Now, those in the quality field need to be prepared for transformation

Thread Content

This is a reflection by a quality professional based on what they have seen and heard; it may not be applicable to your situation. In this ever-changing world, only \"change\" is the eternal truth of \"unchangeability.\" By being prepared for potential risks and thinking diligently, quality talents can go further! The layoffs at Foxconn and Haier are a landmark event, marking the transition of China’s manufacturing industry from a semi-manual stage to an automated one. I estimate that this phase will last for ten years. Ten years from now, when China’s manufacturing industry moves towards full automation, what will be the future for those working in the field of quality control in China? This week I had interviews with an American-owned company, a German-owned company, and a local company, and it was clear to see the differences in their needs for talent. American-owned companies are the leaders in an oligopolistic industry; they do not require technical expertise from their employees, but rather emphasize strategic thinking and logic. The focus is on the ability to integrate resources and to establish rules, which essentially represents a combination of systematic thinking and an understanding of the various stages of business development. It is project management that integrates systems, methods, and strategies. German-owned enterprises operate in a highly competitive manufacturing sector; with an output value of 600 million, they have no more than 60 employees, representing typical high-efficiency companies in the process of reindustrialization. To reach this output value domestically, at least 700 people would be needed. The demand for quality personnel is concentrated in laboratories, where it is needed for data accuracy, control of process variations, support for research and development, and defect prevention. A technical background is required, but it is not mandatory. High requirements are placed on teamwork skills, flexibility, and principledness. A leading private enterprise in China, whose products account for half of the world’s supply in certain categories; it requires employees with extensive experience in the industry, the ability to solve current engineering and technical challenges, knowledge of the five key tools, and proficiency in lean methodologies. Able to endure hardship and work hard. Currently, quality management in most countries focuses on the product itself; as for systems and prevention measures, it is still at a stage where efforts are made to meet customer demands, and few places manage to integrate systems, prevention strategies, and production processes effectively. That American-owned company valued my system planning skills and lean methodologies, while the German-owned company appreciated my ability to apply SPC techniques as well as my skill in understanding and balancing customer needs. Leaving domestic enterprises aside, to be direct: if they value industry experience, I’m not the right fit. I don’t want to share my experiences either. What these two foreign-owned companies have in common is a high degree of automation. Automation is made possible by a high level of standardization; there are stricter requirements regarding the precision of parts, and the design for redundancy as well as tolerance specifications must be more precise – not necessarily higher, but more rational. The focus of control lies in controlling variations; that German company is able to guarantee a variation of 2% for its customers, with an internal control level of 0.5%. It is 4 times higher than the industry average. High standardization is also required for raw materials. With standardized and highly consistent products, what is the value of quality control personnel who are currently busy checking products and correcting errors on the production line? With such highly consistent products and processes, what is the purpose of current IQC, IPQC, and OQC? What are the SQEs doing, busy dealing with customer complaints as QE, busy correcting errors on the production line as PQE, or busy conducting audits? When it comes to standardization, one hero named Zhang Xiaodong must be mentioned. Over 20 years ago, he pointed out that the mistakes in China’s approach to standardization had become fatal problems today; standardization should not be pursued for its own sake, but rather should be implemented on a quantitative basis. In China, the situation is reversed: in order to achieve standardization, the precise product parameters and process parameter tolerances that are suitable for specific products are increased to apply to all products. Such standardization is simply absurd. Now, those working in the field of quality need to prepare for transformation. There are, in my opinion, two paths for this transformation: one is to focus on specialization in technical aspects, which is aimed at achieving higher data accuracy. This approach involves measurement, experimentation, instruments, testing methods, and testing equipment – essentially a laboratory-based path. Or return to data analysis, particularly automated data collection and the in-depth exploration of the value provided by big data systems. Another path is Bo, focusing on management-oriented interdisciplinary talents. It mainly involves ways to organize resources, such as customer quality management integrated with sales, supplier management integrated with the supply chain, staff functions integrated with human resources, technical quality officers integrated with technology, and IMS integrated with management. In any case, these positions will gradually lose their current direct subordinates and turn into virtual organizations; collaboration, organization, balance, decision-making, and risk assessment will become the key capabilities, which is completely different from the role of quality inspectors as it is today. Am I ready for such changes? Source: Internet