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 5


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 #33  
Old 11th October 2002, 09:24 AM
Mike S.

 
 
Total Posts: 2,097
Easy answer, db. In your example, us "experts" are part of the "system" which is always at fault, so you are at fault in this case. And if the average "hourly production worker" Joe or Jane forgot to take the standard (let's say they were for some reason invited to visit the customer), it is still your and the system's fault. Got it?

Sponsored Links
  Post Number #34  
Old 14th October 2002, 12:55 PM
Kevin Mader's Avatar
Kevin Mader

 
 
Total Posts: 1,221
Lightbulb

From the Deming Conference last weekend:

A presenter offered this explanation – only when the root cause is traceable to a Company Value that was willfully broken can the employee be at fault. These ‘company values’ are developed by everyone in the company, not just management. Everyone needs to operationalize the definitions so that all agree what is “is” and live by them as a culture.

All other failures are attributable to the System.

Regards,

Kevin
Thanks to Kevin Mader for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
Sponsored Links

  Post Number #35  
Old 14th October 2002, 01:55 PM
Mike S.

 
 
Total Posts: 2,097
Kevin,

I don't get it (again). Unless it was a WILLFUL screw-up the system is always at fault?

So in our earlier example of a despondent Joe, whose relative died, the system was at fault?

If a truck driver momentarily was distracted by ____ (fill in the blank - a pretty girl walking down the street, sunlight in his eyes, the high-beams of an oncoming truck, the appearance of a ball bouncing into the street, a sudden change in the sound of his truck, etc. etc.) and has a wreck, it is the system's fault?

If a machinist, reading the blueprint for a part he is making, unknowingly transposes the numbers in the size callout (i.e. should be .5470" +/- .002" and he "thinks" .4570") and machines the only piece of stock available undersize, the system is at fault?

I have to disagree with this guy. (Or, maybe I'm just not smart enough to understand what this presenter was saying.)
  Post Number #36  
Old 14th October 2002, 02:54 PM
energy

 
 
Total Posts: n/a
BIG Smile Me neither

Quote:
Kevin Mader said:

From the Deming Conference last weekend:

A presenter offered this explanation – only when the root cause is traceable to a Company Value that was willfully broken can the employee be at fault. These ‘company values’ are developed by everyone in the company, not just management. Everyone needs to operationalize the definitions so that all agree what is “is” and live by them as a culture.

All other failures are attributable to the System.

Regards,

Kevin
Just another opinion from another "expert" from on high, IMHO. If I forget to put water in the coffee pot, even with hands on training and being the only absent minded employee to do such a thing, our system is at fault? I didn't do it "willfully". C'mon Kev. Enlighten me. Something in this person's grand presentation made you post it. Do normal people make mistakes on purpose? That's Sabotage. This "Human Error" thing is way out of whack. I would have taken the Presentor to task with several examples of situations, including the one where the operator admits to making the mistake on something he/she does on a regular basis, where procedures and training work well for everybody else-most of the time. These people who concoct these deep interpretations give me case of the *as or gas! Being removed from the every day routine of manufacturing can give one a vision that mistakes are always the fault of the company and their System. Bull-cocky!
  Post Number #37  
Old 14th October 2002, 03:34 PM
Kevin Mader's Avatar
Kevin Mader

 
 
Total Posts: 1,221
Hehehe...

Gentlemen,

You presumed that I agreed with the statement. In actuality, I am still contemplating its worth. I merely put it out there for discussion.

Kevin
  Post Number #38  
Old 14th October 2002, 03:49 PM
energy

 
 
Total Posts: n/a
Laughing Now, Cut that out!

Okay Kev,

I thought of the possibility that you may be playing the Devil's advocate. But, I'm always a sucker for the right bait!!

See Mike, two birds with one stoned!

Experience here has me thinking that there are those who agree with it. Look at the poll.
  Post Number #39  
Old 15th October 2002, 07:26 AM
M Greenaway's Avatar
M Greenaway

 
 
Total Posts: 1,657
I totally agree with the fella.

The analogy of Joe's cock up due to a relation dying is ridiculous. How on earth would you get to that conclusion from a proper 5 why process from the reported fault ??

Imagine Joe had incorrectly packed the wrong part. If we looked at the process and asked why, or even how this could happen we wouldnt jump to the conclusion that a relative of his had died. We may find however that he was packing two, or more, orders at the same time on his work bench and inadvertantly mixed the labels - as a result we might revise the process such that only one order or product is packed at one time.

Or maybe after some research we find that he had picked the wrong part from stores due to the similarity of part numbers, and the storage locations being adjacent - as such we might revise the stores put away process to ensure that products of similar part numbers are not held in adjacent locations.

Just a couple of examples where we could have stopped at operator error, but a little research shows the circumstances that created the possibility of operator error in the system.

Corrective Action is about creating robust systems to people variation, not blaming stupid operators and hoping that your criticism will stop it happening again - now that IS compassion !!
  Post Number #40  
Old 15th October 2002, 09:18 AM
Mike S.

 
 
Total Posts: 2,097
Martin,

If you go back to the original scenerio involving poor Joe, you will see that "Jo mispacks 20 of the next 100 cartons he is packing". Let's say that by "mispacks" it means he put the right parts in the carton, but forgot to wrap some of the parts in the required amount of bubble wrap, or maybe he writes the wrong part number on the part label, or forgets to use the anti-static bags on some of the parts. How do you practically and economically make that stuff foolproof? Remember, Joe has done this stuff practically forever with no errors, so it is not an obviously non-robust system.

How do you explain away the other examples I gave (the truck driver and the machinist) as always the fault of the system and create "foolproof" CA's by practical and economical means?

In your world, can any car wreck EVER be the fault of a driver? Please explain.

IMHO it is you who are oversimplifying the CA process by rubber-stamping every failure as a system failure. For what it is worth, it looks to me like the vast majority of the poll respondents do not agree with your analysis, either.

Nuthin personal.
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 06:21 AM. All times are GMT -4.
Your time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.


 
 


NOTE: This forum uses "Cookies" - A Peachfarm Internet Property