I would explain that a systematic approach must be taken to figure out what explains the defects in the production process. Through a deductive approach it is feasible that the issue can be quickly identified. One obvious way to track the products quality is to follow from stage to stage in the production process and continuously examine the quality and look for defects. This is usually enough to figure out what stage in the process is creating the errors and then once the stage has been identified further investigation should be able to identify the particular problem.
¶ … president?
I would inform the president that the increase in the defect rate must be related to an assignable cause. If there was no change in the overall process, then there must some small deviation in the chain of operations included in the process. For example, while there may not have been a change in the process for die cutting, it could be possible for one of the dies to have become wrapped or one of the machines to become out of alignment. Other examples that may explain the defects would be a variation in the raw materials or other imputes that go into the process as well as a countless number of other possible attributable causes.
Furthermore, I would explain that a systematic approach must be taken to figure out what explains the defects in the production process. Through a deductive approach it is feasible that the issue can be quickly identified. One obvious way to track the products quality is to follow from stage to stage in the production process and continuously examine the quality and look for defects. This is usually enough to figure out what stage in the process is creating the errors and then once the stage has been identified further investigation should be able to identify the particular problem.
2. He wants you to change the process to reduce the number of defects, but you know that is the wrong approach. How do you talk him out of it?
I would desperately try to talk him out of trying to redesign the whole process. The first thing I would mention is that no process is entirely perfect. Each process takes time and energy to put together and bugs in the process are worked out along the way. Thus processes have sort of an evolutionary aspect to them. They are first designed and redesigned to meet their requirements. Each redesign in the process represents a valuable contribution. Thus if you start all over by building a new process you will lose the value in the existing design.
In many cases, companies that hastily redesign processes will actually make the process worse than it was before. Not only will they encounter a whole new set of problems in constructing the overall process but they will also face obstacles and challenges in working out any kinks in the system. They best approach is generally to make incremental approaches to system and process improvements when they are appropriate and not to start over from scratch. It is important to think a process in terms of a dynamic system that requires a lot of design and maintenance to operate effectively. Thus starting over with the process often requires more effort and expense than fixing the flaws in the current system.
3. What approach would you use to get the operation back to normal?
There are wide arrays of various tools that can be used to help identify the problems and get the system functioning again. There are also several tools that can be routinely employed to minimize the chances of such a problem occurring in the future. In many cases simple tools such as scatterplots, control charts, flow charts, histograms and other similar tools can help to identify the problems quickly.
You’re 84% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.