Share | A Letter from the Quality Manager to the General Manager: Let’s Do More Practical Things and Avoid Shifting Responsibility

Thread Content

A letter from the Quality Manager to the General Manager: I hope we can do more practical things and avoid passing the buck too much. General Manager: Hello! It has been 50 days since I took on the role of Quality Manager, and I have been with the company for over 5 and a half months now. Below, I would like to provide a brief summary or review of my own work as well as that of my department. Of course, after reading the content, one might think that it isn’t a summary or review, but rather a complaint or outburst; it might also seem like I’m acting immaturely. Yet everything listed are facts, and they represent the current situation of the company. For the staff in our quality control department, what is evident at present is that the requirements placed on us are too high, and the expectations of us are too great, which results in excessive pressure on quality control. With fewer people and more tasks, the chances of making mistakes increase significantly. We do not deny that there are many areas where we fall short; we have the ability and confidence to do better. Ability is an issue; our quality inspectors have long gone beyond the scope of quality control and are also responsible for overseeing manufacturing processes. Everything regarding what the workshop should do and how to do it is determined by quality control; if it’s done correctly, that’s fine, but if not, all the blame falls on quality control ； When a problem arises, instead of working together to resolve it promptly, everyone just passes the responsibility back and forth; after all, it’s the quality control staff who have to run around to deal with it, and it’s not my concern if they get exhausted from doing so. Time is wasted in this way, and then people wait to calculate the lost working hours, assuming that someone else will pay me compensation anyway. During the time when quality control staff are handling these tasks (which can take anywhere from half an hour to several hours, or even days without any result), there is no one to oversee the quality. The workers in the workshop often say that it’s not their responsibility; they wait for the quality inspection team to come and check things. By the time the quality control staff finish their checks, there are still many items that fail the standards. Then the workers in the workshop ask, “Weren’t there quality control staff? Weren’t the items qualified? What were you doing?” So the incoming material inspection report dated May 12 was rejected; the quality manager approved its return. Other departments kept passing the responsibility back and forth without reaching any conclusion. By May 18, the machining workshop would issue a fine to the quality department for delayed inspection – it had already taken more than 4 hours beyond the specified time limit, so such a situation was not surprising. In fact, it is mostly the quality manager who handles these tasks in the quality department. Just having the quality manager sign the return form for the incoming materials is not sufficient; it must be signed by the purchasing department for it to be valid. If the purchasing department is not available or if the task is handed over to another purchasing officer whom one does not know well, things can get delayed for several days. Sometimes it’s even difficult to find out where the form is. When the production department doesn’t have the materials needed to proceed with production, the first question they ask is directed at the quality department: Why haven’t you finished checking after all these days? What have you been doing? ； Moreover, since it is known that these are substandard materials, or even materials that cannot be used, they simply cannot be returned. In short, the time required for re-purchasing is not sufficient, which affects the delivery timeline. Another issue is that the same quality defects keep occurring in the incoming materials; as a result, we contacted the supplier to request improvements. The response we received was that such defects are inevitable, without any effort on the part of the supplier to make improvements. Sometimes, they even ask our quality department to identify the causes of these defects, or claim that we are over-interfering in quality control. It’s even more problematic when the quality manager signs off on accepting materials that are only acceptable after technical assistance is provided; what needs to be determined by your quality department is why it has to be handled by our technical team. Some even claim that the technical team is unable to carry out its normal tasks due to having to deal with such issues. The feed pipe clamp on May 24th is clear evidence of this – the general manager spent so much time analyzing it, and everyone agreed with his findings. But as soon as the general manager left, the criticism turned towards the quality manager: Why did you write that sentence? Why bring it to the technical department? Weren’t you guys the ones who decided on a return? Previously it was said that the fit was too loose; the drawings were changed, and now it’s said that the fit is too tight or impossible to achieve – what are we supposed to do? It seems like all the problems are created by our quality department; they’re invented out of thin air, and it’s us who deliberately make things difficult ； When technical support is needed, the quality manager can only submit the request to the technical manager. However, the technical manager says they are not familiar with such matters and suggests that the request be sent directly to a certain engineer. Once it is handed over to that engineer, there are no more technical terms used; the responses are things like “Agree with the quality department’s opinion,” “Cannot be used,” or “Return it.” The form should indicate whether technical support is required or suggestions for modifications, not whether the technical department should approve something proposed by the quality department. It is the quality department that decides whether something can be used or should be returned; the technical team doesn’t need to write anything about this. What’s needed are instructions on how to handle the situation and what actions to take. The quality manager signed off on the materials to be selected for use, but without the approval of the relevant department manager or deputy manager, the workshops below will not carry out those instructions. The quality manager signed off for the metalworking department to handle the selection, but the head of the metalworking department said that the quality manager has no authority to order him to do anything; only the deputy manager of the production department can give such orders. Moreover, as for how the costs will be calculated, can you cover them? ； The quality manager signed off on those items selected by the warehouse. The warehouse staff said I had my own tasks to carry out and suggested that our supervisor handle it, but a procurement manager has so many responsibilities that they certainly can’t stay here all the time waiting to sign things for you. In the end, several hours passed, and complaints came in from the production department. The same applies to abnormal orders issued during the production process, as well as customer complaint forms. It is the responsibility of the Quality Department to indicate the defects on the exception reports, as well as to analyze the causes of those exceptions. It is the frontline quality inspectors who are responsible for describing the defects and analyzing their causes, which raises issues related to competence and experience. An ordinary quality inspector can only carry out inspections and analyze simple, visible causes; they are unable to analyze deeper or related causes. Of course, it is possible to listen to the relevant parties’ explanations for the situation, but such analyses can be accurate only if they are unbiased and free from any attempts to shift responsibility. But with the evaluation system in place now, various departments are afraid of taking responsibility. If it’s not due to their own mistakes, that’s fine; but if it is their fault, they try their best to hide it from being discovered, which leads to inaccuracies in the analysis of quality issues, and sometimes the true cause cannot even be identified. A customer’s complaint about cracks in the toilet seat is a specific example; when asked if there were any reasons in the injection molding workshop that could cause such cracks, the response was just one sentence: we simply produce products using the raw materials purchased, with nothing else mentioned. But once it reached the general manager, things changed immediately