So I am asking for a more formal phrase for "making sausages".

"carefully controlled process"
"fully monitored process"
"traditionally made"

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 02:30:29 +0100, Colin Wilson
wrote:

So I am asking for a more formal phrase for "making sausages".

"carefully controlled process"
"fully monitored process"
"traditionally made"


Isn't that the same as ISO 9000?

"Charles" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 02:30:29 +0100, Colin Wilson
wrote:

So I am asking for a more formal phrase for "making sausages".

"carefully controlled process"
"fully monitored process"
"traditionally made"


Isn't that the same as ISO 9000?

Not at all - provided your work instructions lay down that your production
method should be totally chaotic with a complete lack of quality control
then provided that you can produce traceable documentation to prove that
this is how a paricular product was indeed produced then you are totally
compliant!

In fact the concept of "total quality" means that application of strict
controls to a process that you have defined as not requiring them is
non-compliant.

The public can be terribly conned by companies claiming ISO 9000
accreditation - it doesn't guarantee good quality products but only well
documented and monitored production methods. If a company makes sausages
from crap ingredients then ISO 9000 means that they will always be able to
prove that the ingredients really were crap!

David

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:14:22 -0000, "David Lee"
wrote:

"Charles" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 02:30:29 +0100, Colin Wilson
wrote:

So I am asking for a more formal phrase for "making sausages".

"carefully controlled process"
"fully monitored process"
"traditionally made"


Isn't that the same as ISO 9000?

Not at all - provided your work instructions lay down that your production
method should be totally chaotic with a complete lack of quality control
then provided that you can produce traceable documentation to prove that
this is how a paricular product was indeed produced then you are totally
compliant!

In fact the concept of "total quality" means that application of strict
controls to a process that you have defined as not requiring them is
non-compliant.

The public can be terribly conned by companies claiming ISO 9000
accreditation - it doesn't guarantee good quality products but only well
documented and monitored production methods. If a company makes sausages
from crap ingredients then ISO 9000 means that they will always be able to
prove that the ingredients really were crap!

David



I was being somewhat facetious. Part of the company I worked for went
ISO 9000, and repeatedly sent us stuff that didn't work, and some that
didn't survive shipping. One of our vendors sent us some equipment
with parts installed backwards, so that when they were switched on,
they went off, and switched off, they went. When I told them about
it, their defense was that they were an ISO 9000 company.

The part of the company I worked for decided to try TQM, that means we
generated a lot of paperwork, but when it came to spending any money
we lost interest.

Charles wrote...
Isn't that the same as ISO 9000?

Not at all - provided your work instructions lay down that your production
method should be totally chaotic with a complete lack of quality control
then provided that you can produce traceable documentation to prove that
this is how a particular product was indeed produced then you are totally
compliant!

I was being somewhat facetious.

I assumed so and my comments were also somewhat flippant! However - as your
follow-up confirms - there is a serious side to both our comments!

Part of the company I worked for went
ISO 9000, and repeatedly sent us stuff that didn't work, and some that
didn't survive shipping. One of our vendors sent us some equipment
with parts installed backwards, so that when they were switched on,
they went off, and switched off, they went. When I told them about
it, their defense was that they were an ISO 9000 company.

The part of the company I worked for decided to try TQM, that means we
generated a lot of paperwork, but when it came to spending any money
we lost interest.

The point is that ISO 9000 ONLY guarantees traceability of documentation.
However in the case of your defective equipment, if the vendor truly had
been complying with ISO 9000 then he would be able to supply documentation
defining the processes for assembly and testing of the items, records
showing when and by whom the items were manufacured and tested and the
actual results of testing. Since clearly there was a problem, these records
should have made it straightforward to determine where the problem had
occured. Either someone was not complying with work instructions or else
the processes in place were not adequate. Of course there is always the
possibility of deliberate falsification of records but that is a dangerous
thing to do since any indication of this practice picked up in a quality
audit would result in loss of the company's ISO 9000 accreditation.

The usual problem with TQM and ISO 9000 is that untrained quality managers
go overboard and insist that everything must be done to the highest possible
standards rather than perfectly documented at the level of quality
appropriate to the job in hand - so that you don't try to control the
process for building a lawnmower at the level appropriate for a life-support
machine! The result is a totally unworkable system at a crippling cost and
the company starts from a position of serious non-compliance. The TQM
documentation should document the way that you are actually carrying out
your business - if you are working efficiently and to the appropriate
standard of quality then no further action should be necessary. If your
processes are inefficient or of unsatisfactory quality then action needs to
be taken anyway, irrespective of ISO 9000 - a properly implemented TQM
system, on the basis of a sound and sensible assessment, will almost always
result in higher efficiency and lower costs.

I remember an example of inappropriate quality management in a project
developing mid-IR LEDs in collaboration with a company developing a gas
detector. All the partner was interested in was whether one batch of
devices was significantly better than any previous ones, in which case he
would test them in his prototype system - the absolute output power was
irrelevant. The level of calibration insisted upon by our quality
management added absolutely nothing to the quality of our devices but
seriously reduced the amount of work we could afford to carry out - totally
****ing off our partner! A proper quality assessment would have defined all
the processes at a level appropriate to the specifications required by the
customer, greatly improving our efficiency. Unfortunately I suspect that
this sort of failure to properly appreciate what ISO 9000 really means is
very common in British industry.

David

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 12:23:29 -0000, "David Lee"
wrote:

Charles wrote...
Isn't that the same as ISO 9000?

Not at all - provided your work instructions lay down that your production
method should be totally chaotic with a complete lack of quality control
then provided that you can produce traceable documentation to prove that
this is how a particular product was indeed produced then you are totally
compliant!

I was being somewhat facetious.

I assumed so and my comments were also somewhat flippant! However - as your
follow-up confirms - there is a serious side to both our comments!

Part of the company I worked for went
ISO 9000, and repeatedly sent us stuff that didn't work, and some that
didn't survive shipping. One of our vendors sent us some equipment
with parts installed backwards, so that when they were switched on,
they went off, and switched off, they went. When I told them about
it, their defense was that they were an ISO 9000 company.

The part of the company I worked for decided to try TQM, that means we
generated a lot of paperwork, but when it came to spending any money
we lost interest.

The point is that ISO 9000 ONLY guarantees traceability of documentation.
However in the case of your defective equipment, if the vendor truly had
been complying with ISO 9000 then he would be able to supply documentation
defining the processes for assembly and testing of the items, records
showing when and by whom the items were manufacured and tested and the
actual results of testing. Since clearly there was a problem, these records
should have made it straightforward to determine where the problem had
occured. Either someone was not complying with work instructions or else
the processes in place were not adequate. Of course there is always the
possibility of deliberate falsification of records but that is a dangerous
thing to do since any indication of this practice picked up in a quality
audit would result in loss of the company's ISO 9000 accreditation.

The usual problem with TQM and ISO 9000 is that untrained quality managers
go overboard and insist that everything must be done to the highest possible
standards rather than perfectly documented at the level of quality
appropriate to the job in hand - so that you don't try to control the
process for building a lawnmower at the level appropriate for a life-support
machine! The result is a totally unworkable system at a crippling cost and
the company starts from a position of serious non-compliance. The TQM
documentation should document the way that you are actually carrying out
your business - if you are working efficiently and to the appropriate
standard of quality then no further action should be necessary. If your
processes are inefficient or of unsatisfactory quality then action needs to
be taken anyway, irrespective of ISO 9000 - a properly implemented TQM
system, on the basis of a sound and sensible assessment, will almost always
result in higher efficiency and lower costs.

I remember an example of inappropriate quality management in a project
developing mid-IR LEDs in collaboration with a company developing a gas
detector. All the partner was interested in was whether one batch of
devices was significantly better than any previous ones, in which case he
would test them in his prototype system - the absolute output power was
irrelevant. The level of calibration insisted upon by our quality
management added absolutely nothing to the quality of our devices but
seriously reduced the amount of work we could afford to carry out - totally
****ing off our partner! A proper quality assessment would have defined all
the processes at a level appropriate to the specifications required by the
customer, greatly improving our efficiency. Unfortunately I suspect that
this sort of failure to properly appreciate what ISO 9000 really means is
very common in British industry.

David







either TQM or ISO 9000, properly implemented, could be a good thing.
In the company I worked for, it was nonsense, there was no real
commitment to it. It was just window dressing. The vendor I spoke of
did happen to be in England. they had lost interest in the product,
had realized that there was no profit in supporting it. What they
promised for support within a week would take over a year to be
realized. I can't really blame them for not wanting to support the
product, but they should not have promised to fix it, and they should
not have sent out bad stuff. the people I worked directly with were
all good people, conscientious, but had other commitments as well.

I'm one of those people who would be a cynic if only I could keep up.

"David Lee" wrote in
message ...
"Charles" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 02:30:29 +0100, Colin Wilson
wrote:

So I am asking for a more formal phrase for "making sausages".

"carefully controlled process"
"fully monitored process"
"traditionally made"


Isn't that the same as ISO 9000?

Not at all - provided your work instructions lay down that your production
method should be totally chaotic with a complete lack of quality control
then provided that you can produce traceable documentation to prove that
this is how a paricular product was indeed produced then you are totally
compliant!


Isn't that how B-Liar & Co (a subsidary of AlistairMcLies) got the Hutton
Report through?

In fact the concept of "total quality" means that application of strict
controls to a process that you have defined as not requiring them is
non-compliant.

I've always been of the opinion the the title should be; - "Consistency"
rather than 'Quality'. Consistency, of product/process, is what is
guarenteed by the 'standards'.

The public can be terribly conned by companies claiming ISO 9000
accreditation - it doesn't guarantee good quality products but only well
documented and monitored production methods. If a company makes sausages
from crap ingredients then ISO 9000 means that they will always be able to
prove that the ingredients really were crap!

David

Indeed: a sewage works can be ISO 900, et seq. qualified and proudly fly its
flag - alongside its 'investors in People' [or at least their byproducts]!

--

Brian

The message
from "Brian Sharrock" contains these words:

Isn't that how B-Liar & Co (a subsidary of AlistairMcLies) got the Hutton
Report through?

I saw Campbell on Who Wants to be a Milliner yesterday. Couldn't make up
his mind which country out of France, USSR, UK or US launched Skylab in
1973. The eliminated France and Russia - and were dithering over UK or
US.

Presumably the ability to forget that in 1973 we were in the grip of the
3-day week etc is part of the qualification to be a politician.

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

Guy King wrote...
I saw Campbell on Who Wants to be a Milliner yesterday...

Was the typo deliberate? I love the idea of the great Alastair reduced to a
wannabe seller of women's hats!

David

Colin Wilson wrote:
So I am asking for a more formal phrase for "making sausages".

"carefully controlled process"
"fully monitored process"
"traditionally made"

Carefully coded by Microsoft engineeers.

The message
from Colin Wilson contains these words:

"carefully controlled process"
"fully monitored process"
"traditionally made"

Hand pressed by Bavarian virgins.

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 12:45:53 +0100, Guy King
wrote:

The message
from Colin Wilson contains these words:

"carefully controlled process"
"fully monitored process"
"traditionally made"

Hand pressed by Bavarian virgins.


They still have those?

The message
from Charles contains these words:

Hand pressed by Bavarian virgins.


They still have those?

Now that Deutsche Gramafon do CDs, probably not.

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

Hand pressed by Bavarian virgins.
They still have those?

Not since we got cheap flights from Liverpool with easyjet :-p

Colin Wilson wrote:
So I am asking for a more formal phrase for "making sausages".

"carefully controlled process"
"fully monitored process"
"traditionally made"

Selecting.

A process for divining the cheapest and most select potatoes.