posted 22 August 2001 09:58 AM               

One can look at the concept of continuous improvement in practice as a system of two elements: corrective actions and ppreventive actions, can't one? If so, it looks all simple.
A corrective action is meant to eliminate the reason for a non-conformity, which has already occured. It naturally results in an improvement.
A preventive action is a little more sophisticated matter - it is meant to eliminate the reason of a potential non-conformity. The crux of the matter lies in the concept of POTENTIAL non-conformity. What does it mean? Obviously it is a situation when one can forecast a non-conformity:
- if a bad trend remains unchanged;
- if the environment (internal orr external) changes;
...in case no preventive actions are taken.
This above is very broad and liberal concept. It allows describing prcatically anything through this word - 'potential non-conformity'.
- The company needs more equipment (or it lacks production capacities if the tren in sales volume remains);
- The company needs to control some more parameters of a production processes, as the outbound testing shows unstable results, thoughh within the accepted allowance.
- The company needs to educate its employees better (otherwise, with time passing it loses its competitiveness against companies with better educated labor)
- et cetera.
This kind of example list can be endless and endlessly diverse.

So, potential non-conformities can be non-conformities at all - just improvement suggestions.

Isn't it meant so in the ISO 9000 standard, which contains separate paragraphs for Continuous Imporovement, Corrective Actions and Preventive Actions?
Can someone give me an example of an improvement, which is not a preventive action aimed at eliminating a reason for potential non-conformity?

posted 22 August 2001 10:17 AM               

I think you have answered your own question, not just for quality systems, but for life in general.

Why do I cut the grass every week? Because if I don't, it will grow long and make it more difficult to mow the next time.

Yes, this is a very simplistic example but I think it fits.

posted 22 August 2001 12:29 PM               

quote:

---

Can someone give me an example of an improvement, which is not a preventive action aimed at eliminating a reason for potential non-conformity?

Anton[/B]

---

How about:
Upgrade MRP database to include (insert your favorite data here) information not currently available.

a) can we agree its an improvement?
b) And at "face value at least" has nothing to do with eliminating a potential nonconformity

(The use of the new information may lead to future disovery of an area for potential nonconformity, but may also simply be a trend measurable to re-enforce what we allready know -- without involving nonconformity potential.

Regards
Jim

posted 22 August 2001 01:27 PM               

And let me take Jim's example a little further.
Upgrading software...the old system may work fine and be error free, but a new version may operate faster, be easier to use. So there is no preventative action here, but an improvement in efficiency. Same idea can be applied to machinery, the old one may work error free, but a newer model may save time in set-up or operation.

posted 22 August 2001 02:10 PM               

My post, probably was not really "a shot" as Jim says. I was probably validating my own experience. Consulting people not very aware of the quality and even management theory, you always have to find good formulas helping them be motivated to do "the right thing".
In my humble experience I have been using the presented idea to motivate people in client companies to build up efficient continuous-improvement-systems, involving all of their staff as far as it is possible.
One has to know why he has to improve. It sounds banally, however is still a burning question for numerous enterpreneurs and managers, especially in SME's. It is not always persuasive enough to say that simply improving they just do not let their competitors go ahead of them (rather then going ahead themselves). They tell you that they understand it fully, but shall continue sustaining their favorite "status quo".

So, in some cases it is really striking to insist on the fact that any improvemnent is on the other had a way to avoid future non-conformities - or simply - problems.
This makes people think of improvements considering that these improvements have to solve some problems now or in the future. This also can be a base for ranking improvement activities according to their significance and benefits.

Yours sincerely,
Anton