Whose fault is it? Our quality department gets blamed for anything!

N

nutzz

#1
Hello All,

I need some help from all the wise members of the Cove. Our quality department gets blamed for anything and everything that goes wrong. We usually hear that "we should know better".

My question is.... how would you respond to this?

Any input would be helpful.

:thanx:

Dawn (nutzz)
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
C

Craig H.

#2
Well, Dawn, it would help to have some examples, but I have some ideas initially.

If you have a QMS in place, and it includes corrective and preventive action, those should include who actually does the CA/PA - and most of the time it shouldn't be QA. If you have issues that are cropping up again and again, then there is a problem in how these have been approached/executed.

Also, you can address many issues as part of management review.

Finally, I really dislike the "finger pointing" approach to problem solving. Maybe using a structured approach is an option? What kind of support do you have from top management?
 
N

nutzz

#3
First, thank you very much for you help.

Unfortunately, it is upper management that is pointing the finger. We utilize CA/PA but how many can you issue before it just gets old?

Several examples of “we should know better”

1 Material shipped without being certified even though we issued a bench certification that was distributed to all parties involved.

2 Skids were moved out of the Quality HOLD FOR DISPOSITION which is clearly labeled in big bold letters and a neon orange sign stating the same is put in the traveling folder.
 
C

Craig H.

#4
nutzz said:
First, thank you very much for you help.

Unfortunately, it is upper management that is pointing the finger. We utilize CA/PA but how many can you issue before it just gets old?

Several examples of “we should know better”

1 Material shipped without being certified even though we issued a bench certification that was distributed to all parties involved.

2 Skids were moved out of the Quality HOLD FOR DISPOSITION which is clearly labeled in big bold letters and a neon orange sign stating the same is put in the traveling folder.

Ok, #1 sounds like a communication issue. Who gets copies of the certification/notice it has been issued? Make sure the one(s) squaking the loudest is(are) on the list. Answer any further complaints with "notification was sent via attached email(or other coorespondence) sent HH:MM:ss xx/xx/04" and make sure it is circulated at least 1 level above them. Make sure you document everything like the certification to those above you. It is just CYA good policy. Even if it is the top manager, it won't take too many embarassing "here-it-was-moments" for them to get the message.

When delivering the message, it is very important for you to mention that it is your usual procedure (once it has been) for the information to be delivered the way you sent it. Ask the "offended party" if the method of communication is not working, and if it is not, what better way would they suggest? Remember, it is your goal to inform, and the lack of communication is the issue here, not personalities. However, once it is seen that you are communicating, then pointing a finger at you, when they had the data all along, will be something they will want to avoid. Attack the communication problem. The people will likely take care of themselves. Just to be sure it is the problem you are attacking, not the people. Even if it is the top person.

Number 2. We use cheap plastic marking ribbon (marking tape), the type surveyors use, to wrap around suspect pallets. Cheap, quick, easy to see, and NO EXCUSE for moving it by unauthorized people. If the pallet checks out OK later, remove the tape (there is no adhesive on it) and ship the pallet out. We keep rolls of it around where the key people always have a roll when they need it. Make sure you outline who can put on/remove the tape.

Hope this helps.
 
W

WALLACE

#5
Hi Dawn,
You're actually in a great position of changing gear and redefining your quality system and internal auditing strategy.
May I suggest you take a look at this link within the Cove forums:
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=7678

I get the gist of your issues without you offering much more examples. It may indeed boil down to plain old training. Employees (Including myself) tend to do what we want if there are no system constraints put in place that, force us to look at the whole system as processes that are supported by procedures, that must be followed. Yeah, it sounds too simple, doesn't it? yet within many organizations that have a formal quality management system in place, they just do it the way it's happening at your location.
Take a look at what Ford use internally to enforce and measure task process capabilities. SQDCME: Safety, Quality, Delivery, Cost, Morale and Environment.
Also have a look at this thread too: http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=7647&highlight=SQDCME
Hope this gets you off to a new start.
Wallace.
 
N

nutzz

#6
:thanks:

First off, thank you both Wallace and Craig for your help, I am indeed hoping to change the “mentality” (I use that term loosely) here. Unfortunately, it is the manager of our materials department that we seem to be having the most problems with. He just doesn’t get it. :confused: The tools that you have suggested look promising and I will be looking at how I can implement them here.

Thank you again,

Dawn
 

gpainter

Quite Involved in Discussions
#7
The key people in your organization are responsible for your system:
President
Quality Manager
Production Manager
From just what you say it sounds like your organization is more than likely production driven and quality is not everyones responsibility. I may be wrong but I have experienced this too some extent at previous employment. It will be a long battle but keep on pounding.

1. who is responsible for shipping and the certification?
2. who is responsible for the hold area?
Is everyone trained in their processes?
 
Q

qualitygoddess - 2010

#8
Make it Go Away!

Nutzz:

Since your senior management seems to think the quality group is to blame for human error, think about how to eliminate the human error. I always like the mistake proofing approach. We sometimes call it idiot proofing, as long as we don't offend anyone when we say it out loud! For example, Craig's suggestion to use the non-adhesive tape to wrap around the skids is a way to communicate to the "idiot" not to use this product. You need to come up with solutions to eliminate the possibility of human error.

As an example of mistake-proofing, think about the hand-pushed lawn mower. Recall that a while back, the manufacturers put on a safety bar. Once the mower starts, the user has to hold down the bar, or else the motor disengages. This was a mistake-proofing solution to help combat the "idiots" who turned over the mower while it was running in order to clear out something stuck under the mower.

How do you get there from here?? I like to flowchart the work process and then take each step in the flow and do something called a process activity diagram (picked it up in one of those classes from long ago). You can see a diagram in the attached file. Look at the Notes view. Then with a team of the people who know the process, you make process activity diagrams for all the process steps, and fill in the controls and the resources. Then you brainstorm all the possible ways that the controls could be used incorrectly -- and think of ways to make the controls mistake-proof. You can also look at the resources and think about ways to better prepare the human resources, or ways to make equipment less prone to human error when in use.

Yes, it's difficult work! If you want a more formal approach, FMEA can be used. Regardless, it's not quality's fault. Good luck!

--Jodi
 

Attachments

M

michelle8075

#9
Hi Dawn,

I like to believe that a Quality System is just a Business Operating System. That is, Quality is not something that is different or an add on to what great business already do.

Unfortunatly, I have some of the same issues that you do. And, I would guess that a majority of Quality Professionals have faced your situation at some time.

My suggestion is that through Internal Audits and Surviellance Audits you can only look at so much of the big picture at a time. Quality can only catch so many things each time. In our procedures, we specifically state that managers, directors, or even the president are responsible for the procedure, for training on the procedure, and making any revisions/additions etc. to the procedure. That way they can't blame QA. They have to blame themselves for not making the Quality System part of their job. Sure, the Quality Dept. is responsbile for helping the managers write effectivce procedures and work instructions, but it always comes back to management being responsible. Period.

Good Luck
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
Admin
#10
nutzz said:
First, thank you very much for you help.

Unfortunately, it is upper management that is pointing the finger. We utilize CA/PA but how many can you issue before it just gets old?

Several examples of “we should know better”

1 Material shipped without being certified even though we issued a bench certification that was distributed to all parties involved.

2 Skids were moved out of the Quality HOLD FOR DISPOSITION which is clearly labeled in big bold letters and a neon orange sign stating the same is put in the traveling folder.
It seems that your top management believes that the quality department should baby sit or, even worse, police the rest of the organization, based on the two scenarios that you just mentioned. If that is the case, and they can not understand that quality and customer satisfaction can only be economically achieved as a collective effort, I am sorry to tell you, but the situation is hopeless.

Try to make them understand the financial implications of people failing to follow the processes. For example, you could say that you will have a locked area for the skids waiting to be dispositioned, to minimize the chances of someone further processing the product that should be ON HOLD. But there are monetary consequences, besides disrupting the lay-out and process flow. And sure you can try to implement corrective and preventive actions to deal with the situation, but at the end of the day, it boils down to your top management true understanding of effective (quality) management processes.

A key word in any management system is accountability. Your department can not be held responsible for other’s lack of discipline.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Marc Y2K - Whose Fault? After Work and Weekend Discussion Topics 9
S Whose responsibility is it to issue Corrective Action Requests? Internal Auditing 8
Y How can FDA supervise devices whose manufacturer name is changed US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 9
H AIAG CQI-11, 12, 15 and 17 - Whose requirements are these? Customer and Company Specific Requirements 12
Q Whose brain child is 5S? Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 10
hogheavenfarm Whose job? What department schedules a PSI (pre shipment inspection)? Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 6
S Whose company achieved their 2008 goals? Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 3
Wes Bucey Whose responsibility for injury? World News 9
CalRich Subcontracted laboratory per 5.10.6 - Whose name goes on the Calibration Certificate General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1
A Whose responsibility is Data Analysis - ISO 9001 QMS responsibility? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
T Product / Service Life Cycle Quality - Whose Responsibility to Sort, etc.? Philosophy, Gurus, Innovation and Evolution 1
A Customer Satisfaction - Whose responsibility? Sales Manager? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 16
M Disabling measurement data during fault conditions IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 5
D SINGLE FAULT CONDITION, short circuit and open circuit of any component (IEC 60601-1 3.1) IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 9
T Single Fault Condition IEC 60601 Clause 8.7.1 shorting Cr/Cl in Patient Applied Part IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 7
adir88 Tools for Normal and Fault Conditions ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 9
S Returned product due to Customers fault, is it a Non-Conformance? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 7
A Touch current in single fault conditions test and earth leakage current in normal conditions test, are they really different tests? IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 8
T Pulse oximeters ISO 80601-2-61, is 0% okay for probe fault? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 4
G IEC 61010 - Single Fault Condition - Protective Impedance Implementation IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 1
M What are Single Fault Conditions and how to test - IEC 80601-2-13 Other Medical Device Related Standards 0
E Single Fault Condition Simulation IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 2
P Question related to Single Fault Conditions IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 2
G What is the exact meaning of Single Fault condition? EU Medical Device Regulations 4
R Single Fault Condition for Internally Powered Medical Device IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 4
W Medical Device Single fault test-protection against fire IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 2
M IEC 60601-1 Single fault conditions of electronic PCB components IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 2
R Single Fault Condition - Motor Test IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 17
R Is foreseeable misuse considered as single fault condition? IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 33
G Single Fault Condition for 3-Phase Medical System - IEC 60601 Clause 8.1b IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 3
Y FDA News bulletin: It's the FDA's fault! FDA at Fault for Poor Quality Devices US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 6
R Should the fault tests pass if temperature goes high in short time? IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 15
C FTA (Fault Tree Analysis) Software - Which is better/best Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 1
apestate At-Source DCMA QAR DOD Inspector finds fault with Part Marking Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 5
B Define Fault, Double Fault and Normal Conditions - Preparing a Risk Management File FMEA and Control Plans 1
I Seeking thoughts on using BOTH FTA (Fault Tree Analysis) and FMEA ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 17
P Difference between Fault Tree and Factor Tree Analysis Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 1
I Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) - Application - Preventive, Corrective or Risk Analysis? Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 10
E My boss wants me to issue a CAR to myself, though I don't feel I am at fault Nonconformance and Corrective Action 27
Ajit Basrur Risk Analysis using Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) or Hazard Operations Analysis (HAZOP) ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
C Is a nonconformity the "fault" of QA auditors? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 33
Marc Fault Tree Analysis - A brief powerpoint ppt pps file General Information Resources 0
S What is a Six Sigma Tree? Fault tree analysis? Six Sigma 14
M PCB (Printed Circuit Board) Root Cause Fault Analysis Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 1
N Guidance - Cost of Good Quality Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 2
D Quality plan for moving locations ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
was named killer Job Opportunity-Quality Engineer-Tampa Florida Job Openings, Consulting and Employment Opportunities 0
Marc Job Opportunity – Quality Assurance Specialist - Suspense 7 April 2021 Job Openings, Consulting and Employment Opportunities 0
C Requirement to link Quality Manual to ISO 9001 clause numbers? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 13
normhowe "The Problem with Quality Management: Process orientation, controllability and zero-defect processes as modern myths" Book, Video, Blog and Web Site Reviews and Recommendations 2

Similar threads

Top Bottom