In improving Quality, continual improvement through the practice of incremental refinement is a powerful approach.

For example, as I drive home I have a route that works quite well. It is the most direct path between two points or the fastest path between two points. As I go along I start to notice things. Hey, people are turning off here, I wonder why or hey, Google disagrees with me and thinks it knows it better route. (Google maps that is, Google doesn’t talk to me yet…) Or hey, I wonder where that road goes it comes out at an intersection and looks busier than the road I took previously. Through experience we don’t become experts at driving down new roads but we become experts driving down the roads that we know. So with each opportunity to observe a contrary point of view each opportunity to experience the effect of plans. We are in a position to improve and to do better.

I believe in continual refinement. Let’s draft a document, present it to some other knowledgeable people and have them critique it. Then lets present it to our customers and have them shoot it full of holes. After each critique and review, we see problems and we fix them, so it becomes better and better and better until we have a really good document. The alternative is to try and get things perfect before we benefit from the insight and correction we might be offered. Producing PERFECT work is the realm of those who fear that the customer will discover they are not perfect.  In producing PERFECT work (which is really just unreviewed work) Those doing the writing will tend to overthink second guess and overcorrect the work in the hopes that it will not fail, this extra “dilligence” will result in an increased cost that may or may not pay off in acceptance by the customer.

So, let’s put it out so the customers can test it.  Every time the work encounters a problem, we hear about it and we’re able to improve our documentation. Things that we anticipated would be a problem, are not.  However those that we never would have anticipated become problems. We let our customers help us achieve quality through continual and repeated refinement.

In the case of a business process that is being refined, where incremental change is possible (and it isn’t always) staff experience less disruption, maintain more productivity and generally experience less stress caused by change.

Some customers I worked with had been drafting some webpages which would represent their department and department’s initiatives.  They had these pages in draft form for 3 years, during which time, none of their customers could read the information they had been thoughtfully compiling.  The information by that point, ironically was out of date and would require updating.  Their desire to get the information absolutely perfect had effectively removed the entire benefit of compiling the information in the first place.

Often in the IT environment where I work, we wrestle with the need for information that should be documeted, but which has not been. Even if we had partial information, outdated information, or incorrect information that would be preferable to NO INFORMATION.  At least partial information gives you a place to start. A contact, a server name, a vendor’s 1800 number.  So I am through my experience a fan of work that is created imperfect, and then refined as opportunity presents itself. 

Well, this document has been sitting in draft for a while, so I’m going to kick it out there.  Maybe though it it incomplete, it will be of some benefit.  Let me know what you think, and I’ll improve it as we go.

 Recently we had a problem with our web site’s “feedback form” (details later) which got me thinking about quality checks in manufacturing and how they can be done in a way that is economical.

We need to double check the work we do because often the result we produce is not the result we intend to produce. It is true that if we double checked everything we did, we would be very unproductive. I can imagine as I type this out, double checking that I have located the correct key before pressing it, checking that the key I pressed appears on the screen before continuing on. Stopping after every sentence to reconsider my spelling, my punctuation and my grammar. Pausing after each paragraph to consider whether what I just wrote was in fact what I really wanted to say. It is ridiculous.

There was a time when everything was double checked. The first time I typed I was uncertain of what I typed. I had to find the letters… Now my fingers press words without me even needing to think about the letters in those words. I string ideas together and present them with thought to the content, but not much thought to the mechanics of my writing. This is how learning works for us humans we get better at something and our minds are freed from having to concentrate on the details. Amazing how our brains were constructed this way. Our brains can watch for exceptions and ignore the majority of our activity. Most people will observe themselves doing this while driving. They will say “I don’t remember that part of my commute today, I remember getting on the freeway and I remember getting off, but I don’t remember spending 30minutes on the freeway..”. As a driver when the brake lights come on in front of you, that is your brain’s queue to start paying more attention. The thoughts of your planned California vacation fade and thoughts of reacting appropriately in traffic start forming.

The same is true in manufacturing. We can’t afford to quality inspect every widget we produce (unless they are expensive enough). At the same time we must know if there is non-conformance in our products that needs to be addressed. Much like the typing example we may have QA staff shadow a new hire until they start learning what to watch for. After a while the production workers will be performing their own less official but important QA functions.

But how do we balance the cost of increased quality assurance with the attention QA requires? We can start with some best practices based on experience. First-off testing examines the first piece produced for defects and deviations, what better place to catch these than with the first piece. Additionally we can set up a sampling rate that allows us some coverage for the produced product. If the variance on an operation is increasing during the production run, this can be detected and corrected before it becomes unacceptable.

Also, remember to perform QA on your QA. If everything keeps coming up roses, then your diligence with suppliers, production equipment and staff training and quality ownership are paying off. You can be less intense in inspecting. If however a product or operation shows reduced quality you can be more vigilant.

Now for that personal example that started this train of thought. Much like the driver who is convinced everything is fine on the freeway, I was convinced that the feedback form on GreenTree Software’s website was working fine. I had done a first-off test when it was first set up which worked fine. We had been receiving some spam through the form which sent us form submissions with SPAM content (probably sent by automated scripts). So when we started receiving completely blank form submissions (the brake lights on the freeway) we just ignored them. On a whim the other day I retested the form and promptly received a blank email. Whoops. So to everyone who tried sending us a message I apologize. We did not receive it and have no record of who you are (or we would apologize personally). The broken form has been taken out of service (everyone has email these days). Again I’m sorry. If I hadn’t tested the other day we would still be losing your messages and receiving blank emails. If you tried to contact us using the form, drop us a line via email and we’ll try to make it up to you.

Thanks Greg.