New QA Manager - Top Management is Divided - Between a rock and a hard place

[Nette]

Only 3 weeks - that makes me sound pathetic that I'm already fed up.

I have been in quality for 8 years now. I originally worked in engineering and they offered to train me up as a Quality Engineer because they thought I had suitable qualities (eg I'm like a dog with a bone and can stand up for myself). I moved over to SQA 2 years ago and was given the QM job 3 weeks ago.

I do enjoy working in quality. I think its now that I'm getting dragged into office politics (believe it or not I have managed to aviod them on the whole up to now) that I'm getting frustrated.

Also I'm a firm believer that if you are going to do something do it properly.

 

[Coury Ferguson]

Only 3 weeks - that makes me sound pathetic that I'm already fed up.

I have been in quality for 8 years now. I originally worked in engineering and they offered to train me up as a Quality Engineer because they thought I had suitable qualities (eg I'm like a dog with a bone and can stand up for myself). I moved over to SQA 2 years ago and was given the QM job 3 weeks ago.

I do enjoy working in quality. I think its now that I'm getting dragged into office politics (believe it or not I have managed to aviod them on the whole up to now) that I'm getting frustrated.

Also I'm a firm believer that if you are going to do something do it properly.

You are still young in the QAM position. Yes, Engineering doesn't involve too much "office politics."

I have been a QAM 20+ years, and as you begin the trek into the QAM arena, there are a lot of "Office Politics" that you deal with on a daily basis. But, don't let them get you down. They will (after a few years) run off of you like rain on your windshield. Just learn to be tactful and diplomatic.

 

[Nette]

Tact and diplomacy will become my middle names.

Thank you so much for your words of encouragement. I guess I am just in an adjustment period and getting use to being management.

 

[just67horns]

Now guess what!
During an internal audit we found that the "TS16949 Certified" Logo is already on our catalogs (for 3 months!) and Salesmans business cards. Did we kill ourselves?
What is an ethical Quality manager supposed to do?

If found, will this kill our audit chances?

 

[RoxaneB]

If you're not registered to it and they're using it, it's a finding (external doc control). Suggest you document it as a finding before your external auditor does. In my experience, if the internal audit has captured it, the external auditor won't write it up.

 

[Jen Kirley]

Good advice from RCBeyette.

Only 3 weeks - that makes me sound pathetic that I'm already fed up.

I have been in quality for 8 years now. I originally worked in engineering and they offered to train me up as a Quality Engineer because they thought I had suitable qualities (eg I'm like a dog with a bone and can stand up for myself). I moved over to SQA 2 years ago and was given the QM job 3 weeks ago....

The thing to keep in mind is that minds are changed slowly; hearts are not won all at once. Perseverence pays, and politics of course help. Easy does it.

The next thing to remember is to keep it plain you understand your primary mission is to the firm's productivity and market share. Productivity as impact on profits is easier to show than an impact on sales, but both can be done.

It's not too soon to start thinking in constant terms of connecting these dots to your relentless efforts toward doing things right the first time, every time. In this thread I have attached a quality cost calculator that may help you link causes to effects in terms of money, a language that you must learn to speak fluently. See this discussion thread: QA Inspection Gate - QA caught defect in the buy-off stage?

You can do it.

I hope this helps!

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Only 3 weeks - that makes me sound pathetic that I'm already fed up.

Sorry, but I couldn't resist.

 

[Nette]

Sidney

Very funny! It does make me sound bad but in my defense I have worked for the company for just over 10 years.

Jennifer

Thank you for the cost of quality information. I'll be using that one.

 

[ElmerP]

Good day to all of you, this is my first post... pls, I ask for your patience.

I have a similar problem as discussed, our current TS project as far as I know, was mandated by our head office way back 2003. They kept on pushing us until finally, the project kicked off May of 2005. Our status now - we still have to conduct our first IQA.

I too like the others, don’t seem to see management’s full support even if at present it is no longer a mandate from the head office but a requirement from our customers, especially from our AGM. As a result, domino effect – the local managers down to the leaders are also showing the “I’m just waiting for instruction from my boss” thing. Of course not all are doing this, but generally we can say that since the AGM is showing little to no interest, the locals are also not pushing the responsible people. I seem to understand that this project is not their least priority but not their first either.

I was told one time by the AGM that TS is “for business purposes only, all we need is the certificate”. He even boasted that from where he came from, companies only submit the needed documentation, finish – CERTIFIED. So frustrating!!! I was about to ask him which one he wants, to be certified or to be CERTIPAID!!!

Anyway so much for the whining (& I’m sorry), for some reason positive or negative I was transferred to this position & by all means I have to do this job. I plan to have the certification audit come December of this year & I need all your help. BTW I assumed this position December of last year & I was able to work full time only this June. The previous coordinator or QMR was our AGM himself.

These are 2 of my problems:

1. We are producing assembled plastic parts for automotive vehicles. We produce the component parts thru injection molding & then assemble them to the final product required by our customer. From the very start, up to the present, we have been doing adjustments to the component parts without customers consent neither approval as long as the final product meets the same customer requirement. This happens when we encounter problems or if the mold die gets older resulting to not meeting the prescribed requirement (usually function).

For all I know, APQP requires us to notify or ask approval from the customer before implementation, but our AGM has instructed me that we will do the same & told me that meeting the TS requirement is my problem .

OK, I have to do something , so in order to pass the certification, my plan is to hide all component parts drawing & show only the assembly with an explanation to the auditor that our customer gave us the assembly drawings & from that all the component parts was developed by our sister company in another country. The dies were then sent here for us to produce & do the assembly. So basically, in the absence of the component drawings from the customer, we are free to do as we wish to the component parts as long as we satisfy all the requirements to the final product (fit, function, etc). Question, is this acceptable ? Pls consider that asking for a waiver from our customer would be impossible.

2. Our AGM has a lot of advisers, same nationality as him. Now with the certification schedule a couple of months away, our AGM wants to exclude the advisers from the audit. Practically I would prefer these people excluded, but how can I do that when their signatures appears to a lot of documents. It is ok if they sign to confirm or just to note the document but sometimes it is them who makes the decision. If luckily during the audit the document that showed their judgment would be one of the samples, & the local in-charge could not explain when asked, for sure we have to drag them in order to explain. – any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you very much

 

[Wes Bucey]

Wow!

You have my sympathy!

I almost don't know where to begin to help you! If ever a guy were caught beween a rock and a hard place, you are the poster child!

Let's just look at the two problems you think you have

These are 2 of my problems:

1. We are producing assembled plastic parts for automotive vehicles. We produce the component parts thru injection molding & then assemble them to the final product required by our customer. From the very start, up to the present, we have been doing adjustments to the component parts without customers consent neither approval as long as the final product meets the same customer requirement. This happens when we encounter problems or if the mold die gets older resulting to not meeting the prescribed requirement (usually function).

For all I know, APQP requires us to notify or ask approval from the customer before implementation, but our AGM has instructed me that we will do the same & told me that meeting the TS requirement is my problem .

OK, I have to do something , so in order to pass the certification, my plan is to hide all component parts drawing & show only the assembly with an explanation to the auditor that our customer gave us the assembly drawings & from that all the component parts was developed by our sister company in another country. The dies were then sent here for us to produce & do the assembly. So basically, in the absence of the component drawings from the customer, we are free to do as we wish to the component parts as long as we satisfy all the requirements to the final product (fit, function, etc). Question, is this acceptable ? Pls consider that asking for a waiver from our customer would be impossible.

2. Our AGM has a lot of advisers, same nationality as him. Now with the certification schedule a couple of months away, our AGM wants to exclude the advisers from the audit. Practically I would prefer these people excluded, but how can I do that when their signatures appears to a lot of documents. It is ok if they sign to confirm or just to note the document but sometimes it is them who makes the decision. If luckily during the audit the document that showed their judgment would be one of the samples, & the local in-charge could not explain when asked, for sure we have to drag them in order to explain. – any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you very much 1 Week Ago 05:5

Number 2 first. It makes no difference if the guy who signed the document is still employed or even alive! The document speaks for itself. The question here should be "How can I assure an employee using a document to do a job understands what he is supposd to do in the next couple of months?" -This is a training issue.

Problem 1 is really dangerous, both for you, personally, and for your organization. I have a hunch a case could be made to the customer to sign off on the assembly as built as long as the assembly has form, fit, and function to meet its requirements. This is a delicate, very political issue for both customer and supplier and you will never get the opportunity to try to negotiate the deal, given the current mind set of your AGM, and, presumably, his bosses above him.

This would be a wonderful case study for me (Wes Bucey offers service as "Strategy Advisor" - Seeking Case Studies for Book), but I doubt your top bosses would hire me.