From your description, it sounds as if management is doing the right thing for the right reason. That is a fortunate start to which some of us would envy. Kevin brings up good points, to which I for the most part agree.
…have personal knowledge of implementing ISO in a short run, varied product, job shop environment?
My current firm is 25, previous firm was approximately 42. The current firm could best be described as 'production' in a 'job shop environment.' The product is the same, but manufacturing methodology is job shop based. Production (such as it is) is approximately 20 per week. I do not know if that qualifies me, but here goes.
When I first began this particular assignment, I realized immediately that one key was to establish a system that was not bureaucratic and 'paper' heavy. For this, I kept 4.2.2 as a guidepost, which states, in part:
For purposes of this American National Standard, the range and detail of the procedures that form part of the quality system depend on the complexity of the work, the methods used, and the skills and training needed by personnel involved in carrying out the activity.
I have kept paperwork to a minimum (i.e. I do not need paper to move product, I have no work orders, etc). Master technicians do not need work instructions for each and every operation they perform through the 'skills and training' portion. The 'range and detail' of my documents describe the operation as it exists, but does not elaborate further. For example, I do not describe 'how' to strip and prep a wire, I say "strip and prep wire." Master Machinists do not need to be told 'how' to make 150 widgets. Give them a drawing and say 'I need 150 of these.' Little things like that go a long way to employee and management 'buy in.'
Another thing I have emphasized is that ISO 900x says 'what to do' but does not say 'how to do it.' I explained from the onset that the standard was a 'slave,' we were the 'master' and incorporated this in all my training sessions. Every employee, from the President on down has had my ISO training so they understand that ISO was not going to be burdensome and cumbersome. Twenty percent of employees have had my one-week training session, including the two Vice Presidents.
I would also suggest that every employee be involved in the implementation phase. I asked the employees here which work instructions
they needed or wanted, then asked that they write them based on their method of operation. I then translated that into the Quality Management System I was setting up. This way, they felt they were part of the system, not some system that was being thrust upon them. They now freely point out to me when an operation is lacking in documentation or when documentation is questionable because they are part of the system.
I would also one other piece of advise as far as ISO 900x goes:
Do not read in what is not there. The system must be suited to your method of operation and add value to your organization. The example I usually cite is SPC. Most believe that because of 4.20, some sort of SPC is required and that simply is not true. If SPC adds value, use it. If not, do not.
Hope this helps.
production is doing their own inspection
Kevin, I am curious. Why is this a problem?
Regards,
Don
------------------
Just the ramblings of an Old Wizard Warrior.
Check Out dWizard's Lair:
(broken link removed)
