How can I make the QMS (Quality Management System) interesting to employees?

[potdar]

Well Ann,

I havent been around for as long as you have been. Nor have I had the pleasure of meeting many of the veterans in person. But we do share one thing in common. I too have had my ears boxed, I too have felt like hanging up gloves for good, I too refused to do it, I have had nice discussions, disagreements, debates, fights, battles,......... I have reasons to believe that I even may be on the ignore list of some people.

But it is still an immensely enjoyable learning experience. One just has to learn to filter out what he wants. Takes time, but can be done.

Yes, I have also learnt, and continue to learn how to write and how not to write opinions, how languages used in different parts of the world may be differently understood elsewhere, what is considered politically correct and what is not....

Red Bead, hang on man! I did. And I dont repent it. I have since lost count of the number of people I have recommended the Cove to. I will once again recommend it to you if I still need to.

 

[Umang Vidyarthi]

The truth, of course, is that Sidney is also a member of our select group of
Cove posters who have grumpy hours, days, and even weeks. Jim and I are relative newbies compared to Sidney and Randy when it comes to Cove grumpiness, but I still have the idea we'd all get along pretty well in a saloon, swapping war stories far into the night.

To the topic:
If I were faced with this situation, I'd think in a Quality vein and ask myself, "What is the root case of the present sense of "non-interest?" At first guess, I'd probably look to see whether employees had a sense of empowerment that what they do makes a difference or whether they have an overwhelming sense of futility that nothing they do makes a difference and there is no appreciation for their efforts.

As some of us grumps comment, empowerment and appreciation have to come from the top or it isn't going to happen. Without empowerment and appreciation, it would be a rare individual, indeed, who could even "fake" interest, let alone have REAL interest.

Without finding and curing the root cause, efforts at "jollying" the troops will be as effective as bandaids on smallpox sores.

I agree with Bucey in toto.
Thnx for your appropriate analysys and advise
Umang

 

[QualityPhD]

Well Ann,

I have reasons to believe that I even may be on the ignore list of some people.

There is an "IGNORE" button here on the Cove????? Where is it.. where is it..

 

[potdar]

There is an "IGNORE" button here on the Cove????? Where is it.. where is it..

Thats one thing I wont sure help you with. You will have to look for it yourself. The less number of people know about it, the better

There are many people you feel like permanently ignoring, but nobody's on my list yet. They do contribute real gems time and again.

 

[arin_23]

Hi All,

It is very nice to see that against all odds we covites are so emotionally bonded with the forum. There goes a common saying that little amount of fight alwyas strengthen the bond.We all understand that.

Anyway if we can sucessfully convey this message to the covites...the original poster will be sucsessful in making her qms more understanding to the people.

Let us use these series of discussion as a classical case study.

Cheers

Arindam

 

[QAlady]

Dear All,

Thanks for all your ideas ... those are really helpful to me. As of now, I am doing great starting a new system in the company where I am currently working. I'm sure this thread had help lot of begginers like me.

Thanks and God bless to all.

 

[Jim Wynne]

I joined the company I am working with for almost two months ago. The company will under go its 3rd survillance audit this coming August. To my surprise, their present QMS is really rediculous that:

they do not have their monitoring of Quality Objectives,

most are not aware on their procedures,

their procedure where still on its initial issue which is year 2005

don't know how to conduct RCA

do not implement C/P action...etc.

Bottom line is they do not have interest on this system. The company is maintaining its certification because it is a requirement on the gobal office. I don't know how they maintain this certification despite of this situation.
Please help me how to make people be interested in QMS. Please help me! Thanks

An efficacious quality management system is not an entity that one likes or dislikes due to being "interesting" or not. It's a cultural phenomenon, and asking how to get people interested in the QMS is akin to asking how to get them interested in breathing. The QMS should be transparent and unobtrusive, and just the way things are done in your company. Until your company has adopted the "new philosophy," the problem will continue. If the QMS is a problem, it's not a QMS.

 

[pondo]

An efficacious quality management system is not an entity that one likes or dislikes due to being "interesting" or not. It's a cultural phenomenon, and asking how to get people interested in the QMS is akin to asking how to get them interested in breathing. The QMS should be transparent and unobtrusive, and just the way things are done in your company. Until your company has adopted the "new philosophy," the problem will continue. If the QMS is a problem, it's not a QMS.

This reminds me of trying to lose weight. No matter the reason for starting, what has always motivated me was seeing a change on the scale whenever I weigh myself. I want to see a positive change on the scale, and when I do I am that much more fired-up to make it happen the time after that.

 

[Alex Kobzar]

they do not have their monitoring of Quality Objectives,
most are not aware on their procedures,
their procedure where still on its initial issue which is year 2005
don't know how to conduct RCA
do not implement C/P action...etc.

1. Unless a Quality Manager has a support on that from the top management: I would not recommend a Quality Manager to make others monitoring any Quality Objectives.
It is a job of a Quality Manager to make sure that
- measurable qulity objectives are established for each COP;
- the objectives are (easily) measured (without any need in specific "monitoring" or other body movements); and
- the measured results are presented to Management Review.

2. Unless a Quality Manager has a support on that from the top management: I would not recommend a Quality Manager to ask others to know what is written in Quality Procedures in an extent exceeding that, which is specifically required by Scope of the QMS (e.g. ISO 9001 has some specific requirements in the chapter "6.2.2 Competence, awareness and training" and there may be more in other places).
I believe that Quality Procedures shall not be designed as work instructions; QP's are to formally assign responsibilities (who / what, but not "how"); that in order to be used as a reference for internal audits and as an aid to all Managers during external audits.
I believe that ideally QP's shall be written that way, which will help Company to demonstrate conformity of QMS to the requirements of it's Scope, when the QP's shall automatically support any good stuff, which would be done to support the purpose of the Company, that without the people not necessarily knowing what exactly is written in the QP's.
(Anyway: the QP's shall be signed/approved by relevant managers and other relevant people may also have a chance to get an expose to what is written in the QP during internal audits; also the QP's shall be easily acessible to relevant employees in order to support any intention they may ever have towards reading the documents.)

3. What's wrong with the year 2005?
Has Scope of the QMS been changed since then?
(If nothing changed; then why to touch the old yellow papers, which have worked well for already 3 years??: )

4. I guess that this is a job of a Quality Manager to promote and teach methods of Quality Engineering as applicable throughout a Company.

5. Not implementing CA may be a very bad thing.... what is the actual and/or anticipated loss of not implementing the action in terms of money value and of loss of reputation or in a bottom line of a "supplier scorecard"?
If such cost is none for the mentioned CA's: wipe the item actions outta the system (and/or change reference requirements as appropritae to eliminate any need in such action); if the cost is reasonable, then tell it to the top management and see what will then happen!: )