Ralph Mowery;3625637 Wrote:
> Years ago when the Three Mile Island
> power plant melted down was caused by management that did not know how
> things worked.
Three Mile Island is the classic example of how management, who does not
know how the work gets done, then proclaim ridiculous denials about
systems that make management redundant. That means employees - people
who know how the work gets done - make decisions. Business school
graduates fear that.
Only guy in GPU management who knew anything about how a nuke worked was
off on National Guard duty. On Three Mile Island, they could not even
make outgoing phone calls. GPU management could not ask Bell of PA for
guaranteed service let alone more phone lines. It took Jimmy Carter to
fix even that problem. He had all Three Mile Island phones connected
directly to the White House switch board. Because 85% of all problems
were directly attributed to top management. Who then blame others
because they do not come from where the work gets done. Because they
come from business schools, only they are trained (entrenched) to make
decisions. Concepts such as ISO9000 expose business school graduates as
a big reason even for bankruptcy - and crappy products.
Does he come from where the work gets done? One only need view how
Steve Balmer did so much damage to Microsoft. Appreciate why business
school graduates only see ISO9000 and other functions that target better
products as paperwork.
Name a GM product designed by an engineer in the last 40 years. Even
the engine in a Chevy Volt cannot recharge its battery. Another example
of what happens when business school graduates - not the informed people
- make decisions.
in the system that produces a better product. It just means if you
build junk it will be more or less consistent junk - and well
documented. It DOES allow you to trace back and find out where the
problem came from if you can isolate what the problem is..
When management is trying to reduce costs it is usually not hard to
tell where the problem came from - it came from buying the cheapest
part somewhere to save $0.05
It doesn't necessarily change the mind of the accountant responsible
for the decision.
You can source all your parts from iso9000 registered suppliers, but
as long as their supplier is willing and anxious to provide them with
parts with "fudged" certification stickers, it doesn't help anything.
The accountants try to save $0.05 per unit to recouip the hundred
thousand dollars plus they spent on the ISO certification so they can
sell to government accounts.
At leastthat's how it worked in the computer business.
After getting ISO certification the quality actually DROPPED - for
the above stated reasons. It's not "business school graduates" saying
this - it's business school "graduates" doing it. The manager/CEO
calined to be a "Harvard MBA" and the controller/CFO was an anally
retentive old-school CMA - two worse pains in the ass could not
possibly have been thrown into contact with each other in your worst
Ed Pawlowski;3625863 Wrote:
> On 9/18/2016 8:17 PM,
> Exactly. I had a good supplier that went through the ISO certification.
> They made nothing but crap after that and I dropped them.
From Wikipedia on ISO9000: > The standard is seen as especially prone to failure when a company is
> interested in certification before quality. Certifications are in fact
> often based on customer contractual requirements rather than a desire to
> actually improve quality. "If you just want the certificate on the wall,
> chances are you will create a paper system that doesn't have much to do
> with the way you actually run your business",
If one thinks like a business school graduate, then he needs
certificates and other paper to 'prove' his accomplishments. Spread
sheets are somehow proof. If one comes from where the work gets done,
then most of the paper work already exists in a form that addresses the
many aspects of actual operations.
Business school graduates focus on paper work (ie spread sheets) that
are only reporting on things that really happened four to ten years
ago. Product people focus paper necessary to better support the
customer, innovate a product, and maintain standards that defined a
I cannot say how many times I have seen business school graduates use
cost controls as if that makes a better product. In reality, cost
controls typically result in higher costs. But you cannot tell that to
someone enthrall by the certification rather than learn how the work
When ISO9000 does not work, then search for an eliminate the reason for
failure - a business school graduate who never learned how the work gets
done. Worst company president is the guy who was previously a CFO. His
existence explains why ISO9000 does not work.
On Monday, September 19, 2016 at 10:17:17 AM UTC-4, westom wrote:
What you need to understand is that what Clare posted is correct.
The definition of "quality" most people think of is not what ISO
and similar define quality as. For example, we say, "that's a quality
wrench", meaning that it's well built, nice and shiny, solid, close
tolerances. But for quality measurement and monitoring purposes, the
definition of quality is a product that meets the specification.
You can be making cheap wrenches, that rust easily, that have
wide tolerances, that have rough edges, but if that is what is spec'd
for the product, then the product that meets it coming off the line is
good and counted as such when monitoring whether the product meets
the quality standard or not.
"If you just want the certificate on the wall,
In the 70's I briefly worked for a company that went to large stores and
factories and replaced ALL the lightbulbs. Mostly florescent tubes.
Whether they worked or not, ALL bulbs were replaced every few years.
I always thought that was wasteful, but I suppose it eliminated downtime
for the companies when lights burned out.
Several times I took th working bulbs, put them in a box, and brought
them home. I had a few of the work lights that used the 4ft bulbs and
the bulbs still worked. I actually still have at least one box of
I have always had mixed feelings about replacing all of them at one
time. If the bulbs are made at the same place and time they all should
be about the same quality. If the companies would wait for about 20 % or
so of the bulbs to go bad, then replace them all it should be ok.
The main reason is labor. Some companies do not have the equipment to
reach high places and not skilled labor to replace the bulbs and
ballasts if needed. When hiring people they only want to do it once in a
long time as just getting the equipment and people there is a large part
of the cost.
If In a plant like I worked we had lots of people that were qualified
and equipment to do the work. We replaced the bad lamps in our
'spare' time when other work was not pushing or there was not much to be
done. By doing that the company saved lots of money because the labor
was bsically not costing anything extra and only the bad bulbs were
changed out. It was nothing for us to change 200 to 300 bulbs in a day
as large as the plant was. That many could be bad and there was still
plenty of light.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.