What about more forums so we can be more specific?

[Qualiman]

Hi Marc:
I am happy to say hello to you and the rest of the folks.Has been great to discover (could be by mistake)recently your site and having the opportunity to learn a lot and try to give some help (sometimes not expressing myself properly in English, due I am Mexican). Thanks Marc for giving us your experience in this "free"($$) way.And of course also to all the colleagues that have spent a lot of their time to give us help.
At the end, by participating in this kind of Forums all of us will be better prepared to build a better world (I am quite Don Quijote)

On the other hand I have only one question:

Have you planned to include into the Forums topics like Kaizen, 5 S's, Hoshin and other improvement tools ?

Take care

Qualiman

Note: This is a reply of submitted March 17, topic on Sugestions. It has been posted here because of its relationship with Continuous Improvement an due to lack of response in the other Forum. Thank you.

 

[Marc]

Sorry - I don't always catch every message.

I really have not thought much about specific forums for each quality tool. I can easily do that if you want to come up with a proposed list.

My biggest problem is keeping up with everything...

 

[Kevin Mader]

Qualiman,

I saw your post of the 17th, but was waiting for a response from Marc. Either way, any topic you want to discuss, you could fit it into a couple related forums, which would effectively attract a few of us.

So now that you have been discovered, what would you like to discuss first?

Regards,

Kevin

 

[Andy Bassett]

Hello Marc
What do you think about this;

Create a section for the new ISO 9000:2000 Standard.
For each individual section ie 8.5, 8.5.1 create a thread and let people ask their questions in each section.
You should end up with something like a very useful reference book with information/clarification for each section of the standard.

Regards

------------------
Andy B

 

[Marc]

Well, Andy, I understand your point but - then you end up with a number of threads on each section - which would be fine if the questions about each section were similar. But a lot ends up, to some degree, company specific. In addition you could end up with some very long threads.

I will leave the option to you folks - if you want to start a thread for each section, you are welcome to do so.

In so far as starting a number of new forums - well, suggest a short list and I'll add them. Adding forums is no problem.

In so far as a new forum dedicated to ISO9000:2000 - well, I guess I could. I have so far seen this as an evolution that didn't warrant a separate forum. Many if not most of the requirements are, for all intents and purposes, similar if not the same. I'll look at making some changes tonight.

 

[Kevin Mader]

Marc,

Andy's suggestion is a pretty good one. But to your point, many forums may make your maintenance activity a bit cumbersome. I think it is a good idea to get more opinions on this suggestion.

I think that most of the advantages of having a separate forum might be offered by performing a search. However, the search engine may be viewed as an additional, seldom used step.

Regards,

Kevin

 

[Marc]

I wouldn't even think of a forum for each section if the standard but I'll define an ISO9001:2000 forum.

As far as forums for each quality tool or specialty, I'm open to suggestions. If you want me to add a forum you have to agree to monitor that forum.

My experience has been, however, that many 'specialty' forums don't 'succeed'. An example is the AS9001 forum and the VDA forum. I have done this with a few of my 'pet' interests (such as TPM). What we wind up with if I make a forum for every tool, however, is tons of forums to monitor (it's hard enough to watch every forum as it is), increased maintenance for me (the software is pretty lame, actually, but not unexpected for a script based system. Each forum has to be individually maintained - you can't do much globally. I don't want to end up with 100 forums. I personally feel there are too many now.

I pretty much envision stuff like Kaizen and 5 S to be discussed, if you will, in the general quality topics forum.

 

[Roger Eastin]

Yeah, Marc, I think you could get rid of quite a few of the forums, like VDA6. In fact, you could probably get rid of at least a third of them, maybe even half! Hey, it's springtime, so it's time to prune!!

 

[Qualiman]

Kevin: Thanks for your post
Marc: Thanks for your response. I knew that only excess of work could brake your traditional quick response.

Hello everyone. When I posted the Kaizen-5"S" topic i wasn´t thinking of opening a "special" Forum but discuss those topics in some place.I agree with Marc to talk about it in the general topics. We cannot overcrowd the forums. I think that a good idea could be put all "starting" or new topics in the general, and in such a case that discussions are rich enough or even over concurred, in that time the forum coordinator will have sufficient evidence of the necessity of place that topic in a private or special Forum.

As always, is a pleasure to talk to you guys

P.S. Kevin: You asked me to start with questions or discussions on Kaizen,5S. If you dont mind let us move ( If that is a democratic decision) to general quality topics. OK Marc ?

 

[John C]

Andy, Marc,
I agree an ISO 9000:2000 would be of great interest and could grow to be of considerable value. I need to do some work on it and I suppose we all do - what better way than together? Agreeing with Marc: I don't think it should be called ISO 9000:2000 though. It's the issues that forces our approach to change that really concern us. Queries relevant to '94 and '00 versions should not be part of it.
I don't see that we should change the Cove system. It's the individual, 'live' issue that grabs the attention and makes us devote a lot of effort to issues. So, rather than making a framework and then trying to patch it in, let's start with someone's current big concern. I think it is a new heading within ISO Topics. There's already some - different - 2000 topics there. (Note; I saw a forum where they did work through the standard section by section and it turned out to be very boring and did nothing for me) If the first contribution goes well then it will expand. It needs to be able to grab the attention so we should try to ensure that the first topics are current and critical.
rgds, John C