Hi Jim and Sidney,
Jim, I like you're proposed solution, in that simplicity is often difficult to improve upon. It is interesting, however, that such a simple concept can elicit so many perspectives...and that fact remains, that many systems are not a robust and comprehensive reflection of the simple model.
Sidney, your comment that Management Review is a review of the status of CA/PAs implies that you think that Management Review is only happening at the highest level of the organization.
When performance objectives from the Business Plan are deployed throughout the organization, the champion/owner of the metric is typically empowered to take action (corrective/preventive/improvement) to keep the performance on track.
This action may be taken at the Program/Project Level, the Departmental Level, the Divisional Level, or at the Corporate level...and yes, even at the Employee level (if they have been assigned responsibility for some aspect of performance).
So, yes, you are correct, CA/PA/CI can and should happen at all levels, and yes, they shouldn't have to wait for SENIOR Management Review. I don't think that the concept of Management Review belongs only to Senior Management. Anyone who is managing a performance objective is the "manager" of that process....his/her review of the metrics/data, etc. can and should elicit CA/PA/or CI actions within the scope of their authority. If they in fact need their Superior's approval to proceed, so be it...that's just another level of "Management Review"...be it Departmental/Divisional/Corporate, etc.
The fact remains that there is not just one big PDCA cycle going on in the organization at any given time, but that the culture and methodology of PDCA must be inherent in each key process in the organization and reflected in your documentation/flowcharts. So there should be several PDCA wheels going around simultaneously all over the organization.
That, I believe embodies the process approach using Deming's model as management/control methodology/discipline. While Deming provided a significant "kick-start" to the model, he did not have ISO-compliance in mind when he created it...and so, in and of itself, it is not totally representational of the ISO Standard and its mandates.
Hence, my interpretation...and expansion of the model...like PDCA on steroids, and written in "ISO"ese.
Patricia
Jim, I like you're proposed solution, in that simplicity is often difficult to improve upon. It is interesting, however, that such a simple concept can elicit so many perspectives...and that fact remains, that many systems are not a robust and comprehensive reflection of the simple model.
Sidney, your comment that Management Review is a review of the status of CA/PAs implies that you think that Management Review is only happening at the highest level of the organization.
When performance objectives from the Business Plan are deployed throughout the organization, the champion/owner of the metric is typically empowered to take action (corrective/preventive/improvement) to keep the performance on track.
This action may be taken at the Program/Project Level, the Departmental Level, the Divisional Level, or at the Corporate level...and yes, even at the Employee level (if they have been assigned responsibility for some aspect of performance).
So, yes, you are correct, CA/PA/CI can and should happen at all levels, and yes, they shouldn't have to wait for SENIOR Management Review. I don't think that the concept of Management Review belongs only to Senior Management. Anyone who is managing a performance objective is the "manager" of that process....his/her review of the metrics/data, etc. can and should elicit CA/PA/or CI actions within the scope of their authority. If they in fact need their Superior's approval to proceed, so be it...that's just another level of "Management Review"...be it Departmental/Divisional/Corporate, etc.
The fact remains that there is not just one big PDCA cycle going on in the organization at any given time, but that the culture and methodology of PDCA must be inherent in each key process in the organization and reflected in your documentation/flowcharts. So there should be several PDCA wheels going around simultaneously all over the organization.
That, I believe embodies the process approach using Deming's model as management/control methodology/discipline. While Deming provided a significant "kick-start" to the model, he did not have ISO-compliance in mind when he created it...and so, in and of itself, it is not totally representational of the ISO Standard and its mandates.
Hence, my interpretation...and expansion of the model...like PDCA on steroids, and written in "ISO"ese.
Patricia
