I want to try my best to learn all the knowledge about quality control, so that quality can become my career. So I joined the American Quality Control Association, read every book I could find, and took every course I was allowed to take.
But I clearly remember that the whole action is based on "it is unrealistic to try to do everything right" and "compromise must be an inseparable part" in each case.
Since nothing is completely correct, I think everything is natural. I realize that quality is a desirable characteristic; Quality is obtained through inspection and testing; The implementation standard is an acceptable quality level.
It was several years before I became suspicious. I began to realize that all this is a self-fulfilling way of looking at things. We place material orders according to acceptable quality standards. We conducted a sampling inspection and found some problems. We store the products. Moreover, this product is not a suitable product. Although I don't have a deep understanding of the exact meaning of management, I realize that quality is the product of policy. If we don't intend to do many things in the right way, the result will be incorrect.
In order to change this situation, I suggest that we should give up the acceptable quality level and start to pay attention to zero defects. This means completely meeting the demand, rather than wasting time to determine how much deviation can be made. I declare that we are the source of the problem, not the probability.
Quality professionals attacked me and said I was unrealistic and ignorant. They didn't take the time to ask me what my idea really meant. They are deeply immersed in the imagination of inevitable mistakes and compromises. They have no other imagination of mistakes and compromises, but just call it "quality economy"
1965, I joined ITT as the quality director of the head office. This world-class group company provides first-class laboratories. We immediately established the quality policy of the head office: "We will provide users with defect-free products and services on time." Soon, I became a quality expert at ITT, and then set up a competent school. We have proved that it is possible to manage quality through prevention. "
I wrote the book The Quality of Freedom from 1977 to 1978. The idea is that if someone buys it, I can set up a consulting company to help them. Therefore, in July of 1979, I established Philip Crosby United Company in Lidavente Park, Florida. Many companies come to us. They have long been tired of paying for the quality cost, and they want to manage the quality. None of these companies are in trouble. They are all profitable enterprises, but they know what will happen in the future. Companies such as IBM and 3M participated, and there are more than 500 companies in the world.
Before learning how to deal with quality, we must remove the obstacles in understanding.
"Basic principles of quality"
"Quality meets requirements"
This means that management must take the set requirements seriously and then insist on meeting them every time. If you think that every request can be negotiated, there will always be problems. Now, we say that if you want people to do things right the first time, you must tell them what they have done. This applies not only to product requirements, but also to service and management requirements. Traditionally, quality means constant evaluation and re-evaluation. This creates a situation where they don't know what they should do.
"Quality system is prevention"
Just like using immunization and other preventive methods to treat diseases, it takes too many problems to learn how to prevent non-conformity. The traditional concept focuses on the inspection of products after completion. What we want to do is to improve the system work of service according to products.
"The quality standard is zero defect"
Giving people standards and convincing them that mistakes are a normal part of business life will be counterproductive and insult their wisdom.
"the price of non-compliance"
How much does it cost to do something wrong? In manufacturing enterprises, the cost of doing something wrong is about 25% of sales revenue; And service companies have to spend half of their operating expenses on the cost of doing something wrong. This is real money. The traditional report is to give the index of defect level or some defect levels, so as to continuously improve this result. In this way, nothing can be perfect, and management never knows when to be upset and when to be cheerful.
"Choose correctly besides understanding"
We have seen thousands of companies engaged in various operations successfully learn quality management. They turned quality management into advantages, saved a lot of money and eliminated operational confusion. It's not difficult. It didn't cost much. Everyone started to be heroes. So the question is: why don't people do this?
The answer is that management still has the problem of absorbing bad information in its formative years. MBA, quality "experts" and traditional beliefs still insist that quality is a variable, employees are a problem, and quality is pure luck. They haven't thought about this idea yet, they are just repeating what they have taught in the past.
In fact, quality is a choice. The company can decide whether there is quality or not. In addition to understanding the principle, it also includes several things:
1. All work is a process. The whole company is responsible for the final output. Individual output and input can be measured by ordinary systems and can be understood by everyone.
People need permission to do the right thing. Employees at all levels need to be regarded as "chefs" who develop and write recipes. They can always make the same fried eggs as required. They don't need inspectors to look on their shoulders. They know how to measure their work, take corrective measures, and ensure that there are no defects in the process.
The management must always witness this promise, that is, users will indeed receive what we sell them. There are no more deviations, differences and the like. Quality is no longer a special thing that provides market advantages. This is unity. If it is not unified, then the company cannot operate.
The company needs to have a formal quality process method, which can be operated from the beginning. I listed what 14 had to do, but the team had to determine hundreds of actions by themselves according to the listed list.
I can't figure out why people insist on setting up technical obstacles, why they should obey the skills that have been formed and make their quality so complicated. As an individual, if you want to be accepted by society, you must learn to pay attention to personal hygiene (clean shirts are not enough); We must learn to keep all the promises (not just a few); We must pay the bills (not just threatening our bills); Be kind to people (not just those in our class). Like companies, we can't selectively meet expectations and ignore things that we find difficult or monotonous.
"Simple discrimination"
Say it again: quality is the product of policy, whether for individuals or companies. If the policy is to always identify whether something is suitable or not, then nothing is reliable. In the book Quality Without Tears, I showed a description of a company that was troubled by quality.
It's easy to see how this works:
1. They always provide users with the same products they agreed to provide. After all, there are some differences.
They have a "remedy" organization to help users deal with inconsistencies and disappointments.
They have no clear implementation standards. They talk about Excellence, or quality, or something that is not specific.
They don't know how much it will cost. The unqualified cost is not in their accounting system.
They think it's all someone else's fault.
The company is changing rapidly. Although we can take a big step to turn things around in a year. A company that can become the norm in three years. No one will remember the old practice in five years. But management must take quality seriously, and just setting up some complicated skills is insignificant for the necessary cultural changes.