What if the Customers Insist on Service that Breaks the Established Procedures?

[StMichael]

The implementation of a Quality Management System does not changed the reality of business dealings such as the need to pay for goods or service supplied irrespective of when the claim is submitted.

Indeed, it does not. But it is difficult for us, with limited resources, to provide a higher level of service than what our resources can cover, hence the thought of setting up "tighter" procedures.

In general, a QMS will have service standards such claims submitted within ninety days will be processed within 'X' weeks. Any claims submitted beyond that may not be promptly processed. This is normally the 'intent' of having service standards. Unfortunately, a lot of systems in the service field do not focus on the service quality aspect.

And here is the problem - the customer expects us to process them promptly, and in certain cases the problems are genuine. We want to be able to help in such cases. It looks like the solution is to write the processes such that there is a "way out", like letting the boss sign off for such cases.

I've gained quite a bit of knowledge from the people here!

 

[Sidney Vianna]

I hope allegiance to ISO is not turning the world into a Dilbert world of enforcing a set of rules for the sake of enforcing rules.

A QMS should always support the business model of the organization and never the other way around. Requirements derived from the QMS should always pass the litmus test of existing because:

• There is a legal requirement
• There is a business requirement
• There is a customer requirement/expectation

If people define processes, dissociated from these 3 sources, ISO 9001 should not be blamed for.

Too many organizations (attempt to) implement a QMS dissociated from the business practices and then try to have it fit. In the vast majority of the cases, the end result is dysfunctional and unsustainable. It is not "ISO's fault".

 

[tyker]

A quick nit-pick to start with but aren't the teachers suppliers rather than customers?

Anyway, whatever they are, if the teachers are outside your organization, your procedures don't apply. What do apply are the purchasing terms and conditions which are contractual and you have to decide how and to what extent they're enforced. You might also try and insert a clause requiring a percentage reduction for late claims.

If I'm right and the teachers are suppliers, do you have a choice of which ones are employed? Can you distinguish between preferred and non-preferred teachers - hopefully mainly on teaching ability but at least threatening the late claimants with a shortage of work?

This might sound like I'm ignoring the principle of mutually beneficial customer/supplier relationships but I'm not, I'm just seeking to motivate the other party to join in.

 

[StMichael]

Too many organizations (attempt to) implement a QMS dissociated from the business practices and then try to have it fit. In the vast majority of the cases, the end result is dysfunctional and unsustainable. It is not "ISO's fault".

Yes, and this discussion is giving me a clearer picture. The issue here, in my case, is more of a business model issue rather than an ISO issue. We just have to write the procedures to fit the business model (which I will have to work out with the boss).

 

[StMichael]

A quick nit-pick to start with but aren't the teachers suppliers rather than customers?

We are an educational services company, so the teachers are actually customers. We service them by helping them process financial claims, etc, on behalf of the school. It's a weird situation, actually, because both the school and the educational services company are subsidiaries of one main company. While they are two separate legal entities, the same boss owns them both...

Anyway, whatever they are, if the teachers are outside your organization, your procedures don't apply. What do apply are the purchasing terms and conditions which are contractual and you have to decide how and to what extent they're enforced. You might also try and insert a clause requiring a percentage reduction for late claims.

Indeed, that is what we may want to work on. Like I mentioned, this discussion has been very useful to me, in clarifying the actual issues. I love this community!

On a separate note, how do you all enable your signatures? I could not find it anywhere!

 

[Jen Kirley]

Companies that produce things very often find they have to do a rush order, but may charge a premium for that based on the disruption to our scheduled work.

Same goes for returned items in some stores - they might be subject to a 15% "restocking fee." People hate these premium charges. However, when it comes down to managing behavior (and some customers can "learn" there's no consequence to their behavior and keep it up) a fee might help. But it should be undertaken carefully, in case they have choices of who to buy from.

 

[StMichael]

However, when it comes down to managing behavior (and some customers can "learn" there's no consequence to their behavior and keep it up) a fee might help. But it should be undertaken carefully, in case they have choices of who to buy from.

I must be the envy of many in the service industry, as I have a "captive" customer. The school does not really have a choice, since the Board prefers to let the money move from the left pocket to the right pocket, instead of flowing out to another service provider.

Anyone can tell me where I can look for to get a signature function? I have it in other forums, but not this one!

 

[harry]

......................... Anyone can tell me where I can look for to get a signature function? ....................

Signature - Personal Signatures that show at the bottom of my posts

 

[StMichael]

Signature - Personal Signatures that show at the bottom of my posts

I managed to get the signature function. I suspect one needs to post quite a bit to get that function, as a "perk"!

 

[JaneB]

I managed to get the signature function. I suspect one needs to post quite a bit to get that function, as a "perk"!

No. Just stay around more than a day or two. (Occasionally people zip in and try and use the Cove for their own purposes, usually self-promotion/spam, so there are a few restrictions.)

Glad you have got useful advice. I can't add much to what's already been said, other than to say it's very good advice you've been given by a number of people says.

A QMS should always support the business model of the organization and never the other way around.

Yes indeed.

PS You can write into a procedure a business rule/policy something along the lines of "exceptions must be authorized by the team manager " and use that for special cases, exceptions to the general rule, etc. After all, that's one reason why one has managers: to make intelligent decisions.

If the system is dysfunctional, cumbersome, hard to work with or even just crappy, that is not - ever!! - the fault of the Standard. It is in the implementation - ie, the how it's done, often because people haven't properly understood the requirement, and/or have copied what they've seen before or been told by others (equally misinformed).

The Standard says what must be done but does not dictate the how. So if the 'how' isn't working well for you, then change it so that it is.