No In-process or first piece inspection - Final Inspection ONLY! Am I wrong?

Al Rosen

Staff member
Super Moderator
#21
pabloquintana said:
2. Majority of defects found can be traced to an operator which didn't look at the problem when it was in his hands, because he was only worried about meeting the production target for that day.
If you want it bad, you get it bad!
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
Admin
#22
JSW05 said:
Ah, the proverbial smoking gun. So you're saying that operators are faced with a choice between achieving a production target or dealing with a defective product. Your solution is to see if you can hit the production workers over the head harder for the defect than they are being hit for not making the production quota. Who can make them bleed the most?

[/b]

You haven't offered any evidence yet that "they" aren't fully prepared to take responsibility. Do you think that giving them conflicting priorities might be part of the problem?
Bravo Jim. Well said.:applause:
Pablo, you use the word carelessness. Maybe, just maybe, your operators do not really care because the working environment makes them not to care. I have never been in Honduras, but I have audited extensively around Latin America. Most plants that I have audited really do not foster an environment that workers feel particularly good about it. Because high turnover is the norm, neither organizations feel that they need the workers, nor the workers feel that they need the organization, since they can find another job paying the same "salary" without much effort.
Have you tried motivation rather than punishment? The carrot versus the stick some times work better. Much better. Sometimes.
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#23
Sidney Vianna said:
Bravo Jim. Well said.:applause:
Pablo, you use the word carelessness. Maybe, just maybe, your operators do not really care because the working environment makes them not to care. I have never been in Honduras, but I have audited extensively around Latin America. Most plants that I have audited really do not foster an environment that workers feel particularly good about it. Because high turnover is the norm, neither organizations feel that they need the workers, nor the workers feel that they need the organization, since they can find another job paying the same "salary" without much effort.
Have you tried motivation rather than punishment? The carrot versus the stick some times work better. Much better. Sometimes.
In fairness to pabloquintana, I think there are probably cultural considerations at work that make things more difficult in Honduras than they might be here. The fact that the law allows for unpaid overtime indicates a lack of enlightenment that will be difficult to overcome. Nonetheless, just because draconian laws exist doesn't mean that they have to be taken advantage of. It seems pretty clear that no matter what country you're in, if workers are given conflicting priorities, they'll always choose the one that tends to benefit them the most (or cause the least amount of pain).
 
B

bmccabe - 2006

#24
Well, I guess whatever’s done will pass the cost benefit analysis first.

You could Poka Yoke the process, and add robot assembly systems.

Cost: One time fee: $250,000 [and up] per system.

Or, you could do as you suggest, and stop paying your people OT.

Cost savings: From what I’ve read, 5 hours OT for your average Honduran worker comes to, what, about $.50 per week.

Well – That settles that!

In the US, $$$$ is everything. Example: You produce and sell milk. To increase productivity, stop feeding the cows. Less money spent on food = cost savings = more money for you – See how it works.

I don’t know if you’ve seen the news lately, GM recently made a quite similar decision – You’re on the right track, and if things don’t work out there, we’ve got a top spot for you in the US.
 
P

pabloquintana

#25
JSW05 said:
...if workers are given conflicting priorities, they'll always choose the one that tends to benefit them the most...
You are assuming they have two choices:

Do I let this defective product follow downstream and meet my schedule with bad quality or stop here and separate them and have better quality but do not meet my schedule?

Right?

But you have to take into account they are not being demanded a production rate which cannot be achieved even having time to inspect their own work.

Cycle times are calculated having in mind they will have to check for defects caused by them or coming from upstream.

So at the end their choices become:

Do I let this defective product follow downstream and meet my schedule and have spare time to slow down when I want to chat with my neighbour or stop here and call my supervisor to help me fix the problem eventhough I'll have to focus more to meet my schedule?

I believe they've chosen the first option until now.

Returned defective material meant to them MORE HOURS = MORE MONEY. Is that fair?

What do you think now?

Pablo :truce:
 
P

pabloquintana

#26
Sidney Vianna said:
...maybe, your operators do not really care because the working environment makes them not to care.

...neither organizations feel that they need the workers, nor the workers feel that they need the organization...
You are so, but so RIGHT! :agree1:

That is what is happenning. Something I would like to work and fix, although is not directly my responsibility. That has to do with Organizational Environment (not sure if that's the correct word in english). Something Human Resources should be worried about.

But just take a guess who's responsibility is that HR is not doing nothing regarding that: OUR CORPORATE, WHICH HAPPENS TO BE A US COMPANY!

That means you americans believe you are doing our people a favor. And our people believe they are doing the company a favor because they can leave today and have a job tomorrow just around the corner. NOT A TINY BIT OF OWNERSHIP OR BELONGING! :mg:

In the midst of that conflict, us Honduran managers need to find a way to serve both. Have the company reward people in their good outcome and have people believe their job is important but if they do not follow rules they will be demanded answers. :whip:

Things are a bit different around here.

Pablo :bigwave:
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#27
pabloquintana said:
You are assuming they have two choices:

Do I let this defective product follow downstream and meet my schedule with bad quality or stop here and separate them and have better quality but do not meet my schedule?

Right?
Yes, that was my assumption, because it was the dichotomy that you presented.


pabloquintana said:
So at the end their choices become:

Do I let this defective product follow downstream and meet my schedule and have spare time to slow down when I want to chat with my neighbour or stop here and call my supervisor to help me fix the problem eventhough I'll have to focus more to meet my schedule?
Which is different from what you originally posted. With each new post, you supply new information that might have a bearing on the responses you get.

pabloquintana said:
Returned defective material meant to them MORE HOURS = MORE MONEY. Is that fair?
It appears now that you're saying that the production workers are "gaming" the system in order to work more hours and make more money.

pabloquintana said:
What do you think now?
I think the workers probably had nothing to do with the design of the system they're allegedly trying to milk. It looks more and more like you're dealing with symptoms of bad management practices, and it's every man for himself on the production floor. The punitive measures you're promoting might provide some temporary relief, but they won't solve the problem.
 
J

Jim Howe

#28
Honduras law

pabloquintana said:
Well, here in Honduras the law states that if an employee caused a failure because of carelessness he must fix the problem and the company is not liable for his salary during that time.

Believe me, is working.

Pablo
I am always amazed at the different laws around the world. I am not at all opposed to the worker who created the problem to correct the problem. As an old tirebuilder (piece work) I can testify that if i built them wrong I had to fix them but it was not on overtime. That having been said, if I were repairing tires, I wasn't building any new ones and I was only paid for the new ones I built and that was URW union work rules circa 1980.
 

Jen Kirley

Quality and Auditing Expert
Staff member
Admin
#29
First, thank you for providing some more details about the situation.

Some people are easier to manage than others, it's true. Almost all of us have certain factors that motivate us the most...we vary greatly: more so when we are secure and less so when we struggle to survive. In general, money motivates more when pay is very low.

I feel okay with motivating via money when the person being motivated truly is in control. We are very seldom in control of all the things that contribute to our work, and those things are very often the types that HR can't touch.

I also understand motivation by consequence better than I did before teaching middle schoolers these past two years. I can tell you truly that some people wait until they can feel the consequence before they will act, even in the manner they knew all along was right. Some of my students have required detentions before they would modify behavior, even after warnings. Sometimes this pattern continues into adulthood.

So I usually advise that one behavioral modification approach will not work to solve problems when people's motivations differ.

Let's see...is there no consequence if they do not meet the schedule? Do the assemblers get paid by the piece?

Do certain workers perform the majority of the problems?

I was struck by your claim that Human Resources should be worried about Organizational Environment. What could HR do to improve the way people interact with their processes?

Did having a nice lunch to celebrate an error-free period result in a continued error-free period, or even have a noticeable positive effect? Did it have a positive effect on the more problematic workers?

Can your people be drawn into the behavior modification process through peer pressure? What if you reward according to teams that show an acceptable rate of good quality production? Would the workers pressure each other to stay on task if it meant everyone is linked to everyone's performance?

If the inspection staff is reduced and time-costly problems are resolved, the company would make more money, right? Would the company agree to motivate through rewarding groups with bonuses and higher salaries? Would this also help keep workers from going around the corner? I have posted a free cost of quality calculator in this thread: http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=13438&page=2

I understand your disapproval of the U.S. corporation running that company as though we are doing you some kind of favor, when in fact there could be a definite patriarchal, authoritative atmosphere that workers find quite depressing. It's not the sort of management style that enjoys high productivity, but a relaxed environment is also not right for all types of people.

Here in Maine, such patriarchal organizations have existed for a long time. Past generations went to their work with stoic, do-well attitudes because they had families to raise and they had few choices. Now that the new generation's mood is "I'll just go down the street and see if it's any better" the businesses generally cry, "The work ethic is dead." Perhaps you are experiencing the same problem.

Before latching onto a unilateral plan for approaching this behavior, if people are simply making decisions to perform in spite of every other need being met by management, I urge you to think deeply about what motivates your people best. It may not be the same thing across the groups, so it may be best to apply a number of approaches as appropriate--but please be sensitive for both positive and negative results!
 
P

pabloquintana

#30
Jennifer Kirley said:
1. Is there no consequence if they do not meet the schedule? Do the assemblers get paid by the piece?
Nop. There is a standard hourly rate no matter what they produce.
I've asked production manager to look into paying by production but seems there was a time they did it and bad experiences still live in his mind. :bonk:

Jennifer Kirley said:
Do certain workers perform the majority of the problems?
We have found two sources that remain as the biggest ones. The others have been disappearing.

Jennifer Kirley said:
What could HR do to improve the way people interact with their processes?
Some kind of plan to facilitate interpersonal relationships between management and workers, training (other than technical), social events to improve team work, etc.

Jennifer Kirley said:
Did having a nice lunch to celebrate an error-free period result in a continued error-free period, or even have a noticeable positive effect? Did it have a positive effect on the more problematic workers?
They liked it but they are waiting for more "tangible" rewards = MONEY. :frust:

People is really involved in eliminating defects and their sources.

Jennifer Kirley said:
Can your people be drawn into the behavior modification process through peer pressure? What if you reward according to teams that show an acceptable rate of good quality production? Would the workers pressure each other to stay on task if it meant everyone is linked to everyone's performance?
Yep. That is the idea. Put a prize for the month and have the better team win it.

Thanks for your thoughtful comments. :agree1:

Pablo
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S Improving Quality inspection gate in one piece flow manufacturing process Manufacturing and Related Processes 0
J AS9100D Sections related to 1st Piece and In-Process Inspection Manufacturing and Related Processes 15
I First Piece Inspection classified as a Key Process Input FMEA and Control Plans 2
J Software or template to manage first piece, in process and final inspection reports Software Quality Assurance 2
S "X-MR charts do not separate piece-to-piece repeatability of the process" Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 2
S Setting up the process - First piece inspections Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 3
J Process Capability Sheet for a short term 30 piece study needed Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 1
B Should 1st Piece Process be a Control or a Line Item in the Control Plan FMEA and Control Plans 10
J Need Help with FPY Data in Assembly Process Manufacturing and Related Processes 7
A When someone refuses to follow a process.... Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 21
E Software maintenance Process Software maintenance Process to IEC 6204? IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 3
R AS5553 Clause 3.1.7 f - "Implement a returns process....." AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
normhowe "The Problem with Quality Management: Process orientation, controllability and zero-defect processes as modern myths" Book, Video, Blog and Web Site Reviews and Recommendations 2
Judy Abbott General temperature used in the blasting process and laser process Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
B SOP for CNC turret punching machine for sheet metal process Manufacturing and Related Processes 0
A API Monogram audit review process Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 4
R AS9102 FAI Change in Material / Process Supplier AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 4
A Process mapping Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 1
R MDEL Process Canada Medical Device Regulations 4
optomist1 Rates Daily or Hourly Process Improvement Training Consultants and Consulting 2
S Manufacturing Process FDA FOIA Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 3
S Manufacturing Process FDA FOIA US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 4
B Toyota PPAP Process - Three Questions APQP and PPAP 3
R Changes vs CMO - How can we simplify this process? Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 3
A Ethics Committee Review Process for IVD Products EU Medical Device Regulations 2
V Laser Welding Process - Impact on Electrical Properties Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards 4
Q Process: Knowledge Section 7.1.6 of ISO 9001:2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
L Documented Information in Internal Audits Process (9.2) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
A Sampling plan for in-process QC (medical devices) Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 13
R MRB (Material Review Board) Process using MS Sharepoint or MS Teams Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
M Clinical Benefit of device that only aids in a process for managing or treating disease EU Medical Device Regulations 2
C In-process inspection - Tooling and assembly lines for automotive companies AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 6
M Efficacy of an IT process after a cyber attack ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
N Sterilization Protocol Change in Validation Process and further impacts ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
N Riveting - special process Manufacturing and Related Processes 11
M Material incoming to the production process reflected in PFMEA FMEA and Control Plans 9
A API Spec Q1 Purchasing Process - Supplier Reevaluation based on Supplier Risks 5.6.1.4 Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 17
B Handling lower detection limits for SPC and process performance Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 1
D Measurables for Plastic Injection molding process Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
S Cleaning process center change ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
Z Rapid audit template for plastic parts manufacturing process Manufacturing and Related Processes 12
R Inspection and Work order process Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 9
T ISO 13485:2016 Clauses related to process matrix ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
A How to reduce the process SPC monitoring Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 3
John Predmore Configuration Management as a process instead of a procedure AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 10
R PCBA process validation Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 2
U Internal Auditor not trained but done Audit for some process Nonconformance and Corrective Action 5
B Two excellent examples of process capability analysis from Quality Magazine Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 5
D ECO (Engineering Change Order) process questions ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
S Sterilization validation after changing sterilization process provider Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 3

Similar threads

Top Bottom