Did it? Using the factual approach to decision making principle, I wish we had data to show one way or the other.
Did quality stop improving after 2004? Why?
The comment was general and anecdotal, for the most part.
However, it is primarily borne out by the data I review regularly at about 50 clients I audit. I essentially am assigned to audit the same clients time and again. Significant improvements in that time. Most are currently at 0 -10 ppm. Some at 50 or less. Fewer than 5 are at more than 100 ppm, and even they have shown massive improvements from where they were. This has been the case for some years now. Almost all have shown significant improvement and robustness.
That is pretty reliable data, though obviously I am not permitted to show the objective evidence for obvious reasons.
I also remember around 2004 reading a comment by a fairly highly placed executive at GM, that 78% of the GM suppliers at the time were at or near 0 ppm. The quality problems were essentially caused by 22% of their suppliers (and probably a few by the GM lines themselves). I think I can safely assert, that was definitely not the state the industry was in back in 1994 (when ISO began to make inroads in the US), let alone 1984.
I'm sure Toyota and Honda suppliers are performing just as well.
The 2004 date was not particularly significant, though around that time, the Big 3 got much pushier and uglier with their suppliers. They began complaining about even irrelevant things, even though their standards were based on 25 ppm. I noticed an uptick in my clients in a 3-5 ppm range, where many had been holding 0 ppm before that.
That's all I've got. There are solid data in there, but not as empirical as some of you would like. On the other hand, I offered some solid data some time ago, as a challenge to the Cove, and not a single person took up the challenge to compare data.
When I make statements here that this stuff CAN work, it is not based on me wishing it would work. I have SEEN it work for many companies over the years. I press my clients to make it work. Somewhere along the line, I understood that was the role of an auditor. Those that want to play games do NOT stay in my client roster.
Further, many of you here on the Cove have seen it work at your companies. Let's not forget the many posters who indicate good results. I would suggest the crowd probably falls about 50/50. Half have seen very good results at their companies, and half are still focused on how they can get around the system. Remember, if you put in the effort, you deserve good results.
I think there is more than enough data, if one wants to see it. If it didn't work, I'd get out of the business. But, since I know it works, it's a blast!
