Who is responsible for quality of the company (Internal ppm) - Quality or Production?

[adirondackman]

Re: Who is responsible for quality of the company (Internal ppm) - Quality or Product

It's interesting seeing the variety of responses to this question. Besides the obvious "everyone is responsible for quality", I've always adhered to the philosophy that production makes the product, and is ultimately responsible for it's quality. I've never known Quality to make nonconforming product. Quality's role is to support production, providing the assistance needed to make sure processes are robust, inspect, monitor, and report, and facilitate root cause analysis and corrective action when necessary. Note I use the word facilitate... production personnel and process engineers are in the drivers seat. Quality is there to help navigate the team through the process.

 

[John Schuler]

Re: Who is responsible for quality of the company (Internal ppm) - Quality or Product

At the risk of splitting hairs, we need to define the term "Responsible".
If we mean "who is the primary person responsible for what is placed on the shipping dock?", that is one thing.

If we mean "who is responsible if Company XYZ is losing market share because of decreased reliability?", that is another thing.

Allow me to offer an analogy closer to a modern home. (I've reversed the typical gender default to make us REALLY think differently. If DAD (the kitchen production manager) normally serves great meals when Mom and the Kids get home from work and school, but today he offers a meal that is inedible, most of us would say: "He" is responsible. But let's look further.

While Dad might be the "Primary Person of Focus", Mom and the kids are ALL responsible for that bad meal. It seems one of the kids left the refrigerator door open and all the food spoiled. Mon said she'd bring home items for the meal, but she was stressed at work, got home late and forgot her errand. etc. etc.

Back in the business world, as you all probably know, engineering we use the term: "Cognizant Engineer", meaning the key person who should be knowledgeable about a situation or product. But is the cognizant engineer responsible if a plane crashes because a landing gear is unable to deploy because of a constricting wire harness?

And now for the real world of humans and machines and corporations. The answer is that WE ARE ALL RESPONSIBLE FOR QUALITY.

Perhaps a better tactical question might be:
Who is the primary cognizant person for today's (apparent) error-level increase or production shortfall? But that merely assigns or identifies a symptom.

But as a practical matter, the person at the top must bear the responsibility for the "disease". In an Army, it is the General in the Field for errors there. It is the Chief of Staff for bad strategies. It is the supply officer for missing machines, etc.

In a corporation, it is the CEO or Chairman who must be "responsible". If a CEO or COO are merely paying lip service to Quality, there will always be a hunt for the scapegoat, or person responsible.

So in summary, the tactical answer for "who is responsible?" might be a given person. But the strategic answer goes all the way up to the top and across the entire company.

In short, we must fix immediate problems by working with the "Primary Cognizant Person" to clear the roadblock or resolve the error. But we can only fix symptoms of poor quality by ensuring that the entire company is on the same Quality Page, starting with whoever sets the mindset of the company and supplies the education and esprit de corps of the organization.

Sadly, many of today's CEOs say they want quality, but most are really just paying it lip service.

And finally, a close look at today's # 1 auto manufacture will show that it recently stumbled quite badly in the Quality arena because, in a rush to become # 1, it pushed systems and people beyond reasonable levels.

And the person responsible for that stumble? Perhaps a CEO who put short-term goals or ego and fame or money and power ahead of the long-term goal of excellence and reasonable continuing profits?

John Schuler
Portland, Oregon

 

[Randy]

Re: Who is responsible for quality of the company (Internal ppm) - Quality or Product

In its broadest use, responsibility is that which one is held accountable for.

In the case of a QMS "responsibilities" are those things which one must fulfill to accomplish ones "role" within the system.

 

[joshua_sx1]

Re: Who is responsible for quality of the company (Internal ppm) - Quality or Product

...nice post there John Schuler, it makes sense… but it makes me hungry too…

...anyway, I guess there is really no regulation of who should handle the quality of the company (internal ppm) – either quality or production… but there are universal patterns that can be applied… and I believe, most of those suggestions are came from experiences…

…but one thing I’ve learned in this world, the best way to relate process is to relate it directly from its word… if you use the “quality of the company internal ppm”, normally and the best way is, to directly link it to quality department… now, if you want to make this as production responsibility, then just simply change the wording to “production internal ppm”…

…so many confusions from this world started from wordings that change gradually from one’s point-of-view to another…

 

[Raffy]

Re: Who is responsible for quality of the company (Internal ppm) - Quality or Product

Hi Hamed,
In our end, we have the ppm monitored by both department, QA & Production. Production is monitoring PPM (test), QA monitoring Gate PPM (Test)
Raffy

 

[vanputten]

Re: Who is responsible for quality of the company (Internal ppm) - Quality or Product

What does the question have to be an "either / or" question? IMHO, collaboration is more effective than competition.

Only one department effects the performance and results?

 

[Bob Bonville]

Re: Who is responsible for quality of the company (Internal ppm) - Quality or Product

Hamed, I like Andy's response because in the final analysis it is management who will decide who is responsible for the increase in PPM defects.

In reality however, the increase in PPM is a direct reflection on the process. If the levels were at one time in control or moving in a positive direction, something has happened that has caused the process to drift.

It is certainly QAs roll to provide accurate defect summary and trend data. Additionally it is QA's charter to require and monitor corrective actions to reduce or eliminate the causes for the increase in the PPM rate.

If your company has a Corrective Action Board, this is the type of issue that the board (collectively) would address. They may choose to assign a process improvement team the responsibility of performing C/A and mistake proofing of the process.

Bob

 

[bobdoering]

Re: Who is responsible for quality of the company (Internal ppm) - Quality or Product

I think that just the need to ask the question probably is evidence that:

a) the leadership of the company is sending signals that it is either production or quality via some blame issue

b) there is a dysfunctional cross-functional team approach to the health of the company

...both of which will lead to finger pointing, throwing over the wall and other such problems.

The top management is responsible, and needs to provide a direction, culture, resources (especially) and environment that allows the teams work together with goal (as in PPM) agreed upon within the team and/or directed by the management (with the hope they know what they are doing).

 

[vanputten]

Re: Who is responsible for quality of the company (Internal ppm) - Quality or Product

Maybe this question will help you see this situation in a different light....

Which part of the car is responsible for forward motion, the engine or the transmission?

You are asking to pick one department or the other in a system. If one is responsible and the other is not, then why have both departments? Can the organization (system) meet its goal without a certain piece?