Let's Blame China!
Here's two interesting headlines on the homepage of American Society for Quality's Web site today:
Dell’s Recall Sparks Worry About Foreign Manufacturing Quality
U.S. Automakers Closing Quality Gap; Dell Bounces Back After Service Slide
Just when Dell seemed to be "bouncing back," disaster strikes!
I think it's interesting that the first article puts the blame on "China" and not Dell or Sony, which had the batteries manufactured for it in China and then sold to Dell. Isn't it Dell's and Sony's responsibility to ensure that their suppliers are manufacturing according to specifications? Aren't they auditing their suppliers? Inspecting product? Testing product?
Another point in the first article that caught my eye: "An industry group is meeting in September to, among other things, examine ways to create industry-wide standards dealing with quality control." Hmm. I thought we had international groups that developed standards for quality. Haven't they heard of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) or the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)?
posted by Scott Paton @ 9:02 PM
2 Comments
2 Comments:
Manufacturers do have a responsibility to verify the quality of supplied product. However, in dealing with the East many have learned that product used for initial PV testing does not resemble actual production material. Unapproved raw material substitutions are common, process changes go unreported, tooling is modified without notice. These things happen in the West, but are considered aberant and dishonest - they are not the rule. As a result, initial validation activities that are perfectly legitimate to use in the US or in Europe are not as effective in China and other culturally similar places.
Auditing incoming product is generally useful for detecting defects already in evidence - not for finding how a part may fail later. Finding a battery that will evetually fail, or a resistor or capacitor that will go bad and cause or allow PCB damage is harder to detect with audits. Auditing is also really only good for detecting problems that manifest in a signifiant portion of the effected product.
Auditing suppliers for systemic compliance with standards is a good idea. However, doing that correctly requires using a reliable auditor who can effectively communicate with the supplier's staff and knows how to look for the details - and how to see through deception. In some Eastern cultures the truth is seen differently from how we see it here. Reality is negotiable - it's all part of the constant process of bargaining. Using un-truth in business isn't even seen as lying, or as a moral fault.
Conducting regular audits of suppliers in foreign countries is expensive. The high cost, and the cultural predisposition of Western manufacturers to expect suppliers to behave in a generally honest manner, serve as disincentives to constant monitoring/policing. Unfortunately that is often what is needed to insure that what SHOULD be done IS done.
Hello,
Manufacturers do have a responsibility to verify the quality of supplied product.suppliers for systemic compliance with standards is a good idea...
Quality inspections china
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home