- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Total Quality Management - Anyone Else Have Experience
Posted on 10/21/24 at 8:43 pm to blueridgeTiger
Posted on 10/21/24 at 8:43 pm to blueridgeTiger
I disagree with most of of you. Working in management in a laboratory afforded me a lot of opportunities to measure and improve processes. And pulling in other departments made me appreciate it more. I remember one lab had a 19 minute turn around on basic CBCs. The lab and ER studied this for a while and eliminated some steps, improved some of the 3 dozen different processes it took to get a CBC done and reduced the turnaround time to 9 minutes. I had a few processes that over the years didn't really improve but usually they did.
We called it TQM, but I think all in all most of the QA studies are basically the same. Something new comes out every few years and is the best thing ever, but it still going to be basically the same.
We called it TQM, but I think all in all most of the QA studies are basically the same. Something new comes out every few years and is the best thing ever, but it still going to be basically the same.
This post was edited on 10/21/24 at 8:51 pm
0
Posted on 10/21/24 at 9:16 pm to blueridgeTiger
PDCA was a big part of what our company did, but in my field of automation software, it was common sense for the type of work we were doing. Our small group was using the principles decades ago long before it became a corporate management policy.
quote:
The PDCA cycle is a powerful tool used in manufacturing to help organizations achieve continuous improvement. It is a core part of both Lean Manufacturing and Total Quality Management (TQM). Essentially, the PDCA cycle is a simple, step-by-step model that allows manufacturers to detect, implement, and evaluate improvements.
Posted on 10/21/24 at 9:26 pm to blueridgeTiger
I think I still have the book. It was a colossal flop at the company where I worked. If I recalled correctly, it seemed like every department was trying to TQM what was wrong in the other departments.
Posted on 10/21/24 at 9:34 pm to LeGrosChat
It is a great system for production and manufacturing environments. Can work ok even in supply chain and transportation. The problem is the consultants were selling to to office environments like banks, insurance companies, things like that. It’s pretty worthless in that type environment.
This post was edited on 10/21/24 at 9:35 pm
Posted on 10/21/24 at 11:06 pm to AlumneyeJ93
quote:
Six Sigma was all the rage for some time,
The most useless waste piece of craps at Dow Chemical got their Black Belts in that shiite, when I had an office in two of their plants, Taft and Plaquemine, in the early 2000's They would NEVER make a decision. BUT it was in their personnel file.
Posted on 10/21/24 at 11:07 pm to blueridgeTiger
If you are instituting anything that creates additional work, over and above what is required to accomplish whatever task is set forth, it will fail.
Everyone in management buys into the next best thing. They create a bunch of KPI’s and metrics to prove it works. The underlings end up spending all this time creating green dots on presentations. Over time it fails and then the next shiny thing comes along.
If you are in industry long enough, you can see the same thing come by with a different name.
Everyone in management buys into the next best thing. They create a bunch of KPI’s and metrics to prove it works. The underlings end up spending all this time creating green dots on presentations. Over time it fails and then the next shiny thing comes along.
If you are in industry long enough, you can see the same thing come by with a different name.
Posted on 10/22/24 at 12:00 am to auie93
quote:
After 3 or 4 years of this DEI garbage, the corp I work for is rebranding it IEB (Inclusion, Equity, and Belonging) heading into 2025. Same shite, different acronym.
IEB
Idiots earning benefits
Posted on 10/22/24 at 2:43 am to blueridgeTiger
Yeah, I was at Martin Marietta in NOLA in the ‘80’s. They implemented it. It’s just a bunch of procedural shite to try to get people behaving in a way they would naturally behave if you rewarded merit instead of arse-kissing.
If you want to know how to run a company, of any size, read the Netflix cultural deck from the ‘90’s. Those mofos nailed it!
You can find it here among other places - it is iconic
If you want to know how to run a company, of any size, read the Netflix cultural deck from the ‘90’s. Those mofos nailed it!
You can find it here among other places - it is iconic
Posted on 10/22/24 at 2:51 am to Teufelhunden
quote:
Deming's principles revolutionized manufacturing in Japan and is the reason their products were vastly superior to ours in the 70s-90s.
Wrong, wrong, wrong!
There was a reason Japan kicked our asses and it had nothing to do with Deming. They had a homogeneous population of nearly fanatical workers. They were smart, well-educated, and had ALREADY done amazing things in the first half of the 20th century.
This was the tiny country that whipped the Russian Empire, dominated Asia, and took on the United States in WW2. After the US crushed them, they rebuilt and dedicated all of that Samuri culture, and imperialism, to manufacturing and economic development.
It’s no coincidence that one Asian country after another has duplicated Japan’s success WITHOUT the help of Dr Deminig. He happened to be there at the right time and place to get credit for what would have happened anyway - and did happen without him elsewhere.
Posted on 10/22/24 at 4:45 am to Penrod
Fair points and perhaps it's an over simplification to say Deming is the reason for their success just as it is that you say he had nothing to do with it. Their culture was fertile ground for his principles, but the Japanese themselves recognize Deming for his contributions. Hell they even established the Deming Prize for TQM.
Posted on 10/22/24 at 6:26 am to Trevaylin
quote:
Safety programs and quality programs all have the same action verbs. Success in one, likely lead to success in the other
I am of the opinion that they are one and the same. Where security is required it is the third property...can't have a one without the other. You can pretend but when shite goes wrong and you are blaming people you have proven the point. Most of the time you'll be to busy reacting to realize it.....
Posted on 10/22/24 at 6:29 am to SuperSaint
quote:
It's like communism. Only reason it didn't work is it wasn't implemented properly.
Its been implemented with great success across many industries and companies around the world. TQM, not communism.
If you consider some of the risky industries which exist in the world and the types of damage they could cause to the communities around them and how seldom anything of significance happens it is obvious that it works and worls well. It does not happen by chance.
Posted on 10/22/24 at 6:38 am to AlumneyeJ93
quote:
If people would implement common sense, standard operating procedures, some checkpoints and accountability it would solve a lot of issues.
Short of "common sense" (a HORRENDOUS plan) the last 3 are the basis of any quality program. Even in their absence there is a quality plan in place...the plan is to fail.
It'd be damn near impossible to build a garden shed without a plan. At the foundation that is all a quality program is...a plan. It doesn't have to be a complex convoluted plan....it can be as simple as a list of material and tasks needed to build the shed......the problem is that anytime people start thinking they start making things complex...its not only our nature it is very profitable - if you can use a bunch of words folks are likely to think you are worth a pile of cash....trust me, I make a good living at it LOL. That said an organization ALWAYS has a plan....it may be well thought out and developed, it may be to fly by the seat of your pants, either way it is a plan.
Posted on 10/22/24 at 6:42 am to I20goon
quote:
Japanese definitely saw benefits, so why shouldn't we. The only reason I could come up with was it either wasn't being used properly and/or did not have the critical mass of buy-in.
Many businesses and industries in the US have benefitted immensely from sound, well developed and implemented quality programs. The program name is unimportant, it is the development and implementation that matters. Faaaaaarrrrrrr too many managers pay a lot of lip service to quality while constantly looking for ways to undermine quality because it can indeed remove some autonomy from management. They will climb a tree to skirt a requirement when they could stand on the ground and easily comply....engineers often times also suffer from the same mind set.
Posted on 10/22/24 at 6:57 am to AwgustaDawg
Has Agile DevOps been mentioned?
Posted on 10/22/24 at 6:59 am to Porpus
quote:
The analogy I draw is that in a lot of organizations, QA is like the police department. Management (and processes) lean on them to make go/no-go decisions that are way over their heads. They operate with great autonomy, e.g. the QA analysts who check my team's work not only don't report to me (even on a "dotted line" basis), they don't even report to the director who oversees me.
This is totally wrong, IMO. QA should not be cops, they should be security guards. That is, they should be told where to go and what to look for based on what the engineers and their managers think might break. They need to check the things we don't have the time to check but know ought to be checked. They do not have the engineering expertise nor the business acumen to do what they're tasked with in most organizations, and that just makes everyone miserable.
QA cannot operate when subject to budgets and schedules. QA also can't answer to anyone but the boss. The boss presumably knows everything needed to make decisions, including schedules and budgets....if the boss does not the organization has serious issues. The boss should be making budget and schedule decisions and QA should operate within those decisions. QA should not, under any circumstance, answer to the groups they are providing oversight for. Those groups should answer to the boss and QA should answer to the boss....if the boss makes good decisions or bad that is their job. Its really pretty simple - the problem is anytime people start thinking they make things overly complex.
If an organization - your department for instance - has been charged with developing a plan that plan will be developed by the people with the expertise to do so. If that organization is routinely diverging from the plan they developed there is something askew....the plan may have been insufficient, it may be that the organization has developed a better plan, whatever the case it is the organizations responsibility to develop a plan and work to it. ALL QA can do is evaluate the plan and how its being worked. Outside of ensuring requirements are captured in the plan there is no function within QA to develop the plan itself nor work to it. That is entirely the job of the experts. The experts develop the plan, QA reviews it for requirements that are either well established (building codes for example) or established by the experts. The experts then execute the plan that they developed....at that point it should go smoothly since the experts have done everything other than make certain requirements are captured. This is where things go south though....the experts start to deviate from the plan without doing so formally. Myriad reasons this happens but its the informal part where things get fricked up....there is no independent review of the changes. In essence this means the organization is now operating without a plan and merely reacting....everyone understands why this is a bad idea. If the original plan that the experts conjured up did not work there is a mechanism in place to tweak it...but why bother, you're an expert, even though the original plan was flawed by your own determination the fixes won't be because your an expert....
its a damned bad idea. QA can not be subject to anyone but the boss. If they are they are merely acting as a rubber stamp for whoever they do answer to. This happens most of the time and is the reason so many people have a negative experience with QA.
Posted on 10/22/24 at 7:07 am to Trevaylin
quote:
"Quality is more of a cultural thing". absolutely 100% correct
Absolutely 100% correct. ALL organizations have a quality program. It may be a well thought and developed one or it may be one where no thought nor development went into it but either way all organizations have a plan....even having no plan is a plan LOL.
I took some marketing classes in college and was told that marketing was important but not everyone did it. Thats is just stupidly wrong....we are all marketing all of the time. We may not mean to be but we are. It is the same with quality...we all have a plan, its just a matter of how that plan was developed and implemented. It may be that flying by the seat of your pants works well....it is unlikely to do so for many organizations and even in those where it does work it is unlikely to do so for long and without avoidable losses.
Posted on 10/22/24 at 8:31 am to blueridgeTiger
Yup TQM - We have figured out a away to waste money rearranging the deck chairs and changing glads to happys by re-wording the simple phrase - "Hey, let's all come to work and do our jobs"
Posted on 10/22/24 at 1:39 pm to Teufelhunden
quote:
but the Japanese themselves recognize Deming for his contributions
He is revered there. My point is that given a society in which the people will crawl over cut glass to get to work, and they will work 80 hours per week for 40 hours of pay, and any system will work.
Tom Landry was supposedly a defensive genius with his Flex defense dominating the NFL. But it would not work anywhere else. Turns out it was a shitty defense, but with guys like Ed “too tall” Jones and Randy White in the trenches, any system would have dominated.
Posted on 10/22/24 at 2:52 pm to blueridgeTiger
quote:
Total Quality Management - Anyone Else Have Experience
I remember it being a thing for a while. My manufacturing employer implemented ISO 9000 in the 90’s which was just some British led scam. We manufactured consumer goods predominately. No coupon clipping mom gives a shite one about ISO 9000… and we dropped it like a bad habit.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News