Visual Management System for a Complete Overview of the QMS?

[CliffK]

I'm not really a neo-luddite. Really, I'm not.

I like coaxing these computer machines to do stuff. And I have implemented systems like these, and they are neat.

In retrospect, though, I'm left wondering if they worked all that well for the folks on the plant floor. It seems like there are always one or two people that kind of get left behind when you replace that reliable three-ring binder with a web page. Sometimes they catch up, sort of; either you do some additional hand-holding or put custom links on the desktop of the nearest computer or there's someone else in the department that helps them find what they need. But the end result is that the job is now fractionally harder for a few front line employees.

On balance, I'm a little skeptical of the benefits for those who are not information workers.

And here's another one: not everyone can easily follow flow charts. There are folks out there who better understand a narrative description. I don't know why, but I've seen it. It doesn't seem to be related to intelligence.

 

[Helmut Jilling]

I'm not really a neo-luddite. Really, I'm not.

I like coaxing these computer machines to do stuff. And I have implemented systems like these, and they are neat.

In retrospect, though, I'm left wondering if they worked all that well for the folks on the plant floor. It seems like there are always one or two people that kind of get left behind when you replace that reliable three-ring binder with a web page. Sometimes they catch up, sort of; either you do some additional hand-holding or put custom links on the desktop of the nearest computer or there's someone else in the department that helps them find what they need. But the end result is that the job is now fractionally harder for a few front line employees.

On balance, I'm a little skeptical of the benefits for those who are not information workers.

And here's another one: not everyone can easily follow flow charts. There are folks out there who better understand a narrative description. I don't know why, but I've seen it. It doesn't seem to be related to intelligence.

Interesting thoughts. I agree. A couple additional things...

I recommend shortcut icons on all the desktops. It always makes it easier to access.

I also recommend simpler paths and less sub-sub-folders with 2 files in them. Keep it simple.

Flowcharts are often over-used, and often overly complicated. If 8 boxes are good, 26 are not necessarily better...

Use the best tool for each task, flowcharts, photos, diagrams, narrative...

And lastly, my favorite, do people actually use the instructions? No, really, they do, sometimes, once in a while...please, figure out how to change that.

 

[handsofman88]

Hi to all,

Has anybody any experience of developing visual management systems whereby a complete overview of the QMS is achieved by means of company policy, strategy, etc., filtering down to accomodate customer specific requirements and then down to internal process descriptions (& process-owners) x-referenced to the appropriate element of the standard, with all of the associated KPIs (indicating current levels of performance)?

I'm attempting to put something together using Excel with hyperlinks to drill down to the lowest level;

I have helped numerous clients set up "visual" management systems using commercial Mind Mapping software that allows interested parties to see a "helicopter view" of their entire quality management system. HTML links are then used to form the pathway to system documentation.

It does require a bit of discipline to maintain the links but is a great way for small to medium sized organisations to manage the documentation associated with a quality management system.

I have attached a image of a typical system. Write me if you need further clarification of content.

 

[Helmut Jilling]

I have helped numerous clients set up "visual" management systems using commercial Mind Mapping software that allows interested parties to see a "helicopter view" of their entire quality management system. HTML links are then used to form the pathway to system documentation.

It does require a bit of discipline to maintain the links but is a great way for small to medium sized organisations to manage the documentation associated with a quality management system.

I have attached a image of a typical system. Write me if you need further clarification of content.

It looks interesting. I like the approach that you can see an overview, almost a table of contents. I would prefer that the processes were a more integral or fundamental foundation to the system, rather than just a link, but it seems interesting.

 

[Marc]

<snip> I have attached a image of a typical system. Write me if you need further clarification of content. <snip>

The representation is interesting. There are so many ways to represent and interconnect things. I see there are icons for documents so this is a map people can use to 'point and click' on a document to see it (I assume).

I have seen some pretty interesting home grown systems, many flow chart oriented. The failure mode is a lot of times the software scheme depends upon someone who put a lot of time into it and kept it working. The problems that come into play are when only one person knows how to maintain the system/software (much as is the case here in the forums as there is no one who knows everything that is involved).

Interactive systems are very good systems when they can be maintained. There was a very good example of a canned system outline/template here but the company complained (long story) so I stopped plugging them (probably 6 to 8 years ago).

It all depends upon how complex you want to be, and/or how complex you have to be.

 

[JaneB]

I've seen, designed and built some online, using HTML or .asp pages, and/or process flowcharts which enable you to click on 'hotspots' in the process chart and drill down via hyperlinks to more detail if required, or call up the template, document, whatever.

have seen some pretty interesting home grown systems, many flow chart oriented. The failure mode is a lot of times the software scheme depends upon someone who put a lot of time into it and kept it working. The problems that come into play are when only one person knows how to maintain the system/software (much as is the case here in the forums as there is no one who knows everything that is involved).

You're not wrong there.

Similar problems also arise with third-party systems, too, in my experience. There's not enough of them or not enough of a market leader or two (at least here) so that there's a considerable learning curve, not to mention an implementation cost involved. I've seen some very good systems in individual markets - eg, someone got a bright idea and developed a good system which works in a particular field, but I think the 'nirvana' of an overall system is some ways off. If at all.

 

[Marc]

<snip> You're not wrong there.

Similar problems also arise with third-party systems, too, in my experience. <snip>

I wasn't referring to third party systems, and I definitely did not say that third party software/systems do not have the same potential problem(s), so I don't think it's a matter of me being wrong or right. You are 100% correct that similar problems also arise with third-party systems, too. The difference is typically a company can get help from the software supplier such as (typically expensive) training when the company uses 3rd party canned software.

My comment had more to do with someone taking SmartDraw or Visio or other multi-use software, making a great interactive system and leaving for what ever reason. Neither SmartDraw or Visio (as examples) have training on something someone made using their software. One can get training on using SmartDraw or Visio, but not on something someone makes with it ('home grown' systems). That's not to say the company can not get someone in who understands SmartDraw or Visio to figure things out, but that's a different story.

I worked with a client who did their own internal system and it was great. When someone submitted a document change request, for example, the responsible person's pager went off and an email was sent as well. Problem was the fellow who designed and programed it all was the only person who knew how it all worked. If he had walked out on them it would have taken several specialists to come in and figure it all out - A sysadmin, a programmer or two, etc. Had they used canned software it wouldn't have been that big a deal to contact the software supplier to get someone in to help and train.

NOTE: This is NOT a promo for 3rd party software.

 

[JaneB]

I was agreeing with you, Marc. Perhaps it would have been clearer if I'd simply said that.

And no, I'm not promoting 3rd-party software either.

 

[Marc]

I know. I initially mis-read what you wrote, but I did try to do a quick re-write

 

[JaneB]

I know. I initially mis-read what you wrote, but I did try to do a quick re-write

No probs. Perhaps I'd better revisit my penchant for double negatives...