Archive for February, 2010

Alternatives to knee-jerk reaction: Understanding variation

February 18, 2010

What is known as “point mentality” is a knee-jerk response to what appears to be a problem. We may learn this when we take our child’s temperature and find that it’s high; we are inclined to do something right away—give ibuprofen, orange juice, and bed rest—rather than waiting to see if this is a “trend.”

In fact, sometimes we can’t wait to evaluate patterns in data, but need to respond immediately to a situation. Emergencies require response. But most of the time, we will save time, energy, and other resources by examining data over a period of time and making decisions based on trends or other patterns in the operation of the system itself. The fact that a child fails one third-grade spelling test does not mean that he or she will be a failure in life—or even in spelling.

Every system has variation; some of this is due to the system itself, known as common cause variation; some of it is due to singular incidents or special situations; this is special cause variation. W. Edwards Deming estimated that 94% of problems (or possibilities for improvement) lie with the system as common-cause variation; 6% are special causes. [Out of the Crisis, 315]

Describing variability over a period of time helps one to understand how the system is working, and to predict how it will continue to work in the future. The alternative is a constant tampering with the system, responding to every whim it may have.

(more…)

Should Toyota’s recall be blamed on quality?

February 10, 2010

Matt Savage

Like you, I have heard about the myriad of problems Toyota has been having lately. I heard about the sticking accelerator, the brake problem on the Prius, and a vehicle recall that will top 8 million. USA Today listed this as “Toyota’s quality fiasco” http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2010-02-05-toyota-recall-friday_N.htm. Toyota’s president Akio Toyoda has stated “Let me assure everyone that we will redouble our commitment to quality as the lifeline of our company” http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/toyota_recall. As I read this, I wondered, is it really a quality problem?

No doubt Toyota has a problem, but was the accelerator problem caused by poor quality? You might recall that one solution to the accelerator problem was related to the floor mat. The floor mat would be modified so that the potential for it to cause the accelerator to stick would be minimized. So what is the root cause of this problem? Were the fibers used in the floor mat faulty? Were the floor mats sized incorrectly? Did the materials supplier produce defective materials? There are many possibilities.

Toyota is known for their precise specifications. So let’s assume that the floor mats, brake pedals, brake lines, etc. were manufactured to a tight tolerance and functioned as they were designed. If this is the case, isn’t the problem related to the design rather than the quality of the parts produced? If root cause analysis identifies that the problem is with the design, then the media should call it “Toyota’s design fiasco.”

Of course at the end of the day, what really matters is that all automotive manufacturers learn from Toyota’s problems and take steps to prevent an issue such as this from occurring again.

I’d like to hear your thoughts on “Toyota’s quality fiasco.”


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.