Should Quality folks be just policemen & policewomen?

[ScottK]

Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

Good morning,
Seems like we are having a good time here.
Based on personal experiences, most of this "unpleasant" notion about quality is that we have to be partly blamed and partly due to the culture of the company.
Here's a typical scenerio, after some "policing" work, the auditor found some non-compliances and report it to management. Management threw it back
at the department and fingers started pointing at the department.
After a while,people start to get perturbed and more protective. That's where all the "unpleasantness" begins. This is typically what I've seen many of a times.
Rather than just being a police, why can't we play forensic (also part of the police force). Playing a more proactive role here and providing clarification and insight into the issue will often remove away the "unpleasantness".
Personally, I feel that it is how we want to position ourselves and what drives for the satisifaction in the job. It is not what other perceives of a quality role.
thks.
jeffrey.

What you're saying should be the goal of the organization.
I, for example, am implementing new systems that this company never had before.
As part of the training I am teaching management to embrace audits and corrective actions as means for improvement.
But it's going to take a while. Some people jump right on the bandwagon and soe will resist forever. Case in point... Our purchasing manager asks me to audit his documented processes and responds to CARs and PARs within hours. On the other hand, trying to get the production manager to respond to a CAR without being forced to go to his boss is just impossible. And even then he comes up with a "you found it you fix it" attitude.

So to the purchasing guy and his staff we are helpful coaches and teachers. But to the production manager we are fascist cops that are out to get him.

 

[Gert Sorensen]

Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

On the other hand, trying to get the production manager to respond to a CAR without being forced to go to his boss is just impossible. And even then he comes up with a "you found it you fix it" attitude.

Why is it always the production people who has this attitude???

 

[ScottK]

Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

Why is it always the production people who has this attitude???

Sad but very true.

But you know what I find? The production workers, for the most part, want to believe.
So again, it comes down to management. But there is hope!

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

The production workers, for the most part, want to believe.

I recall an old Peter Druckerism from the 1970's when the Japanese auto industry first started eating Detroit's lunch, and it was suggested that perhaps American workers just weren't as good as their Japanese counterparts: "American workers know how to make quality products; they just need permission. "

 

[Cari Spears]

Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

But you know what I find? The production workers, for the most part, want to believe.
So again, it comes down to management. But there is hope!

So true. These production workers are also usually being pushed to make production numbers by their supervisors who are being pushed by their managers. Some workers hesitate to report problems to their management or help identify root causes out of FEAR.

 

[ScottK]

Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

I recall an old Peter Druckerism from the 1970's when the Japanese auto industry first started eating Detroit's lunch, and it was suggested that perhaps American workers just weren't as good as their Japanese counterparts: "American workers know how to make quality products; they just need permission. "

I did preventive action training last week for all employees.
I made a specific point with very heavy emphasis that their PA submissions go directly to me and my staff... not through their supervisor.
By the end of the training I had 15 preventive actions submitted by 15 different hourly people. At least one person stayed after each class to submit one.

I guess we're off tompic now, but this is why I do this job.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

I did preventive action training last week for all employees.
I made a specific point with very heavy emphasis that their PA submissions go directly to me and my staff... not through their supervisor.
By the end of the training I had 15 preventive actions submitted by 15 different hourly people. At least one person stayed after each class to submit one.

I guess we're off tompic now, but this is why I do this job.

I don't think this is off-topic. It looks to me that you've identified a "fear factor." For some reason, people didn't think that supervisors were listening to them, or were afraid of being somehow punished for suggesting that the system wasn't working. The problem is that until the supervisors take ownership of their processes and actively encourage improvement suggestions, nothing will get better in the long term. Circumventing them might produce impressive short-term results, but the root of the problem hasn't been addressed. We need to find ways to make supervisors see the light in such a way that it at least looks like it was their idea. this means that we have to be willing to derive our satisfaction from the results, and not the recognition for having achieved them.

One way to accomplish this is developing a kindred relationship with a problem supervisor. Let him or her know that you aren't the cop, but just another guy fighting the same system. Use Socratic questioning. Instead of saying, "There's a problem and I'm here to solve it," which will almost always be perceived as threatening, use a series of conversational questions which will result in the supervisor coming up with the answer on his own. Start by suggesting that you're looking for help from him: "I have this problem x, and you have some experience in this regard, so maybe you can help me." This can be developed to the point where the focus is on the need for employee suggestions, and the supervisor can be asked how he thinks a process should be developed for it. In the end, a partnership can be formed, and you can work with the supervisor in solving his problem. First you have to gain his trust, and then you have to get him to identify the problem. Not easy, but if it were easy, anyone could do it. This method takes considerably longer but is much more likely to result in good long-term results. Culture is changed one manager at a time.

 

[Craig H.]

Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

One way to accomplish this is developing a kindred relationship with a problem supervisor. Let him or her know that you aren't the cop, but just another guy fighting the same system. Use Socratic questioning. Instead of saying, "There's a problem and I'm here to solve it," which will almost always be perceived as threatening, use a series of conversational questions which will result in the supervisor coming up with the answer on his own. Start by suggesting that you're looking for help from him: "I have this problem x, and you have some experience in this regard, so maybe you can help me." This can be developed to the point where the focus is on the need for employee suggestions, and the supervisor can be asked how he thinks a process should be developed for it. In the end, a partnership can be formed, and you can work with the supervisor in solving his problem. First you have to gain his trust, and then you have to get him to identify the problem. Not easy, but if it were easy, anyone could do it. This method takes considerably longer but is much more likely to result in good long-term results. Culture is changed one manager at a time.

Maybe this is the crux of the dilemma.

On the TV cop shows, and the movies, D.A.s and the police try to get "cooperation" from a suspect, which is just a nice way of saying they try to get someone to sell themselves out, and they then reward the cooperator with a nice long, relaxing stay in the pen, meals provided. Don't know if this is true in real life, but its possible.



This is exactly the type of "cooperation" that we, as effective quality pros, should avoid like a bad case of the plague.

 

[Jen Kirley]

Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

The responses reveal an opportunity for me to return to the original question, which was "Should Quality folks just be policemen and policewomen?"

The police force as I think of it relies on two assumptions:

1. People know the law or what is right (and presumably the law is consistent with what's right)

2. People are able to conform to the law.

Defenses against not meeting these two elementary presumptions often don't hold up well in criminal cases, but in an enterprise where prevention is held as an ideal they should be upheld.

That would mean the people need to be informed of the law, and the circumstances would need to be designed to make conformance possible and practical. Both are outside the scope of what I perceive is typical police work.

Going into detective work or District Attorney is another matter.

I agree with the Druckerism.

 

[Manix]

Re: Should Quality folks be just policeman & policewomen?

Guy's:

The day you Departmentalise QUALITY, is the day you have set up your POLICE station!

Quality should not be seen in isolation, but as an effort of collective endeavour of all of your organisations people. With this attitude towards your work, there is no need for that police state! I would see the whole organisation as a team of "community support officers" rather than policemen or women.