Why does production see quality negatively?

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#21
It's less about the 'culture' or 'leadership' of the business and more (IMHO) about the relative behaviours of the people in those organizations.

Rarely do quality people involve themselves in planning, to help Production (and often Engineering) departments avoid problems. Indeed, 'Quality' is often reactive and arrives after the battle is over! If you add to this their use of "techno-geek" terminology, whether it be 'ISO' - based or something similar, it's easy to see that such behaviours don't help the Production peoples' cause.

For example, if we read through the many threads about internal auditing, here at the Cove, we are constantly reminded that a lack of planning leads to poor support and acceptance of the audit program. This situation is analogous to other quality tool/methods implementation, whether it's incoming inspections, calibration controls or similar. Furthermore, the selection of quality tools is often inappropriate or not well understood by the quality folks, hence the avoidance by Production.

Quality folks should be ambassadors and work with their counterparts in planning to use the most appropriate tools for any given situation. Justification of a quality technique should be plausible not 'do this, it's good for you' approach.

Sure, Production people often 'bend the rules' and will make their 'numbers' before 'quality', but the two objectives shouldn't be mutually exclusive.
Until the objectives for all departments and functions are properly aligned, there will be conflict, and the objectives are established by top management. I've worked in situations where I was able to help make things better on a relatively small scale by getting people to talk to each other and understand one another's problems, but in the end the "big picture" isn't going to change until management wants it to change.

You hit on a significant aspect of the enmity between production and quality, though, and that's the resentment that's felt by both sides not understanding what their coworkers actually do for a living. The best quality people I've encountered invariably have some experience in production, and understand that sometimes the best production workers are tied to the daily/weekly/monthly numbers and are mostly helpless in making things better.

In the end, the best approach is to let people know that you're there to help them, and that you're all in the same boat. This won't prevent the boat from sinking if management doesn't do its bit to keep it afloat, though.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
G

Gordon Clarke

#22
Helo AndyN

I agree with most of what you write and physical involvemement in planning would/should help. Isn't quality planning however, an integrated part of the quality manual and system? If not it should be :)

"Sure, Production people often 'bend the rules' and will make their 'numbers' before 'quality', but the two objectives shouldn't be mutually exclusive".

My personal experencience as quality manager of several companies, is that "the guy on the shop floor" is usually more concerned about quality (as opposed to quantity) than his or her supervisor. I've never actually heard a supervisor say, "You're not paid to think" but the look and support for the concerned "Joe/Jane" isn't to be found!

If truth be told, I have met and dealt with supervisors who did really care about quality but were often beaten over the head at meetings for not meeting their schedule.
They either conformed or left the company. 50/50.
 
V

Voodoo76

#23
Im approaching this from a different perspective (Plant Mgr for an Automotive supplier) and specific to Automotive. In general what I see, when these two functions are at odds, is the following factors in play:

1. Production is saddled with marginal process capability either thru part or process design. Design will make or break you, anything done after that is a band-aid.
2. Customer expectation does not quite align with product design. Validation and again Design.
3. Low Margin, that is little P&L "Margin for Error".
4. Quality department that feels no P&L responsibility. Combine with #3 for some real fun. This has to become part of a Quality Departments thinking, how can I help Production make better numbers so we all stay employed. Good to see a number of posters hit on this.
5. "Supplier" quality systems that are punitive by design, with no regard for P&L for either the Customer or Supplier. This is really the big difference between the Toyota system and others in our (Automotive) industry. They understand that thier suppliers need to make a decent margin. Internal quality departments often end up being the messenger, and we all know what happened to him.
 

SteelMaiden

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
#24
Voodoo,

I find your statements very interesting, especially this one:
2. Customer expectation does not quite align with product design. Validation and again Design.


Why don't they? I've been trying to figure out for years why we have hundreds of models of cars and they still aren't what the people want. Now, I know that one model cannot be everything to all people, but why can't we manage to have models that actually satisfy the market they should be intended for? We find a car that pretty much meets our needs and the next thing you know the car companies have added dozens of bells and whistles to it, cutting mileage, adding to the price and we are no longer satisfied because now we have to buy some overpriced vehicle that can do all sorts of tricks, when all we needed was to get on down the road. Shouldn't the customer's wants be considered when a vehicle is designed?:2cents:
 
V

Voodoo76

#25
Great question, bells and whistles mean you can charge more is all I can think of. However it is related to what I was trying to get at.

My statement was more directed at supplying a part that for some reason does not meet the OEM expectation, however is correct to print in every measureable way. In several cases I have seen OEM quality departments directed (used) to "find something wrong with this part, we just dont like it".
 
G

Gordon Clarke

#26
1. Production is saddled with marginal process capability either thru part or process design. Design will make or break you, anything done after that is a band-aid.
2. Customer expectation does not quite align with product design. Validation and again Design.
3. Low Margin, that is little P&L "Margin for Error".
4. Quality department that feels no P&L responsibility. Combine with #3 for some real fun. This has to become part of a Quality Departments thinking, how can I help Production make better numbers so we all stay employed. Good to see a number of posters hit on this.
5. "Supplier" quality systems that are punitive by design, with no regard for P&L for either the Customer or Supplier. This is really the big difference between the Toyota system and others in our (Automotive) industry. They understand that their suppliers need to make a decent margin. Internal quality departments often end up being the messenger, and we all know what happened to him.
Hello voodo78 :)
My comments to your points:
#1 I couldn't agree with you more!
#2 As with #1 - I think customers are often given misleading expectations - especially in the auto industry. Success is when the customer returns, again and again.
#3 Within the auto industry (you'll know this much better than I do) some mistakes have deadly consequencies, others merely inconveniences. One must be found, the other prevented when possible. A thorough design review should seperate the two and take the necessary steps.
#4 I suppose my remark to #3 implies where I think focus should be oriented.
#5 Again I agree copletely. Why are purchasing "rewarded" for buying "cheap" goods? "The best at the lowest price" would be a great slogan on all purchasing department walls :)
I have a Ford (produced in Belgium) but my wife drives a Toyota :) We're both very happy with our transport :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
G

Gordon Clarke

#27
Re: Why does manufacturing see quality negatively?

:topic:
IMO the title of the thread needs slight modification to avoid confusion, by replacing the word 'Manufacturing' with 'Production', since manufacturing is comprised of both: the production as well as quality; and hence it is a misnomer in the title.

On the topic:

The old school of thoght divides the 'Production' and 'Quality Control' into rival groups, thereby creating a war path, both grabbing at each other's throat. The kind of scenario discussed here is very much prevalent in the companies still working on old school of thought.

The new thought process that, "The production department is wholly responsible to ensure and produce quality product", has changed the scenario from warring lords to helping friends. Here the quality personnel come forward to rescue the production guys, and help them by analysing and finding the solution to the problem! Toyota production system (TPS) is one good and successful example of this line of thinking. I too have applied it in my factory with improved results at reduced cost. My company boasts of the best quality and is acknowledged in the market as a leader making quality products. But, earlier we used to "SELL" quality products, now by shifting the onus of responsibility on production, we now "MAKE" quality products! :D
I know I'm replying to an "old" input but there's a couple of things I don't exactly agree with.

Trying to define "Production" and "manufacturing" to me is the same as "What came first, the chicken or the egg" - precious time wasted on irrelevance.

"The production department is wholly responsible to ensure and produce quality product",

That sends chills up and down my spine. Production produces (or tries to) what design designs. If it's made to spec and it doesn't work who's fault is it?

I'm certain Toyota "designs" quality into their products. If the spec is reasonable and "producable" then I'm sure most manufacturing shops can "get it right".
 
Z

zancky

#28
Re: Why does manufacturing see quality negatively?

A good "rule of thumb" is that design is 80% responsible for all product and production errors. Take one or two of your most serious "problems" and figure out what the best corrective action would be. Often, but not always, a specification change would suffice to eliminate the problem.
.

Sorry but I can not agree. If you think 80% of production errors depends on design imho your process engineer (and in some way your quality dept.) is not working properly. Once he has got the drawing he should check whether it feasible or not and ask changes to design department eventually. Once the drawing is accepted by the production, it means they can do it! (not to talk about the meeting during design development where everybody should be).
Sometime production, and even quality (not to talk about suppliers) say tolerances are too tight but (let me use a sense of humor) there is no improvement/progress or competence if we still use the stone age tolerances. Designer must be aware about what it is feasible but the process engineer / supplier must not hide what production can actually do. Usually a designer must ask to some different suppliers (better potential suppliers) in order to get enough informations. We must work in order to have a bridge between design development phase and process design. I have seen sometime it was a jump, whatever has been done before, e.g. during design phase, is missed only the drawing remains. E.g. nobody read the DFMEA in order to understand the reason for some choices; I have seen reference points for assembly on the drawing totaly negleted in the assembly machine design.
Nevertheless I must admit it is true that something can be done into design departement but let's take a look at ISO TS 16949: have you seen any clear explicit requirements for the design department people to know ASME Y145M or ISO 1101 etc? There are a list of ISO and national standards that every mechanical designer must know but ISO 9001 and ISO TS 16949 say it is the company that must decide what they need. From my point of view, I receive drawing from supplier around the world, 90% of the company will fail if an auditor will check the knowledge of ASME Y145M or ISO 1101 and related standards.
Changing the specification.
It should be stated somewhere into ISO 9001 and TS that there must be a written procedureon how to write specification (something as the MIL STD does) in oder to fit and just fit needs. Anyway form my experience, a specification change results soon or later in a disaster on the field half of the time (100% sure if you change one of my specification:notme:).

I know these has not answered to your question but I wolud like you point out some concerns.

I would like You specify whether it is "why does manufacturing see quality tools negatively?" or "why does manufacturing see quality department people negatively?".

In the first case one possible reason is within the standards itself. If we are discussing about words, sentences of the standard in this forum and sometime we find different interpretations, what may be the attitude of production foreman involved everyday in machine setting/problems? Standards should be clearer and may be less general.

In the second case quality people is most of the time requested to assure product quality (read specification and drawing requirements) so they are the personification of all problems. Let me explain: as quality people find out a mistake/problem/non compliance into the production, he is the problem not the real cause (if You don't see/hear the tree is falling down there is no tree fall). that's a very bad attitude if it happens. On the other side I don't believe production will ever "loves" quality people. I have noticed so many times as "external witness" production people behaving friendly and cohoperative with Quality peolple during meeting and work irrespectively or even "against" Quality dept. after the meeting (the same some Quality guys vs Production).

There are some bad habits sometime in some design dept, sales dept etc. all of them will cause misunderstandings and bad relationship between Quality and other departements but I have written so much today.....
 
V

Voodoo76

#29
Re: Why does manufacturing see quality negatively?

.

...Sometime production, and even quality (not to talk about suppliers) say tolerances are too tight but (let me use a sense of humor) there is no improvement/progress or competence if we still use the stone age tolerances....

I would like You specify whether it is "why does manufacturing see quality tools negatively?" or "why does manufacturing see quality department people negatively?".

In the first case one possible reason is within the standards itself. If we are discussing about words, sentences of the standard in this forum and sometime we find different interpretations, what may be the attitude of production foreman involved everyday in machine setting/problems? Standards should be clearer and may be less general.

In the second case quality people is most of the time requested to assure product quality (read specification and drawing requirements) so they are the personification of all problems. Let me explain: as quality people find out a mistake/problem/non compliance into the production, he is the problem not the real cause (if You don't see/hear the tree is falling down there is no tree fall). that's a very bad attitude if it happens. On the other side I don't believe production will ever "loves" quality people. I have noticed so many times as "external witness" production people behaving friendly and cohoperative with Quality peolple during meeting and work irrespectively or even "against" Quality dept. after the meeting (the same some Quality guys vs Production).

.....
Interesting viewpoint. Regarding tolerancing, tight for the sake of tight serves no one. In my opinion this is just lazy design, not taking the time to understand stackup, assembly variation, ect. See this all too often, a simple part with 30mm of clearance and a +/-1mm tolerance.

A big problem related to this in Automotive is that your "customer" changes with phase. Initially it is purchasing, who have a very limited agenda. Then engineering, where unfortunatly these days there is often limited manufacturing experience. And finally the assembly plant. Who will tend to make your life heck if their own engineering department has made mistakes in design or spec.

I would agree that quality departments are often simply the bearer of bad news. However, at least in the Automotive business, they are also often used as a hammer to obtain resolution to a problem not of the suppliers making. All in the name of customer satisfaction. At least to me this abuse is what leaves a bitter taste in my mouth regarding current quality systems.

"Lets all work together as a team, till something doesnt quite work the way we want, then we will play the blame game". This is the mantra in Automotive quality.
 
G

Gordon Clarke

#30
SteelMaiden,

"I've been trying to figure out for years why we have hundreds of models of cars and they still aren't what the people want".
My response doesn't really have anything to do with the original topic title but I've wondered about the same thing too :)

Let's assume I''m reasonably normal. I want a car to get me from A to B every day as economically as possible. Hmmm, then I add "safely", "comfortably" and after a little more thought I want something that can hold the kitchen sink etc. etc.

I go from what my brain tells me I actually need to what my heart make me want. With most cars it's the extras that cost and I don't think anyone is ordered to buy them at gunpoint. Are "bells and whistles" realy the car manufacturer's or sales person's fault? I'm not at all sure :)

How many have a 4WD when the vehicle is only used on a normal highway? Common sense and car purchase don't go well together.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Is SPC required for Production if a Customer does not ask for it? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
P General Production Procedure - Does anyone have a sample? Clause 7.5.1 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
P How does "Manufacturing Manager" differ from "Production Manager"? Manufacturing and Related Processes 8
J Who does most of your inspection - QC or Production Manufacturing and Related Processes 74
J Does ISO9k2k require Safety Training needed in production floor ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 20
C Looking for a company that does production hot forming Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
H TS 16949 - 7.5.2.1 - Why does TS ask for process validation for all the production? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
D ISO 9001 Clause 7.5 Production and Service Provision - What does 'Service' apply to? Service Industry Specific Topics 37
W FPS (Ford production system) - Does anybody have any interesting comments? Customer and Company Specific Requirements 8
lanley liao Does all of the suppliers need to integrated into the supplier list qualified of the company? Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 2
0 To which part of 13485 does this refer? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
A Medical Device Contract Manufacturer - Does the CM need to register with FDA? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3
J Records Control - Does each individual record need to be numbered? Records and Data - Quality, Legal and Other Evidence 2
lanley liao Does the customer`s trademark belong to customer-supplied property? Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 2
H How does a gas turbine work on diesel fuel? Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 12
G What does performance specification include? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
W Where does a coatings and paint company fall in IATF? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
A How much does a complete biocompatibility test package cost? Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 1
B Does anybody know how to get older versions of Minitab to work in Windows 10? Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 9
M Does the ISO 9001:2015 standard require a disaster recovery plan or emergency response plan ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 16
C Does an accessory need an IFU if it use is discussed in the Parent device IFU? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 5
S How long does it take to register a product with MHRA? UK Medical Device Regulations 3
M Quality Manual - Where does Revision History Section go? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 8
U Does *anyone* know a lab that will test to EN 455-4 Medical Gloves shelf life determination? EU Medical Device Regulations 1
A Brexit When does the UK responsible person need to be in place? UK Medical Device Regulations 10
M How does IEC-60601-1 apply to a non-medical device in the patient vicinity? IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 1
N Does anyone have experience of GB/T 34986-2017? China Medical Device Regulations 1
Z Does anyone have experience with EN ISO 17664 ? IEC 62366 - Medical Device Usability Engineering 9
F Does anyone have an ESD quality/cooler talk to share? Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 4
A What does this line from MDCG 2020-3 (MDR art. 120 substantial change) mean to you? EU Medical Device Regulations 4
D Change Approval Requirements - Does every change need formal customer approval? Design and Development of Products and Processes 17
T What does AS9100 mean when it says you must establish a process to do X? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 24
L Does a backdate form format can be changed if wrong revision is used? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 8
B General Motors and Honda Alliance - What does this mean to suppliers? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
C ISO 13485 :2016 - CAPA - Does every CAPA need to be checked by regulations? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 9
A Does ISO 9001:2015 cover all the requirements of ISO 10012:2003? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
N FDA UDI - Label vs. Labeling - Does the insert need to include UDI? Other US Medical Device Regulations 1
A Does anyone have a checklist of API Spec 650 13th Edition? Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 0
D Does Manufacture can submit CE mark application under MDD with NB for his New product after May 2020? EU Medical Device Regulations 3
A What does this sentence "this symbol shall be used in the orientation shown" mean in ISO 780:2015? Other Medical Device Related Standards 4
L Turkish Requirements - Does the Software need to be translated? CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 2
R Where does IATF 16949 address Process mapping? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
J Does Pakistan Medical Device Import License allows parallel import? Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
BeaBea Interesting Discussion Where Does Marketing/ Advertisement of Products fit in to ISO 9001? Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 39
P Does anyone have a API Q1 Documentation Package? Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 1
N What is our product classification? (Does Unclassified classification still exists) Other US Medical Device Regulations 14
C Does a CE mark infer meeting all applicable standards? CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 4
N Small Company - Internal audit process - Who does the audit? Internal Auditing 16
J Does anyone have an excel IATF 16949 Internal Audit checklist I could use? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
A Does AS9100 require traceability to operators performing the work? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 4

Similar threads

Top Bottom