ISO takes as point of departure that work should be planned and then controlled according to the plan. Planning for quality sounds plausible, but it assumes many things: that the plan is the right plan; that the plan is feasible; that people will do it and that performance will improve. Paradoxically this approach often leads to poor decisions. It also leads managers to managing i. According to the book ISO prevents organizations taking opportunities to improve performance which they otherwise might have seen.
The Standard also lures organizations into doing things that do not add value and creates waste by doing two jobs: the work itself and then write about it to document the work so that auditors can do their jobs. The focus of an organization wanting to improve quality and competitive position should be on learning, not be on compliance. Another interesting observation is that when you set a standard e.
These assessors benefit by keeping the ISO myth alive and their work has a major negative influence on performance because a lot of non-value work is done because of them, like a lot of documentation that is only created to make things traceable and checkable for auditors. One important advice from the book is if you really have to do ISO be careful in what assessor you select and work on your own interpretation of the Standard and do not rely on consultants or assessors.
ISO does not do this because the Standard starts from the presumption that it is of value to work to procedures which are documented, showing how work is done and inspected.
This may be true in some situations, but not always. ISO encourages management to believe that adherence to procedures will reduce variation. Instead it often amplifies variation because it neglects to understand what customers want, how the organization is working what goes on, and why and what it needs to fulfill the demands of customers. Instead of delivering a prescription which the Standard does Deming delivered a way of thinking which leads to learning and improvement.
The systems view is important because it looks at the whole and not only at the parts. Improving the parts can make the parts better, but lead to a sub-optimal system for example when the parts meet their goals at expense of each other. It is to compound the same error. Toggle Navigation. Successful quality methods, he contends, spring from a perspective which is diametrically opposed to the thinking in ISO Report bugs here.
Please share your general feedback. You can join in the discussion by joining the community or logging in here. You can also find out more about Emerald Engage. Visit emeraldpublishing. Answers to the most commonly asked questions here.
Article view Figure view Cited 7 cite article.
0コメント