H.R. (Human Resources) responsibilities in TS16949

[Macjaney]

I'm an H.R.Manager and our company is in the process of converting from QS9000 to TS16949. I have been struggling so much with how to satisfy all the TS needs without causing a riot with my production supervisors. They already have so much paperwork to complete, they don't want more. And I've been trying to figure out a way to make the system riendly enough that they will actually DO it, because if it's too much work for them I'll be fighting them every step of the way to get stuff done. I wondered if any other H.R. people could share their ideas and experiences with me. Thanks,

 

[D.Scott]

Welcome, Macjaney, to the world of posting.

I am not really sure which TS requirements are causing the problem. There is very little that wasn't done in QS. Could you be more specific on the areas? I am sure, if we take some specific issues, we can offer whatever help you are looking for.

Dave

 

[Macjaney]

H.R. Responsibilities in TS

Hi Dave, thanks for your response. I guess the big issue with us is proving competency. The production supervisors and I feel that our annual appraisals are pretty comprehensive and cover all areas of the job which reflect competency but our QA people feel we need more than that. Here is what we have said in our Procedure:

"Personnel performing work affecting product quality shall be competent on the basis of appropriate education, training, skills and experience. All Job Descriptions make clear what Skills and Education are required to be qualified to perform a job. Duties/Responsibilities of the job are listed in detail and any Ongoing Training that may be required to ensure continued competence is also detailed on the job description. Training requirements shall be identified by the department manager or supervisor from work instructions, quality plans, non-conformances, on-the-job evaluation and from any plans to introduce new technology, equipment and/or operations. Once a year all Supervisors and Managers will complete an Employee Performance Evaluation Form (Form QF-086) for each employee according to the details of the job description and within the 5 categories specified on the Evaluation form. These areas are: Safety, Housekeeping, Productivity/Performance, Co-operation and Attendance/Timekeeping. If the Supervisor/Manager feels that the employee has performed Satisfactorily in all these areas then the employee will be deemed to be Competent in their position. If there are areas of the employee’s performance that are deemed Unsatisfactory, a plan will be outlined on the Evaluation, including a timeline and measureables, with which the employee’s overall competency should be returned to a satisfactory level. If the result is not reached within the given timeline, further measures will be taken up to and including dismissal. "

I feel that pretty much covers what we need but our Quality Manager wants more. I'm not sure what else we can do.....that's is my dilemma.

Thanks,

Jane

 

[antoine.dias]

Competences

We drew up a matrix in every department with a list of all activities from that dept.
For each function we defined the required competence for each of the activities.
Then the responsibles ( in many cases together with the functionholder - not mandatory but preferred ) filled in the achieved competence against the required.

A difference between the achieved and the required competence ( in the negative sence ) resulted in a training need which was input for the training plan.

I've attached an example from the quality dept.

Best regards,

Antoine

 

[Macjaney]

Thanks for the info!! What do the Titles mean "Comp. need finction Q.M." vs. "Comp. Need Function testing"?

Jane

 

[antoine.dias]

Competence matrix

The activities in quality dept. are divided into two groups.
a) function " Quality management " - QM
b) function " Testing "

The 2 columns you mention are the competence needs for those 2 functions in relation to all activities in the dept ( left column )

Then there are two names of the functionholders for each of the functions.
In these columns you can find the achieved competence of the persons on top.

Best regards,

Antoine

 

[Shaun Daly]

We knocked up Matrix(s) listing the core skills required.

Then for each Operator, we evaluated them on each core skill, either by visual appraisal or by a question & answer session.

It created a little pile of A4 pages for each operator, but we are now about 8 months in to it and it is paying benefits.

In fact the operators are now asking the Trainers when they are going to be evaluated.

 

[jmurph01]

Wow Shaun! That looks like it took a lot of time and thought to develop. I think it is the best example of a training matrix i have seen and I can say it is deffinately better than what my company is doing. thanks for posting it.

 

[Baldrick]

Aaaah - but do you actually MEASURE competency?

I agree with the positive comments on the matrix sample posted by Antoine, but I have a few questions:

1. You've listed about 50-odd tasks that are considered important enough to include in your competency assessment. But does someone actually measure the competency of the staff in each of these areas?

2. If so, how? It looks like it would take a long time (50 tasks, 4 people each). If you DO do it well, your answer to this question could help a lot of people on the Cove, me included.

Remember, the key difference in ISO2k and TS compared to previous standards is that competency must be measured.

Competency is the ability to demonstrate being able to perform a given task to achieve the required results. It does NOT mean knowing about something, being experienced at something, having a qualification in something, or having been trained in something. All of those things, if done properly, CAN HELP LEAD TO COMPETENCY. But they are not, in themselves, competency.

Many companies cite their annual appraisal system as being where they determine competency - but under ISO/TS, and common sense if you ask me, competency has to be established by measurement (i.e. comparing actual performance against some established criteria).

Competency, therefore, cannot usually be determined by a manager in an appraisal interview, and it is certainly not demonstrated by proving that you've been on a course.

From my experience, this is an area in TS which many people are struggling to get their heads around. Most people in HR departments I have audited still tend to believe that if someone has been sent on a course, then the company has done all it needs to do.

Sadly, it appears that many registrars are still looking no further than training - in other words, they're still auditing to ISO9000:1994 or equivalent. This is making it hard to convince HR that they have to do anything more.

Any comments?