Search the Elsmar Cove!
**Search ALL of Elsmar.com** with DuckDuckGo including content not in the forum - Search results with No ads.

Deming's Eleventh Point and AS9101D are Incompatible

Are Deming's 11th point and AS9101D incompatible?

  • Yes, they are incompatible

    Votes: 1 20.0%
  • No, they are compatible

    Votes: 3 60.0%
  • It will depend on the auditor

    Votes: 1 20.0%

  • Total voters
    5
  • Poll closed .

WCHorn

Rubber, Too Glamorous?
Trusted
#1
Eliminate management by objectives. Attached is an article from the public domain published in Quality Digest today. I really liked this article (as you can see by the comments I included).

It got me to thinking about AS9101D and it's new Process Effectiveness Assessment Report (PEAR). As DNV Certification said in a recent customer communcation, there will be a "need for organizations to establish goals/objectives/metrics for all identified high-level process that are part of the Quality Management System."

I would welcome comments from Cov'rs to my conclusion that Deming's Eleventh Point and AS9101D are incompatible.
 

Attachments

Stijloor

Staff member
Super Moderator
#2
Eliminate management by objectives. Attached is an article from the public domain published in Quality Digest today. I really liked this article (as you can see by the comments I included).

It got me to thinking about AS9101D and it's new Process Effectiveness Assessment Report (PEAR). As DNV Certification said in a recent customer communication, there will be a "need for organizations to establish goals/objectives/metrics for all identified high-level process that are part of the Quality Management System."

I would welcome comments from Cov'rs to my conclusion that Deming's Eleventh Point and AS9101D are incompatible.
For a meaningful discussion, it may be helpful to study Dr. Deming's Point 11 first.

It is also one of his most controversial.

Stijloor.
 
B

Bill Pflanz

#3
Deming never had any problem with setting goals in business or life. His primary concern was setting targets and expecting different results when the process was not capable. The workers were expected to meet the targets when the only way there could be improvement was to change the process. Since management has the authority and responsibility to change processes, the targets were of no value to the workers.

Bill Pflanz
 

Stijloor

Staff member
Super Moderator
#4
Deming never had any problem with setting goals in business or life. His primary concern was setting targets and expecting different results when the process was not capable. The workers were expected to meet the targets when the only way there could be improvement was to change the process. Since management has the authority and responsibility to change processes, the targets were of no value to the workers.

Bill Pflanz
To further illustrate Bill's post, look at Deming's Point #1:

Create constancy of purpose toward improvement of product and service, with the aim to become competitive and to stay in business and to provide jobs.
Deming starts by stating a clear goal/objective; he also uses the word "aim".

Stijloor.
 

Doug

Life Balance
#5
Deming never had any problem with setting goals in business or life. His primary concern was setting targets and expecting different results when the process was not capable. The workers were expected to meet the targets when the only way there could be improvement was to change the process. Since management has the authority and responsibility to change processes, the targets were of no value to the workers.

Bill Pflanz
On so many occasions I worked with organizations who set and held their employees to unrealistic goals because process capability was never considered and processes were not capable. This only led to anger and frustration within all levels of the organization.

Once process capability was understood, life changed (!) for the better.
 
S

Sorin

#6
Maybe it will be a good idea to put semantics aside and start with some real-life examples of "high-level process that are part of the Quality Management System."

Any takers?
 

WCHorn

Rubber, Too Glamorous?
Trusted
#7
Maybe it will be a good idea to put semantics aside and start with some real-life examples of "high-level process that are part of the Quality Management System."

Any takers?
Let's start with the four cited in the model in AS9100C, Figure 1: Management responsibility, Resource management, Product realization, and Measurement, analysis and improvement.

Umberto Tunesi, the author of the article I attached to my original post, cites that he "often finds that managers demand a level of performance that far exceeds their suppliers' capabilities." I would expand that to managers that demand a level of performance that far exceeds their own company's capabilities.

He further cites that the management by objectives approach " ... is based on objectives, indicators and metrics that are often not validated." I sometimes find myself in that situation; it's frustrating because I think I'm creating improvement when I'm actually doing more harm than good.

He concludes that processes should be adjusted "based on the requirements indicated by the data rather than specific, predetermined objectives." I believe this applies to sub processes and high-level processes.

Even after reading more about the 11th point (see Stijloor's recommendation in post 2), I remain curious to see how registrars will apply the requirement using the requirements of AS9101D, and if the result is a step backward rather than forward.
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
Admin
#8
I am not sure if AS9101D is the culprit here. Paragraph 8.2.3 of ISO 9001 requires the organization to apply suitable methods for monitoring, and where applicable, measurement of the QMS processes.

This is a requirement that exists since ISO 9001:2000 came about. So, organizations should have been doing that for a decade, now. In the absence of indicators, KPI's, metrics, how do you (the organization) comply with this requirement? Setting aside the external auditor for a minute, if you are implementing ISO 9001, AS9100, etc., how is that requirement accomplished INTERNALLY?
 
#9
I have always interpreted Deming's objection [;)] to "management by objectives" as being related to the lack of evaluation from time to time as to whether the objectives were, in fact, achievable, and whether the process should be improved or altered or whether the objective should be altered.

One of the lessons in "Red Beads" is that the managers blindly adhered to the objectives without ever evaluating whether the process should be altered to achieve the goal or whether the goal was even achievable under any circumstances.

The difficulty in trying to debate Deming on a point-by-point basis is that his theories were holistic, each dependent in some way on the others. In my business presentations for Quality and Business Strategy, I proclaim the underpinning for all of Deming's points is really his theory of the System of Profound Knowledge (SoPK), which can be interpreted to be reflected in the ISO and SAE emphasis on evaluating entire processes rather than isolated steps within a process. The "big picture" is achieved by using ALL the tools in the kit. (think of building a wood frame house: chainsaw to cut the tree, buzz saw or band saw to shape the lumber, circular saw to cut lumber to length, miter saw to finish corners on trim, sandpaper to finish - none of those "tools" could do the job alone.)
 

Jen Kirley

Quality and Auditing Expert
Staff member
Admin
#10
I am not sure if AS9101D is the culprit here. Paragraph 8.2.3 of ISO 9001 requires the organization to apply suitable methods for monitoring, and where applicable, measurement of the QMS processes.

This is a requirement that exists since ISO 9001:2000 came about. So, organizations should have been doing that for a decade, now. In the absence of indicators, KPI's, metrics, how do you (the organization) comply with this requirement? Setting aside the external auditor for a minute, if you are implementing ISO 9001, AS9100, etc., how is that requirement accomplished INTERNALLY?
I absolutely agree, as Deming was famous for asking "Where's the data?"

I think the concept of management by objective is very poorly understood or appreciated. There are forces at play that do not help. Let us consider the pressures of Wall Street for corporations, and nonprofits are expected to show they are fulfilling their mission. Neither can be done without objectives, but management by objectives is a whole different matter.

It is a "tail wags the dog" concept, whereas instead of understanding if we have succeeded, we are performing to achieve the numbers without regard to robust improvements. we can point to modern examples in Enron and its many recent relatives as examples.

Deming was about the customer, both internal and external. His message was about meeting the needs of both without sacrificing or compromising. Metrics don't stand in the way of doing that well; people do.
 
Top Bottom