| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Table of Standard Quality Levels |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Mean |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Tasks |
|
|
Errors |
|
|
|
| |
Between |
Error |
Quality |
Per |
|
|
|
| Level |
Errors |
Rate |
Rate |
10,000 |
Color |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
16 |
6.3% |
93.8% |
625 |
Infrared |
|
|
| 5 |
32 |
3.1% |
96.9% |
313 |
Red |
|
|
| 6 |
64 |
1.6% |
98.4% |
156 |
Orange |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
128 |
0.8% |
99.2% |
78 |
Yellow |
|
|
| 8 |
256 |
0.4% |
99.6% |
39 |
Green |
|
|
| 9 |
512 |
0.2% |
99.8% |
20 |
Blue |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
1,024 |
0.10% |
99.90% |
10 |
Indigo |
|
|
| 11 |
2,048 |
0.05% |
99.95% |
5 |
Violet |
|
|
| 12 |
4,096 |
0.02% |
99.98% |
2 |
Ultraviolet |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| All quality assurance measures can use the standard scale, levels and colors |
| shown above. The levels reflect the exponential power of 2 required to achieve |
|
| a given mean time between errors. For example, quality level 4 reflects 1 error |
| every 16 tasks, as 16 is equal to 2 x 2 x 2 x 2, or 2 raised to the 4th power in |
|
| exponential notation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Once a process measure has been defined and the process observed to be |
|
| “under control”, without wide swings in daily error rates or significant one time |
| events, then the average error rate can be determined. This will set the current |
| quality level. For example, if the observed error rate is 2.3%, then the quality |
|
| level is 5, as level 6 at 1.6% has not yet been attained. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Moving from one quality level to the next higher quality level requires the |
|
| process owner to cut the number of errors in half. This applies to each upward |
| step. In practice, process owners can typically move up one step every 2-4 |
|
| months using standard root cause analysis tools. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Once the measure for a process has been defined and approved by |
|
| management, then the process owner reports on the monthly measured error |
|
| rate. A master table should be maintained showing the current quality level for |
| each defined process, and the first date at which each level was achieved. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| While the ultimate goal of any process is zero defects or errors, this |
|
| pragmatic, incremental approach has been shown to be most effective in |
|
| helping front-line staff members to own and improve their processes through |
|
| time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Most unmeasured processes operate at quality level 4, with a 5-7% error rate. |
| Once a process is measured, the error rate usually drops to 3-4% very quickly, |
| at quality level 5. Once a staff member is assigned responsibility, the move to |
| quality level 6 and a 2% error rate soon follows. These first improvements can |
| usually be done by using common sense and a little more attention. Process |
|
| steps are usually documented and performed consistently at this level. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Moving to level 7 and an error rate below 1% is typically much more |
|
| challenging. Staff members usually need to record the details of each error |
|
| and analyze the errors in a time period such as a week or a month in order to |
|
| identify the largest cluster of problems. At this stage, the bottleneck |
|
| identification and elimination techniques described in “The Goal” are very |
|
| useful. Identifying the type of error, the person, the product, the time of day, |
|
| the machine or other sources of variability commonly leads to rapid |
|
| identification of the greatest problem area. Eliminating the bottleneck can |
|
| often be done through manual process changes, retraining, device calibration, |
| more frequent measurements, and changes in user settings. While computer |
| system changes may be identified at this stage, it is best to attempt to use |
|
| manual changes first, until these have been exhausted. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Reaching the Yellow level of stage 7 merits some celebration. Reducing errors |
| to below one in one hundred is an important milestone. At this point, the |
|
| number of errors has been cut in half 3 times for an overall reduction of 85%. |
|
| Fully 5 out of every 6 errors that originally occurred have been eliminated for |
|
| good. Some simple processes can move straight to level 7 within a few weeks |
| or months. It is important for staff members not to became disappointed when |
| they do more of the same good actions, but “hit the wall”, and are unable to |
|
| move forward as quickly, if at all, at some point. This is normal, but there are |
|
| always ways to go over, around or through the wall. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The progression to Green level 8 and Blue level 9 typically requires the |
|
| application of more advanced quality techniques and/or the revision of |
|
| computer systems. For many processes, the Kaizen approach to rapid |
|
| process revision can work here. The introduction of poke yoke or failsafe |
|
| devices, steps, and specialized tools is appropriate here. Moving repetitive |
|
| tasks to the computer is common at this time. Staff members should have |
|
| been trained in quality concepts, including the basic ISO tenets of say what |
|
| you do, do what you say, and be able to tell the difference. Staff members |
|
| should be performing all of their own measurements. Reliance on final |
|
| inspection should be diminishing, as staff work quality control steps into their |
|
| core process. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Until a process has reached Green level 8, it is typically unwise to attempt to |
|
| change the underlying customer service level that is desired. Attempting to |
|
| reduce a service cycle time from 14 days to 10 days when a process is not at |
| least at level 8, is likely to lead to a reversion back 2 or 3 quality levels, |
|
| thereby offsetting the benefit of greater speed with lower reliability. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| For most processes and customers, Blue level 9, with one error for every 512 |
|
| transactions, is at or below the threshold of materiality. Staff members should |
| be encouraged to apply their skills to move to the next level, but be warned |
|
| that further improvements often require additional invest- ments in equipment, |
|
| computer systems or a total process re-engineering effort, including adjacent |
|
| processes, suppliers and customers. Staff members should focus their |
|
| attention on any processes which remain at levels 4-7, before they pursue level |
| 10, where errors occur once in every 1,024 transactions. This level is usually |
|
| reached by front line staff with 3 or more years of quality management |
|
| experience or those with access to quality specialists. |
|
|
|