Received a minor for not having good measureables/goals. Need help with KPIs.

[qualprod]

That's just it. How many metrics have a reaction point? If it's just measurement for measurement sake, then there isn't much value. We measure shipment performance. What's the difference between 97 and 98%? Not much. If it drops to 85%, I'll guarantee I'll know about it before the data is collected -- customer lines will shut down and they know where I live.

For this issue, I defined that according my kpi results, I take actions, for example: if my goal is 90%, then I defined ranges, if results fell from 87 to 89.9,do nothing, just to monitor the process, if fell from 85 to 88.9,apply correction or contention action, if value is under 85, an obligated corrective action is a must,also use colors, green, yellow and red in my scoreboard.

 

[Johnnymo62]

Section 4.4.1.g: evaluate these processes and implement any changes needed to ensure that these processes achieve their intended results;

We are required to react to KPIs not meeting their goals.

 

[RoxaneB]

Section 4.4.1.g: evaluate these processes and implement any changes needed to ensure that these processes achieve their intended results;

We are required to react to KPIs not meeting their goals.

Being required to react is not quite the same as truly wanting, needing to react. When the response is genuinely wanted, it demonstrates that people care about the process and see the value in the system beyond the piece of paper on the wall.

 

[RoxaneB]

For this issue, I defined that according my kpi results, I take actions, for example: if my goal is 90%, then I defined ranges, if results fell from 87 to 89.9,do nothing, just to monitor the process, if fell from 85 to 88.9,apply correction or contention action, if value is under 85, an obligated corrective action is a must,also use colors, green, yellow and red in my scoreboard.

How were these ranges selected?

What if they have several consecutive yellows?

 

[Johnnymo62]

Being required to react is not quite the same as truly wanting, needing to react. When the response is genuinely wanted, it demonstrates that people care about the process and see the value in the system beyond the piece of paper on the wall.

I agree with your comments. I just want to point out that to ignore a KPI dropping lower is a risk for an audit nonconformance.

 

[qualprod]

How were these ranges selected?

What if they have several consecutive yellows?

It was also defined this: if resulted two consecutive yellows or two yellows within 4 months, CA is needed.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Section 4.4.1.g: evaluate these processes and implement any changes needed to ensure that these processes achieve their intended results;

We are required to react to KPIs not meeting their goals.

It all depends on how "intended results" is defined. If you use process indicators to paint yourself into a corner, expect the inevitable.

 

[Mikey324]

Section 4.4.1.g: evaluate these processes and implement any changes needed to ensure that these processes achieve their intended results;

We are required to react to KPIs not meeting their goals.

I agree with your comments. I just want to point out that to ignore a KPI dropping lower is a risk for an audit nonconformance.

If a kpi drops below the target level, and meaningful kpi was selected, there should should be a want from those interested to make an adjustment. If an audit minor is the biggest concern, the kpi may not be that valuable at the end of the day.

 

[Golfman25]

If a kpi drops below the target level, and meaningful kpi was selected, there should should be a want from those interested to make an adjustment. If an audit minor is the biggest concern, the kpi may not be that valuable at the end of the day.

This is the age old question. Do we pick real metrics to monitor and use them to drive improvement or do we just set a target we can hit to avoid a non-conformance. The problem comes in with the "we are required to react" mentality. Auditors drive this, so people pick easy "goals" so they aren't bogged down trying prove to an auditor they are doing something.

My business metrics create lots of wipsaws. If we reacted to every one we would go insane. One, even two, points doesn't make a trend. We have to smooth everything out to be meaningful. If my delivery goes from 98 to 95% because we had a tooling issue created by a 50 year old tool the customer doesn't want to invest money in, I'm not going to go all root cause/corrective action as it is a waste of time. If an auditor wants to issue a NC because of it, they'll get significant push back from me.

 

[Jim Wynne]

If a kpi drops below the target level, and meaningful kpi was selected, there should should be a want from those interested to make an adjustment.

I agree completely with Golfman25. There should not necessarily be a "want" to make an adjustment. There should be a need to investigate both the impact of missing the target and whether or not the target is reasonable and necessary. It's possible to establish a "meaningful" indicator and an unreasonable target for it.