

Nonconformances and Defects - Operator Error, System Error, or both? - Page 2


Elsmar XML RSS Feed
Elsmar Cove Forum RSS Feed

Monitor the Elsmar Forum
Sponsor Links




Courtesy Quick Links


Links that Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge:

International Standards Bodies - World Wide Standards Bodies

ASQ - American Society for Quality

International Standards Organization - ISO Standards and Information

Howard's
International Quality Services


Marcelo Antunes'
SQR Consulting, and
Medical Devices Expert Forum


Bob Doering
Bob Doering's Blogs and,
Correct SPC - Precision Machining


Ajit Basrur
Claritas Consulting, LLC


NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook

IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors

SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers

Quality Digest

IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology

View Poll Results: In the event of a NC or defect, what/who is at fault?
"The system" is always at fault. 31 15.35%
"The system" is at fault ~ 90-96% of the time. 66 32.67%
"The system ~ 80%", operator ~ 20%. 66 32.67%
It's about even. 39 19.31%
Voters: 202. You may not vote on this Poll because you are not Logged In.


Some Related Topic Tags (Not all threads are Tagged)
nonconformance, operator error, defects and defectives, system errors
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 4.67 average. Display Modes
  Post Number #9  
Old 4th October 2002, 04:37 PM
Mike S.

 
 
Total Posts: 2,132
MG,

I'm suprized by your vote, but thanks for voting.

As for "should we have a system prone to the whims of the emotional state of our employees " -- how can you possibly do otherwise in all cases?

How could you truly error-proof Joseph's job in all industries/situations? Have someone double check him? No, 100% test won't do it as you mentioned as being only 80% accurate in another thread. In the realm of practicality, how do you do it?

What if Joe is a driver delivering the boxes and he has a wreck -- crashes the truck. How do you error-proof that, make it "not prone to the whims of the emotional state of employees" as you say? Figure that one out and the world will beat a path to your door and you will be VERY rich, famous, loved by millions, a Nobel Prize winner, and solely responsible for saving thousands of lives each year.

Sponsored Links
  Post Number #10  
Old 6th October 2002, 11:12 PM
Kevin Mader's Avatar
Kevin Mader

 
 
Total Posts: 1,221
Mike,


I wonder what the poll results would be if this were given to non-quality types.

Regards,

Kevin
Sponsored Links

  Post Number #11  
Old 7th October 2002, 12:56 AM
Claes Gefvenberg's Avatar
Claes Gefvenberg

 
 
Total Posts: 4,945
Lightbulb

Quote:
M Greenaway said:

But isnt the reason we have systems because we employee humans, and they are prone to errors ?

An interesting question that just crossed my mind (having voted 96%) is - at what point do we stop blaming the system and start blaming the operator ?

Can we say we have a good system if it allows operators to error ?

In the analogy given, should we have a system prone to the whims of the emotional state of our employees ?
Good questions... Considering the fact (?) that none of us has ever seen a fool proof system: Surely the system should be "robust" enough to withstand outbreaks of human falliability?

What I'm saying is: Mistakes will happen. Some of them will make the system reel, but the system should not be brought down by them.

We'll never be able to prevent everything. That amazing gadget between our ears will keep coming up with new ways to fail (However: Consider all the things we do *correctly* every day).

/Claes
  Post Number #12  
Old 7th October 2002, 04:13 AM
M Greenaway's Avatar
M Greenaway

 
 
Total Posts: 1,657
All

Exactly !

We cannot build a fail safe system, it is a state of perfection that we will never reach.

But should we blame the operator and ignore trying to improve the system ?

At what point do we say 'our system is good enough - the operator should not have failed, it must be their fault' ?
  Post Number #13  
Old 7th October 2002, 08:38 AM
SteelMaiden's Avatar
SteelMaiden

 
 
Total Posts: 4,196
Re: Here we go again...

Quote:
Michael T said:

(Steps up onto the soapbox that was recently left by noboxwine)

Ahem.... (taps microphone)

Jo goes back to work - clearly not thinking about work - but rather thinking about Uncle Fred and his poor distraught mom on the left coast. Jo mispacks 20 of the next 100 cartons he is packing.

What's the root cause? (No - eliminating telephone calls at work isn't it... nice try... )

Food for thought for the weekend.

Cheers!!!!

Mike
Being a realist with compassion:

Root cause is that Joe/jo received bad news that caused him/her an inability to focus wholly on the job at hand. This was not the fault of systems, nor was it Joe's fault (assuming he did not murder his uncle). It was an isolated incident that is not going to happen at any predictable frequency.

We (the company) will continue to assist our employees in any way we can during periods of family crisis, reaffirm our commitment to provide another operator to assist an employee when something like this happens and allow them to leave their shift when necessary. No corrective or preventive measures will be put in place beyond letting the customer know what happened and making it right by them through replacement, rework or monetary concessions.

Case closed, we took up a collection to help Joe buy plane tickets, he walked out at the end of his shift with $550 and one of the supervisors helped him to get his tickets bought on-line. The customer understood, and shipped back the defective product, which we replaced the next day via UPS Red.

Not everything has to be a big, full-blown investigation, nor does every issue need to create panic to find corrective action. It took me about two minutes to assess the issue and make a decision based on our company policies. Now, I have to quit screwing around and get a plant sent to the funeral home for Joe's uncle. Hey, which funeral home did you say that was?

Have a good one!
Thanks to SteelMaiden for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  Post Number #14  
Old 7th October 2002, 10:56 AM
Mike S.

 
 
Total Posts: 2,132
Thoughtful reply, Steel. If I were the customer I'd be completely satisfied with your solution.

One thing to keep in mnd is that often something a little less dramatic than the death of a family member happens in the life of an employee that may cause him/her to perform at less than their normal level. He/she may tell no one, so it won't be obvious, you might just hear something like "I have no idea why I did that -- I just goofed". It happens, and no economical system I can imagine will "goof proof" every process every time, which most folks seem to believe based on the poll results thus far.
  Post Number #15  
Old 7th October 2002, 11:00 AM
energy

 
 
Total Posts: n/a
Laughing Borrowed Post

Quote:
M Greenaway said:

All

Exactly !

We cannot build a fail safe system, it is a state of perfection that we will never reach.

But should we blame the operator and ignore trying to improve the system ?

At what point do we say 'our system is good enough - the operator should not have failed, it must be their fault' ?
Just borrowed this from a previous post:

Of course, you're right about using "human error" as the last result of the investigation. I've addressed this scenario before, but a nicer version is:

Data Entry error results in incorrect part is sent to the Customer. This is a slip of the finger on the keys. We call it "happy fingers"
1st Why? "I made a mistake"
2nd Why? I made an error. Don't you get it?"
3rd Why? "Look, haven't you ever made a mistake? What was YOUR reason? Go see my Supervisor."

Supervisor is asked the 5th "why?". "The guy made a mistake."
6th Why? "He made a mistake. What do you want, blood?"

There comes a time when you get frustrated with the amount of time that is spent to come up with a good CA/PA. The customer understands mistakes, gets the right part and orders something else. He/she doesn't have a problem with it. After all, some Customers (those who admit it) also have employees who make mistakes.
Most problems are explainable, but occasionally there is no clear answer so you become "creative" with cause/preventive action just so you can get on with life. I also feel if you have enough people to throw at a problem, it's easier. Most small companies do not have the resources. I'll stop here because it's my pet peeve and I become emotional when it comes to overbearing large customers who demand action on anything, regardless of significance.

I would only add that asking 5 or more "Why's" can result in being sprayed with a pesticide when you have been told from the beginning that it was a mistake. For those who would advocate "idiot proofing" the process, I say that it is not very compassionate to instruct HR to amend that hiring process to make sure that that they don't hire idiots!
  Post Number #16  
Old 7th October 2002, 11:45 AM
M Greenaway's Avatar
M Greenaway

 
 
Total Posts: 1,657
Sorry - where does compassion come into it ?
Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Business Systems and Standards Discussion Forums > Common Quality Assurance Processes and Tools > Nonconformance and Corrective Action

Bookmarks



Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors (Members) and 1 Unregistered Guest Visitors)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Forum Search
Display Modes Rate Thread Content
Rate Thread Content:

Forum Posting Settings
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Emoticons are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
Is 'Operator Error' as Root Cause ever acceptable? darwinbb Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 227 19th February 2015 09:09 AM
Countermeasure For CMM Operator Error Pudge Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 4 7th October 2012 02:13 AM
Measurement Error on pure Graphite Coating on Tubes - To Error or Not to Error Brad Gover Using Minitab Software 7 30th April 2012 11:52 AM
Need Root Cause Verbiage - What to say when it's Operator Error? JRKH Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 38 25th April 2009 03:19 PM
Thoughts on issuing a CAR for Operator Error michellemmm General Auditing Discussions 15 23rd March 2008 06:38 PM



The time now is 11:43 PM. All times are GMT -4.
Your time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.


 
 


NOTE: This forum uses "Cookies"