Should Quality folks be just policemen & policewomen?

ScottK

Not out of the crisis
Staff member
Super Moderator
#21
Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

If QA / QC act like policemen, everyone in the organisation shall play the game of "Police and Thief" and result in hostile, Cold War relations. :mg:
Sure, that can happen in extreme cases.

but that's why companies have people like you and me... to help build a culture of understanding between all departments and functions.
 

Jim Wynne

Super Moderator
#23
Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

Who's going to tell management that there is a nonconformance?
Managment has to work through their agents. My agents are my QC Staff.
You're trying hard to make an unsupportable case; that being that a separate rule-enforcing bureaucracy is necessary (or justifiable) in the same sense that actual police departments are necessary. We can establish cultures within companies where reporting of nonconforming conditions is met with the appropriate response (i.e., gratitude for the revelation, followed by conscientious action to correct it, rather than punishment for an "offense"), and that's just not possible in the culture at large.
 

ScottK

Not out of the crisis
Staff member
Super Moderator
#24
Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

In our organization anyone can. Informing management of nonconformances is not enforcing rules.
It's not?

seems to me you set your system to self police. Which is admirable.
I, however, have not yet worked in a palce where that would be appropriate.
Maybe here someday if I set up my QMS right, but that is years down the line.
 

ScottK

Not out of the crisis
Staff member
Super Moderator
#25
Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

You're trying hard to make an unsupportable case; that being that a separate rule-enforcing bureaucracy is necessary (or justifiable) in the same sense that actual police departments are necessary..
No, I'm not saying that.
I'm saying that PART of the quality control role is to police and that the stigma attached to the work is unwarranted.
Am I not doing police or detective work when I do internal audits?
Are the QC inspectors not doing that when they do a first article inspection?

The other part of the quality role is to teach, coach, foster cooperation.
 

Jim Wynne

Super Moderator
#26
Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

It's not?

seems to me you set your system to self police. Which is admirable.
I, however, have not yet worked in a palce where that would be appropriate.
Maybe here someday if I set up my QMS right, but that is years down the line.
The original question had to do with what should be, rather than what is. We all know that the quality function hasn't shaken its police-department connotation (and orientation, in many companies), and that it's an evolutionary process. You seem to be acknowledging that it ain't right and needs to be changed, which seems to contradict your earlier post:

you all make it seem like having police is a bad thing.
 

Cari Spears

Super Moderator
Staff member
Super Moderator
#27
Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

Maybe here someday if I set up my QMS right, but that is years down the line.
You use the words "I" and "QMS" - but only "management" can foster the kind of "culture" that encourages being upfront about problems and nonconforming product. I did not set up a system that does this - the culture was here long before I started working here.

Perhaps it is due - at least in part - to the fact that we are all skilled tradesmen here and we run low volume quantities. No one could really get away with hiding or not reporting nonconforming product. However, no one here is afraid to report problems or suggest improvements because our management welcomes the input.
 

Jim Wynne

Super Moderator
#28
Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

No, I'm not saying that.
I'm saying that PART of the quality control role is to police and that the stigma attached to the work is unwarranted.
Am I not doing police or detective work when I do internal audits?
Are the QC inspectors not doing that when they do a first article inspection?

The other part of the quality role is to teach, coach, foster cooperation.
Do you not understand the distinction between verification (i.e., confirming a hypothesis that states that the system is functioning properly) and deliberate fault-finding (attempting to confirm a belief that the system is not functioning properly)?
 

ScottK

Not out of the crisis
Staff member
Super Moderator
#29
Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

The original question had to do with what should be, rather than what is. We all know that the quality function hasn't shaken its police-department connotation (and orientation, in many companies), and that it's an evolutionary process. You seem to be acknowledging that it ain't right and needs to be changed, which seems to contradict your earlier post:
I fail to see the contradiction between "having police = not necessarily bad" and "self policing = admirable".

Realize the necessity and work with it while you aspire to a "higher" goal. There is no contradiction in that.
 

ScottK

Not out of the crisis
Staff member
Super Moderator
#30
Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

You use the words "I" and "QMS" - but only "management" can foster the kind of "culture" that encourages being upfront about problems and nonconforming product. I did not set up a system that does this - the culture was here long before I started working here.

Perhaps it is due - at least in part - to the fact that we are all skilled tradesmen here and we run low volume quantities. No one could really get away with hiding or not reporting nonconforming product. However, no one here is afraid to report problems or suggest improvements because our management welcomes the input.
Someone has to drive that change. That's why I'm here - to try to teach the existing managment how to change their culture.
And as far as workers here - The only skilled people are in supervision. Our "hourly personnel", if you will, are not 'skilled' at all. And so it has been at every company I've worked for.
 


Top Bottom