Thread Content
Overview of Huatianmou’s experts in lean quality management: Quality system management has become essential and fashionable in various industries, but few are able to utilize it effectively to generate benefits and improve corporate management levels. Products of poor quality bring endless pain and decline to businesses, even leading to bankruptcy. Whether quality system management holds a prominent position within a company determines the fate of its survival and development. However, in the process of implementing and maintaining a quality management system, the following issues often cause confusion: 1. Focus only on having a quality management system certification. 80% of top management in companies are only concerned with whether they have such a certification; they show no interest in, understand nothing about, or make no effort to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the quality management system. In some cases, the quality management function is treated as a secondary department, which leads to resistance among managers and employees toward following the standards set by the quality management system, and as a result, people continue to work in their own way. Such long-term development inevitably leads to a situation of disconnection in corporate management, where the systems established do not match actual operations. Quality system management is carried out merely to obtain certifications and improve the company’s appearance, while the actual management of the factory remains on a \"despotic\" level; the management team simply does not give proper importance to quality control. 2. They are merely weapons for self-defense within an enterprise. Quality system procedure documents represent a summary of quality management in the course of business operations; they serve as regulatory guidance documents. However, such procedure documents cannot cover everything. It is only through proper quality awareness and a correct mindset, along with an understanding of the causal relationships underlying various phenomena, that quality issues can be addressed during the management of production and operations. Through continuous summarization and refinement, procedure documents can be developed to guide future actions. In many companies, the quality management system documents have essentially become tools for various departments to defend themselves within the company’s operational structure. The departments involved in discussing issues each hold their own views, using these documents as a basis for their arguments in order to shirk responsibility; this leads to severe internal conflicts, with decisions often difficult to reach and even harder to implement once made. In daily management, one first discusses the conditions before taking action, and bargaining takes place. They rush to do the things that are profitable and are reluctant to do those that aren’t, always able to use official regulations as an excuse to justify their actions. For matters that truly cannot be pushed through, one emphasizes objective factors, uses \"procedures\" as a buffer, or agrees to certain conditions before accepting. 3. Believing that the quality system can solve everything. Quality system documents outline basic procedural requirements; it is within this framework that we use the eight management principles of the quality system to address product-related issues in a company’s operations, rather than using quality system management to blame everything that goes wrong in business operations. In fact, in the process of enterprise management, there is quality system management, human resources system management, financial system management, business decision-making management, and so on. Quality system management is merely the management of aspects related to product quality within the production and operation process. 4. Incorrect and negative use of quality management system documents: Treating quality system management merely as a means for supervisors to issue orders and conduct inspections – such as centralized audits, special audits, monthly checks, quarterly checks, etc. – which leaves various departments overburdened and extremely annoyed by it. The decline in quality management after certification is always linked to leaders’ one-sided understanding of quality. The company’s top managers must pay close attention to their understanding of the quality system documents; implementing a quality management system requires mobilizing a large amount of resources within the enterprise, as well as new intangible resources. It is far too difficult to drive a quality management system relying solely on grassroots efforts, due to the lack of management authority and control over corporate resources. 5. Treating quality system management as a \"theoretical\" task The position of quality system manager is essentially vacant; tasks are only undertaken when leaders need to deal with quality incidents. Quality system management is viewed narrowly as the role of an incident investigator, or as a position focused solely on handling various detailed tasks. Quality management system administrators fail to play any role in ensuring that the system operates in a standardized manner, as they lack sufficient authority and adequate compensation; as a result, they are not given due respect by employees. The measures and methods established for quality management are not implemented, and employees continue to act according to the orders of their supervisors. 6. Focusing only on results, not on the process: A leadership style that focuses solely on outcomes rather than on the processes involved is contrary to the basic principle of quality management systems, which is to utilize process-based approaches. This leads to the unintentional omission or failure to keep quality management records or procedures during the implementation of quality management system documents, with fake data being added as evidence. As long as tasks are completed without proper attention, this will inevitably lead to a decline in the company’s management standards over time. Given the long-term nature and continuity of quality management, factories must have a 5-year or 10-year plan that starts with fundamental tasks; through policy guidance and appropriate methods, quality concepts should be integrated into the actual operations of the organization, with regular inspections and supervision carried out to ensure that employees adhere to the established behavioral standards. 7. Focusing only on the number of quality audit non-conformities The requirements for quality system certification are becoming increasingly stringent. Non-conformities identified during audits should be viewed properly; it cannot be assumed that a large number of non-conformities or common issues indicate poor quality management. As a leader, I need to carefully consider what resources I have made available for quality management, and how to use the non-conformities identified during audits to continuously improve the management of the quality system. 8. Inability to communicate effectively during audits Whether it is a second-party audit or a third-party audit, it is common for the auditing agencies to be unable to communicate effectively during the process. Some of these agencies even act like \"emperors,\" believing that the factories being audited must comply fully with their \"unequal terms\" and are not allowed to raise any objections ； The managers of the factories under audit also approach the requirements for system management with the aim of not offending the auditors. In fact, the purpose of the audit is to identify what the problems and shortcomings in the factory are. Only through communication between both parties and a thorough understanding of these issues can real improvement be achieved. So, how can the effectiveness of a quality system be achieved? 1. Put into practice the principle of \"writing what is needed, doing what is written, and recording what has been done.\" The purpose of creating quality system documents (quality manuals, procedure documents) is to standardize employees’ work, and whether employees carry out their tasks in accordance with the requirements of these procedure documents is one of the quantitative indicators for assessing effectiveness. Many certified companies share the same feeling: it’s easy to prepare the documents, but difficult to implement them. In fact, emphasize systematicness and practicality: “Write what is needed, do what is written, and record what has been done.” ”Using tables to manage quality records will yield excellent results. 2. Self-correction through rolling internal quality audits Conducting internal quality audits thoroughly is an important aspect of quality system management; it is necessary to ensure that these audits cover every area and level of the company, thereby enabling self-correction. Practice has shown that even if a company obtains quality system certification, various problems still arise in the actual operation of that quality system. Without a mechanism for continuously identifying problems, solving them, and making improvements, various issues will arise that affect the operation of the quality system, gradually making it difficult for the system to function, eventually leading to its virtual disappearance. In general, internal audits, based on internal hierarchical structures, usually do not audit management levels, which is actually incorrect. Because the management’s attitude toward quality directly affects employees’ attitude toward quality work. 3. Pay attention to quality costs to satisfy customers. Quality costs are one of the quantitative indicators used to assess the level of quality management; one can imagine what the quality of a company would be like if it failed to achieve efficiency. A company’s quality efforts reflect the principles of quality management—the seven fundamental principles. By treating customers as gods, it is necessary to pay attention not only to the quality of the products provided to them but also to maintaining good relationships with them. Customer satisfaction actually involves a great deal of communication and understanding. In the course of business operations, quality management should be based on the actual conditions of the company; it is not possible to fulfill all of the requirements put forward by customers. For those requirements that exceed the company’s capacity to meet them, solutions should be found through communication. 4. Implement a traceability system for standardized work processes. The quality of products and services is ensured through standardized work processes; for any defective items, the reasons for their defects must be identified, and it should be possible to identify the responsible persons. Even without imposing penalties, merely exposing such issues can help enhance awareness of quality. Recurring defects require focused follow-up and closure, with employees being educated through quality case studies and quality analysis meetings. 5. Management must always demonstrate a high level of wisdom regarding quality. In their work, some employees and even frontline managers find it difficult to understand why simple tasks need to be broken down into so many steps, or why work instructions are necessary. Do we really not can produce high-quality products without such things? There are also many people who often complain that if everything had to be done this way, we wouldn’t need to do anything at all. Once conflicts arise between the quality control department and the production department, business managers (the leadership) prefer that the products be of satisfactory quality, focusing instead on production and sales. So, in many cases, a company’s quality system management is out of necessity. The story of Zhang Ruimin breaking the refrigerator reflects the great wisdom behind him, which helped to turn Haier into an international corporation. However, when it comes to product quality in reality, there are few cases of products causing problems; hence, it’s not hard to understand the situation faced by numerous companies. As an important component of management in the manufacturing industry and across all organizations, quality system management requires continuous attention and authorization from senior management, ongoing improvement efforts on the part of quality professionals, and the involvement of the entire organization in the PDCA cycle for quality improvement. Only in this way can the quality work within an organization be truly improved, and its quality standards raised.