Effective Communication to Preempt Operational Failures.
In the corridors of corporate domains, clashes over logistics and operational processes often ensnare managers in charged confrontations. Yet, amidst these tumultuous exchanges lies a more profound question: Should quality professionals solely bear the mantle of enforcement?
Scene: An Office in the Heart of a Busy Company
Manager 1: "Thanks for coming. I need to discuss your logistics process."
Manager 2: "Sure, what's the matter?"
Manager 1: "My team refuses to ship our product without the correct paperwork."
Manager 2: "My team will handle it, but we need the proper paperwork."
Manager 1: "You've used unauthorized transport companies!"
Manager 2: "That was an exceptional situation due to a supply-chain shortfall!"
Manager 1: "Possibly. Are you going to ship my product?"
Manager 2: "You're threatening me!"
Manager 1: "[dials number] Hello, quality audit department, I need an audit…"
The scenario between Manager 1 and Manager 2 may ring familiar to many quality professionals - a terse exchange pitting logistics protocols against operational exigencies. This commonplace interaction often escalates to a manager’s impassioned call to audit another department, a precursor to a potential nonconformity report (NCR). But is this a genuine concern for process improvement or a veiled retribution strategy?
The ethical quandary is apparent. Despite advocating a culture of learning from nonconformities, quality professionals find themselves at odds - caught between the noble pursuit of improvement and the role of a disciplinary enforcer. Evading this stance necessitates a paradigm shift in approach.
This underscores a critical strategy: steering clear of becoming the direct action owner in remedying nonconformities. Instead, effective communication stands as the beacon guiding operations. By preempting nonfulfillments through proactive engagement and fostering a culture where issues are addressed promptly, the need for formal NCRs or specialised audits diminishes.
The narrative of 'bullet loaders' is vital, emphasising the intricacies behind nonconformities. We need a shift from merely attributing nonfulfillments to a single incident, preferring comprehensive evaluations through representative sampling. This approach dissects supplier inputs, operational handovers, and the often-overlooked facets of process functionality.
The crux lies in conscientiously assigning corrective action owners, often different from the transgressors. Vaughan reminisces on a poignant incident where the 'bullet loader' assumed accountability - an ode to the poetic justice in such occurrences.
A final plea is one of clarification - a clarion call to engage proactively, not to circumvent NCRs or audits but to instil a deeper sense of awareness. It's a call for stakeholders to embrace dialogue, defuse potential conflicts, and avert nonfulfillments before they demand the intervention of quality professionals.
In the realm of quality management, these insights propose a fundamental shift: from punitive enforcement to proactive communication - a beacon illuminating a path towards a harmonious, more effective operational landscape.
A message from our sponsors, AAA Certification:
Or, if you want to see what's involved in more detail, then get a completely free, no obligation, totally tailored ISO Gap Analysis for your business (only available to UK businesses).