J
Julie O
What you are describing does not work, except to drive employees out of the company. But what you are describing is not what is under discussion.
What you are describing does not work, except to drive employees out of the company. But what you are describing is not what is under discussion.
Wes, I have a real issue with that approach. You can 'train' somebody until you are blue in the face; waterboard them into submission; and make them swear an oath to comply,and STILL not make them actually do it when the time comes. How is that training's fault?
You can only ever present the training material, or rationale for doing it, or even the written requirement that mandates it, but you can't make the horse drink the water (or something like that...).
This is an upper management failure to support issue.
J
Julie O
Wes said IF the step was REALLY necessary. If you can do all this and they still don't do the step, then I guess the question is raised as to whether it is really necessary.
A different perspective comes from someone who was named US Teacher of the Year back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, and that made enough of an impression on me that I have never forgotten it. She said that "teaching" is behavior that results in learning. If the student didn't learn something, it had not been "taught," but only "presented."
PS "Fault"? "Make them do it?" Ouch.
Wes Bucey
Prophet of Profit
Julie O. gets it! Teaching and training that results in unsuccessful students only means the teaching and training was not "helping students learn."
In my relatively long life, I've seen a lot of faulty curriculums [curricula?] and even more faulty would-be "teachers," "instructors," and "trainers."
Even as hide-bound an organization as the American Society for Quality recognizes that different folks learn in different ways (see the Body of Knowledge - Manager of Quality/Organizational Excellence Certification - CMQ/OE ) and pays particular attention to the various modes of communication which may be necessary to make a point clear to various members of the intended audience. This all presupposes, of course, that the material to be communicated is, in fact, worthwhile. Review Deming's Red Beads to grasp the SNAFU which results from trying to inculcate an ineffective work process on the poor Willing Workers.
Huh? Did you read the previous posts? It looks - at least to me - that you might want to re-read how the whole thread has developed...
Helmut Jilling
Auditor / Consultant
Sometimes, occassionally, you must take one of these miscreants out behind the shop, beat them or hang them from a tree....just to set an example that you are indeed serious....it makes the rest fall into line.... unfortunately, they tell me that is illegal now ...too bad....
J
Julie O
Yes, I've been following this discussion from early on and have read all the posts multiple times, so I know that it has been made clear that the noncompliance under discussion was not a mistake, nor was it due to the procedure being impossible to do. I also know that no one here has suggested that pay should be docked for mistakes, or because someone didn't do the impossible.
J
Julie O
Yes, I have seen this specific scenario more than once, and this has always been the case.
M
Markaich
in truth, as a quality professional, you do nothing to ensure employees are following the rules (unless of course they are your staff). It's not he QP's job to get staff to follow the rules, that's the job of management.
Your can play with the format of documentation, you can play with words and language used to make it easier to follow but, it is not your (our) job to make people work to them.
The raising of CARs is the process thus bringing the NCs to the attention of management; reporting trends and requiring management to address the issues is in my opinion the way to deal with this.
Similar threads
