Production duties vs. Final Acceptance Testing - New Quality Manager needs HELP!!!

[MsHeeler]

How do I explain to our new Quality Manager that when a quality inspector performs production duties they can not do final acceptance testing their own work?

I have tried everything I know!!!!

I'm afraid I will need more help with this guy....

BTW - I have an audit coming up and I just went thru my procedures and found some items that needed updating, he said that they were fine the way they are. I will let him answer the auditor.

MsHeeler

 

[MsHeeler]

I forgot to mention that I am a certified auditor and he has no training at all!

MsHeeler

 

[CarolX]

How do I explain to our new Quality Manager that when a quality inspector performs production duties they can not do final acceptance testing their own work?

Hi MsHeeler,

Why can't they? Can you provide a little more info on what you company produces? I know certain industries require independence of the final part approval, but this is not mandatory in many fields. I know most folks are accustomed to this type of enviroment, but it really isn't a requirement.

 

[MsHeeler]

We make optical devices and most of the final inspection is visual. I just don't see how that can be ok. Then why have a quality department, production could do final acceptance test on their own work?

I'm sorry I don't get it...:mg:

MsHeeler

 

[Miner]

Unless you are in a regulated field that specifically states this requirement, there is no reason that a production operator cannot final inspect their own work. A facility that I worked in with the best quality that I have seen had 0 quality inspectors. All inspection was performed by the operators, and they were very concientious about it because they had no inspector to fall back on.

By the way, this was an ISO9001 and Q-1 plant.

 

[Jim Wynne]

I agree with Miner; there's no reason that operators can't inspect their own work, and certainly no reason that dedicated inspectors can't do both in-process and final inspection.

 

[qcman]

I want my people cross trained as much as I can so I end up doing just what you are saying you can't do all the time. On another angle one of my goals is to have the operators do all or as much inspection as possible.

 

[Wes Bucey]

I agree with most of the other responses: Redundant inspection is often just that - redundant and unnecessary. We often talk about best practices using in-process inspection. The sense I get from your post is one where the final inspector is "judge, jury, and executioner." We like to think that inspection is an opportunity to

1. confirm the process is in control
2. point out areas for concern or improvement

Who better to have first hand knowledge whether the process is in control or to recognize opportunities for improvement than the operator who is making the part?

Thanks for raising this question - it should provide grist for good discussion!

 

[Helmut Jilling]

We make optical devices and most of the final inspection is visual. I just don't see how that can be ok. Then why have a quality department, production could do final acceptance test on their own work?

I'm sorry I don't get it...:mg:

MsHeeler

The Quality Dept. can serve many functions, but two in particular in your case. Presumably, they are more highly trained than general operators in the doings of the "Science of Quality." These higher skills can be applied however you choose. Some do inspection, some testing, some auditing, wherever you want to deply them.

The second aspect, is commonly they reinspect a smaller population of parts, to ensure that the first line of operator/inspectors are achieving the level of performance we want them to achieve.

If they find the first line is doing a great job, then you can rely on it. But, if the Q people reinspect the same population all the time, then you are doing redundant work. If this is necessary, then your first line is not effective, and you should take corrective action, and redesign the approach.

You don't inspect the soda you drink for lunch, do you? You just open it and drink.

 

[SteelMaiden]

Then why have a quality department, production could do final acceptance test on their own work?

I'm sorry I don't get it...:mg:

MsHeeler

we don't....have a quality department, that is. Even our laboratory ops are production people.

It all goes back to, it depends on your company's culture. you've either given your employees the ownership, responsibility and authority they need to operate on their own, or you haven't, in which case they might well be working under what I call "ship it" philosophy. All production cares about is getting it out the door, no matter what the quality. This leads to separate inspection functions, additional personnel, lack of ownership.

Of course, there are industries out there that require separate inspection...that is your call to determine the regulatory requirements.

good luck