The Doctor Is In The Blogiverse…

This is the first in a planned series on Process Capability, exclusive to the Quality Doctor.

My encounters with Process Capability practices Indicate there is a lot of room for improvement and standardization in this arena. There is a lot of missing information, misinformation and outright bad interpretations inside Quality functions at many of the factories and companies I visit. The magnitude of the problem compels me to challenge this situation. I will post occasionally to this Series, to address specifics I grapple with while consulting globally.

There are several general issues; some examples:

• Confusion about, and misuse of, standard Capability Index labels
• Over-simplification of key concepts
• Violations of assumptions, usually through ignorance, leading to bad decisions
• Unsophisticated statistical interpretations of Capability
• Attempts to extrapolate IQC sampling to Capability

There significant variation in the good practices I see as well.  This is a more pernicious problem, as it indicates a lack of standardization in the Quality Improvement (QI) industry on this topic.  It is my belief that such variation in terminology and execution, while perhaps “correct,” leads to confusion among managers and less-sophisticated QI colleagues.  I have personally seen it lead to ongoing waste in the relationships between suppliers and customers.  I believe we need basic standard practices in the same vein as the basics of Statistical Process Control (SPC/SQC).  I will occasionally propose specific principles where I find the need.

In closing, we should remember the purpose of Capability:  To assure customers about our ability to meet their needs.  It’s truly about business decisions, predictability and levels of trust.  While Capability practices can’t provide all those conclusions, it certainly has a key role.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS