Please critique my plant turtle maps....

[AndyN]

Yours were the first turtle diagrams I have seen. I did not know what they were (where did I get my CQE??). So see?? All of us learn everyday. So, I really can't comment on your turtle diagrams. They really look nice, and should probably make up one component of your toolset.

Brad:

Turtles were 'invented' by Phil Crosby, in the 'good old days' of TQM. In recent years, Plexus Training has resurrected them as a tool to help in retraining disadvantaged QS-9000 (read element based) external auditors to prepare and think 'Process', as required to do a TS audit. IMHO, they didn't realize that the 'silver bullet' for TS implementors is to use the same diagram to 'make it easy' for the auditor (it's a game, right?). So lots of folks have used the turtle. I would point out that the IATF have been 'de-emphasizing' the use of turtles recently............

 

[Stijloor]

Hello,

To use an assembly analogy.....

A turtle diagram can be viewed as an "assembly drawing" of a process. It shows the components of each individual process
A flow chart shows the dynamics and sequence of the components.
A system diagram (interaction of all processes) shows how all processes interact that make up your system.
A process matrix is what I call the "Bill of Material." It lists all processes that make up the system, process owners, inputs, outputs, objectives, measurements, etc.

Hope this helps a little,

Stijloor.

 

[Stijloor]

Brad:

Turtles were 'invented' by Phil Crosby, in the 'good old days' of TQM. In recent years, Plexus Training has resurrected them as a tool to help in retraining disadvantaged QS-9000 (read element based) external auditors to prepare and think 'Process', as required to do a TS audit. IMHO, they didn't realize that the 'silver bullet' for TS implementors is to use the same diagram to 'make it easy' for the auditor (it's a game, right?). So lots of folks have used the turtle. I would point out that the IATF have been 'de-emphasizing' the use of turtles recently............

From Crosby to Plexus......

Went to train-the-trainer for the Crosby QES program in 1983.
Saw the revived model when I went for ISO/TS auditor training....

Here they are....side by side...

Stijloor.

 

[Helmut Jilling]

Thanks, Helmut. Maybe I should also clarify for our other readers (Hi Coury!) that a review of many of the inputs etc of these turtles are, in fact, simply ISO requirements and not the actual business inputs/outputs.

The OP is missing a great opportunity to focus the management teams and give them a chance to show how they run the business effectively, through the use of a well defined and documented QMS.

A turtle simply doesn't show anything about where problems in a process actually lay. They are, IMHO, the road to ruin. Their use is a palliative and nothing else! And I'm not even getting heated about it yet........

Well, I know I won't persuade you on turtles. But, to be honest, Andy, at your level, I agree a turtle does not provide much value. Turtles are simpler diagrams, more suitable to regular, non-technical managers. Regular managers are often much clearer on the process approach and how their piece fits the puzzle after they see a turtle of it. However, Engineers can deal with more sophisticated diagrams.

I say, select the tool appropriate for the audience. I am weary of managers who have concocted a poorly done flowchart of a process that is not sequential in nature. They clearly don't understand it, and did it because the Mgt. Rep told them every process has to be flowcharted. Countless hours have been wasted on these. Yet, when we scribble a basic Turtle, their eyes light up.

Let the tool be appropriate for the audience and the need. PS: We agree the turtles are not enough by themselves.

 

[Anerol C]

Thanks for all your comments,
I got what you mean.

Any way, please take a look at the turtles and let me know your feedback.

Regards,
AC

 

[AndyN]

Thanks for all your comments,
I got what you mean.

Any way, please take a look at the turtles and let me know your feedback.

Regards,
AC

What else are you looking for?

 

[CliffK]

I say, select the tool appropriate for the audience. I am weary of managers who have concocted a poorly done flowchart of a process that is not sequential in nature. They clearly don't understand it, and did it because the Mgt. Rep told them every process has to be flowcharted. Countless hours have been wasted on these.

Amen to that.

But it's the Mgt. Rep's failure for not helping them to understand how to use the tools.

Yet, when we scribble a basic Turtle, their eyes light up.

That's good, but they don't have (or can't articulate) full understanding at that point. Which means they are not really as well equipped as they could be for diagnosing problems and making decisions. Someone needs to teach them how to diagram sequence and flow.

 

[AndyN]

This whole turtle thing drives me to distraction. The plain fact is that they're not a complete process description. They are primarily a way to consider some aspects and (control) influences of a process to help auditors who haven't been used to working that way...........

To truely understand a process, it has to be studied and diagrammed (mapped, flowed, spaghetti charted, etc) to see what actually happens. Without this diagramming, using just a 'turtle' to depict the (whole) process is a corruption and the organization will not realize the fullest benefit from the activity of documenting its processes. Furthermore, waste reduction and similar improvement opportunities will not be 'seen' from using turtles and the resulting audit will be reduced to simple compliance and not seen as much value to the organization.

I've recently performed (internal) audits of an organization with turtles as their QMS documentation. The audit revealed plenty of waste and inefficiencies (not blowing my own trumpet - they were known to the management team) but the turtles didn't show anything. Even the TS auditor hadn't made issues, since the organization was 'in compliance'.

It's been my experience that to use audits to keep looking for ways to correct/improve a badly designed (i.e documented) QMS is just as bad as putting QC at the end of the line and expect product design to get better.....

 

[michellemmm]

This whole turtle thing drives me to distraction. The plain fact is that they're not a complete process description. They are primarily a way to consider some aspects and (control) influences of a process to help auditors who haven't been used to working that way.....

I agree. The turtle does not show the complete description of process. It shows the basic anatomy of a process.

There are companies that are transitioning to process approach. They are trying to leap from 1970's QA to ISO9k2k....Turtle charts help those companies start the migration to process approach. Such companies have difficulty understanding even Turtles charts. Forget about the rest of techniques….

Many years ago, I attended Crosby’s quality management school. In the first session, the instructor asked individual to list their top three responsibilities and describe what happens if these responsibilities are not fulfilled. Students took this as a challenge to glorify their existence and contributions, missing the mark. Turtles can stop many from engaging in pseudo intellectual glorification...

In my experience, the most difficult part of filling a turtle chart for people is the performance standard. Basically, people are not sure what is expected from them. They all come to work wanting to do their best. Turtle helps them understand why they should anticipate customer's expectation. Recently, I dealt with an R&D manager who could not fill out the performance measurement section of turtle. He is a very intelligent and innovative individual who was moved to management without management training.

Also, I have noticed people have difficulty identifying their internal and external customer and suppliers. Once again, turtle chart opens a dialogue between employees.

I believe an elementary turtle is a transition tool for understanding a process and useless for macro processes....

 

[Stijloor]

Friends,

All (process) tools are useful. One size does not fit all. Some are more useful than others. Select wisely. To pit one against the other is similar to comparing a pair of pliers with a visegrip. We sometimes get too wrapped up in turtles and octopuses (makes it a zoo). All tools must be judged in the proper context.

But I do understand some of my Fellow Covers' frustrations....

Stijloor.