W
Hi All,
Thanks for the replies. Sorry I cannot work out how to attach more than one quotes but there are some good points and lots of help here. I didn't expect this much of a reply but I knew it was a debatable subject. Sorry I didn't reply sooner.
As I thought, I have answered the question already myself but I wanted to put it up here for confirmation and to get some other opinions going as it is not a clear yes / no answer.
You have all given me more awareness that its whatever the requirements of my business are that matters (which is cool, thanks). I knew there wasn't a requirement in the standard as to how much detail is required I just wanted to open the debate as to where we draw the line.
The example of the solder is what bought it to my attention, this is a real example. The example about the Turn on Computer was an exaggerated example. But there lies the debate I feel. Can we ever assume things in Quality? I would assume that a skilled electrical worker can carryout basic soldering work. I would also assume that someone applying for a position in an office would know the basics of how to use a computer. I agree that there will be a probationary period where you would perhaps find out if someone is not up to scratch but why let it get that far? Are we saying that we have to test everybody for their basic skills to ensure competence?
The reason why I feel we cannot assume is because in my company we do deal with a lot of temps and as you may have noticed I am based in China (originally UK) where we have a lot of skilled worker turn-around and not a lot of competence (this is not a generic China statement, just my experience). We therefore spend too much time on training and ensuring competence than normal. Another reason is that if we are sending this work out to a sub-contractor we should be able to assume that the supplier (if approved) have the ability to produce standard soldering. Or do we need to see evidence of each workers competence at a sub-contractor? How would we go about that?
Another thing is that if we send the work to a sub-contractor and he solders incorrectly or poorly how do I reject it back to them? Where is my evidence of our solder requirements?
These are some questions that probably do not apply to most businesses as you would have a robust hiring process. Its not there for me yet
The things I have learnt from this though is that –
Work Instructions and Job Descriptions go hand in hand – thanks adickerson – I never thought of it this way when writing a process or work instruction
Usually it is a 'trade off' between what abilities/competence people have and how much we need to write down. – colpart – this is the answer for me I feel. It is a trade off and in my situation the best solution (although over the top) should be to detail all requirements, even requirement that should be covered in the persons job description. This way we will have the documentation to train, follow, check and the evidence to reject against if not conforming.
When questioned about the ridiculousness of doing so, we were told the instruction needed to be able to be understood by the proverbial "man off the street" and that was the corporate standard. – rand T – I also had this in mind when producing documents – can someone directly take over this job if the current operator quits today. With the above case in mind though, we are assuming the replacement will also be a skilled electrical worker. So creating instructions for the “Man on the Street” is a bit too over the top.
Thanks again for all your replies, I have been looking around here for a while but never really got involved. Glad I did on this occasion.
Cheers
Wes
Thanks for the replies. Sorry I cannot work out how to attach more than one quotes but there are some good points and lots of help here. I didn't expect this much of a reply but I knew it was a debatable subject. Sorry I didn't reply sooner.
As I thought, I have answered the question already myself but I wanted to put it up here for confirmation and to get some other opinions going as it is not a clear yes / no answer.
You have all given me more awareness that its whatever the requirements of my business are that matters (which is cool, thanks). I knew there wasn't a requirement in the standard as to how much detail is required I just wanted to open the debate as to where we draw the line.
The example of the solder is what bought it to my attention, this is a real example. The example about the Turn on Computer was an exaggerated example. But there lies the debate I feel. Can we ever assume things in Quality? I would assume that a skilled electrical worker can carryout basic soldering work. I would also assume that someone applying for a position in an office would know the basics of how to use a computer. I agree that there will be a probationary period where you would perhaps find out if someone is not up to scratch but why let it get that far? Are we saying that we have to test everybody for their basic skills to ensure competence?
The reason why I feel we cannot assume is because in my company we do deal with a lot of temps and as you may have noticed I am based in China (originally UK) where we have a lot of skilled worker turn-around and not a lot of competence (this is not a generic China statement, just my experience). We therefore spend too much time on training and ensuring competence than normal. Another reason is that if we are sending this work out to a sub-contractor we should be able to assume that the supplier (if approved) have the ability to produce standard soldering. Or do we need to see evidence of each workers competence at a sub-contractor? How would we go about that?
Another thing is that if we send the work to a sub-contractor and he solders incorrectly or poorly how do I reject it back to them? Where is my evidence of our solder requirements?
These are some questions that probably do not apply to most businesses as you would have a robust hiring process. Its not there for me yet
The things I have learnt from this though is that –
Work Instructions and Job Descriptions go hand in hand – thanks adickerson – I never thought of it this way when writing a process or work instruction
Usually it is a 'trade off' between what abilities/competence people have and how much we need to write down. – colpart – this is the answer for me I feel. It is a trade off and in my situation the best solution (although over the top) should be to detail all requirements, even requirement that should be covered in the persons job description. This way we will have the documentation to train, follow, check and the evidence to reject against if not conforming.
When questioned about the ridiculousness of doing so, we were told the instruction needed to be able to be understood by the proverbial "man off the street" and that was the corporate standard. – rand T – I also had this in mind when producing documents – can someone directly take over this job if the current operator quits today. With the above case in mind though, we are assuming the replacement will also be a skilled electrical worker. So creating instructions for the “Man on the Street” is a bit too over the top.
Thanks again for all your replies, I have been looking around here for a while but never really got involved. Glad I did on this occasion.
Cheers
Wes
