How about TOP LEVEL management holding open meetings with floor personnel - EXPOUNDING that any part showing questionable quality - down to even one part should not reach the customer....
2 days Time passes - the same TOP LEVEL manager - deciding that 50 parts found by floor personnel as visually/obvisouly defective must be shipped - reasoning "They are too expensive to call nonconforming"
Horror stories - How about a TOP Level manager - DIRECTING the customer not be told of poor quality which "Could involve life threatning details - even after it is proven internally a major error has been committed as far back as contract review? -
Common Sense. I hate the term. For me, it's usually against me when I'm trying to comply with the wording of the standard. Here goes the old age creeping in. "What's one man's (I'll add woman's) Goose is another person's Gander. Boy is that heavy?
A company I once worked for had product that was receiving a large number of customer complaints in regards to a dimensional characteristic. In response, the engineers and quality people researched what the dimensional spec should beto eliminate this cause of customer dissatisfaction. Inspection gaging was modified to inspect for this new specification. Less than one week after implementing the new gaging, the plant manager and the engineering manager dictated that the old specification be reinstated due to a 30% scrap rate in manufacturing.
It still makes no sense to me that they would change the specification to meet a process instead of changing the process to meet a specification.
This same company would also wait until a gage was machined and inspected to find out what it measured before they would assign nominal dimensions with acceptable tolerances.