Operationalizing Quality Checks

phmoe13

Registered
Hello - My current organization is discussing operationalizing all quality checks, meaning the QA team will no longer do any CCP checks and these will all be left to the ops/production team to complete and file. There will no longer be a QA present on the floor or on the lines.

Any insight to this? The other two major organizations I worked for, considered anything similar to this a major conflict of interest. I thought this was the reason why in most companies, quality was a corporate hire and not a part of the FC hiring structure?

How does this work in an Audit if ops/production is responsibility for the quality checks?

Thanks ahead of time!
 

John Predmore

Trusted Information Resource
I do not know what CCP checks are.

In my opinion, making operations personnel responsible for Quality (the quality of their direct work output, as well as checking quality of inputs to their work station) is consistent with modern quality philosophy. This is considered an improvement over a separate Inspection work function, in general.

When you ask in the context of an audit, there is a principle in auditing that no one should audit their own work. With this distinction, auditing is an independent verification of the first stated principle, that a worker is primarily responsible for the quality of his own work product.
 

Scanton

Quite Involved in Discussions
When GE (General Electric) took over the lighting manufacturer I worked for, this is exactly what they did, it took around 9 to 12 months to roll out, and it worked very well.

Of course, they didn’t take any half measures with the training, and the quality of the reference documentation for the new people doing the checks was second to none.

These newly promoted people gained the title of “Production Technician” because they now additionally did something technical, and yes they did get paid a little more for doing this.

There are negatives to not having an independent team of people doing the checks, however there are also benefits.

As long as the transition is done professionally, is well thought out and not a half measure to quickly lower the headcount, it can work.
 

Golfman25

Trusted Information Resource
My own take is the development of "independent" quality departments to do checks and such is part of quality's overall acceptance problem. It creates Fiefdoms and finger pointing. If quality is "everyone's job" then make it everyone's job. As long as your performance measurements include returned parts, the operations people will make sure the quality is there (i.e.; no advantage to shipping substandard parts).
 

FRA 2 FDA

Involved In Discussions
We do "quality spot checks"- essentially things that we have determined we need to check up on to see if they are happening as we expect them to. It is written into our quality auditing procedure. The checks that the ops/production manager has decided are important for her to do she either does or has one of her production people do. This has worked very well for us. The checks are performed because we actually care that things are running the way we expect and there is no worry of sweeping anything under the rug. Then in addition, we do internal audits which are of course much more involved and are carried out by an auditor from a different department so we have independent oversight there.
 
Top Bottom