Ref.: 875
2003-10-16
A new technical report is expected to help users of the ISO 9000 series identify statistical techniques that will improve the effectiveness of their quality management system.
Statistical techniques offer insight into the nature, extent and causes of variability in products and services and, in so doing, help control and reduce problems that could arise from such variability, and which exists throughout the life cycle of products, from market research to customer service and final disposal.
Published by ISO (International Organization for Standardization), the new technical report, ISO/TR 10017:2003, Guidance on statistical techniques for ISO 9001:2000, is intended to assist managers in their decision-making processes by identifying statistical techniques that could help improve the quality of products and processes.
"The effective deployment of statistical techniques is largely governed by how well their potential application and benefit are understood by management," says Lally Marwah, Convenor of the working group that developed the new standard. "This need is well served by the recently published technical report, which offers a clear and concise view of a range of widely used statistical techniques, and their potential role and value in driving quality improvement."
It can be used by organizations in developing, implementing, maintaining and improving a quality management system based on ISO 9001:2000, although the use of ISO/TR 10017 is not a requirement for certification/registration purposes.
ISO/TR 10017:2003 replaces ISO/TR 10017:1999. It is aligned with ISO 9001:2000 and will serve as a strategic tool for managers who may not necessarily be experts in statistical techniques.
http://www.iso.org/iso/pressrelease.htm?refid=Ref875
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
10 CRITICAL FACTORS THAT MAKE ISO IMPLEMENTATION SUCCESSFUL
...
Based on PQA's research on why some companies had such great success with their ISO implementations and others failed spectacularly, PQA has identified 10 Critical Success Factors that make an ISO implementation successful. They are:
1. Sr. Management's recognition of their crucial role in the ISO system management process
2. ISO involvement at all levels, jobs, and areas in the organization
3. Understanding of the organizational processes and the critical control points in the process.
4. People trained in how to do their job, and interact effectively with the whole system.
5. Focusing on organizational development & improvement, not just the bare minimum (ie. what the ISO Registrar is willing to accept today)
6. Finding balance between excess ISO bureaucracy, and insufficient ISO system depth to ensure consistent results.
7. Dedication to following the agreed systems at all levels in the organization
8.Keeping the organization focused on meeting the ISO implementation timeline
9. Effective ISO auditing (ie. Sr. Management knows the ISO status, the risks, and gets actionable recommendations for rapid improvement)
10. Timely management response to ISO audit results.
If a consultant was relied upon to guide the ISO implementation, the fault for a poor ISO implementation may very well lie with the consultant. Was the consultant's advise understood, and followed by Sr. Management? Most Sr. Management get distracted very early in the ISO implementation process, then abdicate (Sr. Management calls it "delegate") the ISO implementation process to staff or consultants. The effective ISO implementation is often sacrificed for a quick ISO certificate on the wall with minimal effort and costs.
For quality consultants to be effective, they need to have a good understanding both of ISO 9001 and the sector or company they are seeking to apply it to. Effective ISO 9001 implementation is supposed to lead to improved productivity, efficiency, consistency and client service. If ISO 9001 is not delivering this, then it has not been effectively implemented.
...
http://www.pqa.net/ProdServices/ISO/ISO-System-Effectiveness.html
Based on PQA's research on why some companies had such great success with their ISO implementations and others failed spectacularly, PQA has identified 10 Critical Success Factors that make an ISO implementation successful. They are:
1. Sr. Management's recognition of their crucial role in the ISO system management process
2. ISO involvement at all levels, jobs, and areas in the organization
3. Understanding of the organizational processes and the critical control points in the process.
4. People trained in how to do their job, and interact effectively with the whole system.
5. Focusing on organizational development & improvement, not just the bare minimum (ie. what the ISO Registrar is willing to accept today)
6. Finding balance between excess ISO bureaucracy, and insufficient ISO system depth to ensure consistent results.
7. Dedication to following the agreed systems at all levels in the organization
8.Keeping the organization focused on meeting the ISO implementation timeline
9. Effective ISO auditing (ie. Sr. Management knows the ISO status, the risks, and gets actionable recommendations for rapid improvement)
10. Timely management response to ISO audit results.
If a consultant was relied upon to guide the ISO implementation, the fault for a poor ISO implementation may very well lie with the consultant. Was the consultant's advise understood, and followed by Sr. Management? Most Sr. Management get distracted very early in the ISO implementation process, then abdicate (Sr. Management calls it "delegate") the ISO implementation process to staff or consultants. The effective ISO implementation is often sacrificed for a quick ISO certificate on the wall with minimal effort and costs.
For quality consultants to be effective, they need to have a good understanding both of ISO 9001 and the sector or company they are seeking to apply it to. Effective ISO 9001 implementation is supposed to lead to improved productivity, efficiency, consistency and client service. If ISO 9001 is not delivering this, then it has not been effectively implemented.
...
http://www.pqa.net/ProdServices/ISO/ISO-System-Effectiveness.html
MEASURING PURCHASING PERFORMANCE
Written by Martin Murray, About.com Guide
Measuring purchasing performance is important as the purchasing department plays an ever increasingly important role in the supply chain in an economic downturn. A reduction in the cost of raw material and services can allow companies to competitively market the price of their finished goods in order to win business. An obvious performance measure of the success of any purchasing department is the amount of money saved by the company. However there are a number of performance measurements that businesses can use when they measure purchasing performance.
Purchasing Efficiency
Administrative costs are the basis for measuring purchasing efficiency. This performance measurement does not relate to the amount of purchased items that the department has procured. The measurement relates to how well the purchasing department is performing in the activities they are expected to perform against the budget that is in place for the department. If the purchasing costs are within the budget then the efficiency of the purchasing department will exceed expectations. If the department is using funds over and above the budget then the purchasing function is not efficient.
Purchasing Effectiveness
The price that the purchasing department paid for an item is not necessarily a good measurement for purchasing performance. The price of an item may fluctuate due to market conditions, its availability, and other demand pressures; therefore the purchasing department may not be able to control the price. A popular method of assessing purchasing effectiveness is to review the inventory turnover ratios. The ratio measures the number of times, on average; the inventory is used, or turned, during the period. The ratio used to measure the liquidity of the inventory. However, this is not always a great measure of purchasing effectiveness as seasonal requirements for having items in stock can make this measurement inaccurate.
Purchasing Functionality
Purchasing performance can be measured against the functional requirements of the purchasing function. The primary function of the department is to provide the correct item at the required time at the lowest possible cost. The performance measurement can take into account these elements, but it does not take into account factors that may relate to the supplier stability, material quality issues and supplier discounts.
Performance Measurements
The performance of the purchasing function can be measured using a variety of measurements. A company can decide which of these measurements of effectiveness are relevant to the performance of their purchasing department. The measurements can include,
•Cost Savings; If the purchasing department procure an item at a lower price than they did previously, then it is a cost saving. This can occur when a new supplier is found, a less costly substitute item is used, a new contract has been signed with the vendor, a cheaper transportation method has been found or the purchasing department has negotiated a lower price with the existing supplier.
•Increased Quality; When an item has improved quality either by using a different supplier or by negotiating with the existing supplier, the improvement will be reflected in a reduction of waste or production resources.
•Purchasing Improvements; Efficiencies in the method used in the purchasing department will increase effectiveness. These can include the introduction of EDI, e-procurement systems, vendor managed inventory and pay on receipt processes.
•Transportation Improvements; When a purchasing department negotiates with a carrier or number of carriers to reduce the cost of transporting items from the vendor to the production facilities, the unit cost of the item will be reduced. This cost saving can be used as a measurement of effectiveness.
Purchasing Performance
A number of studies have been carried out on purchasing performance and the results have noted that there is no one method that will cover every purchasing department. However, there are a number of key measures that are found to be common in evaluating performance, namely; cost saving, vendor quality, delivery metrics, price effectiveness and inventory flow. Although these key measures are common, the weight placed on these measures is by no means uniform and will vary between industry to industry and business to business. In addition the importance of these measures to the overall effectiveness of a purchasing department will change over time and therefore need to be assessed and modified on a periodic basis.
Source: http://logistics.about.com/od/strategicsupplychain/a/measure_purchasing.htm
Measuring purchasing performance is important as the purchasing department plays an ever increasingly important role in the supply chain in an economic downturn. A reduction in the cost of raw material and services can allow companies to competitively market the price of their finished goods in order to win business. An obvious performance measure of the success of any purchasing department is the amount of money saved by the company. However there are a number of performance measurements that businesses can use when they measure purchasing performance.
Purchasing Efficiency
Administrative costs are the basis for measuring purchasing efficiency. This performance measurement does not relate to the amount of purchased items that the department has procured. The measurement relates to how well the purchasing department is performing in the activities they are expected to perform against the budget that is in place for the department. If the purchasing costs are within the budget then the efficiency of the purchasing department will exceed expectations. If the department is using funds over and above the budget then the purchasing function is not efficient.
Purchasing Effectiveness
The price that the purchasing department paid for an item is not necessarily a good measurement for purchasing performance. The price of an item may fluctuate due to market conditions, its availability, and other demand pressures; therefore the purchasing department may not be able to control the price. A popular method of assessing purchasing effectiveness is to review the inventory turnover ratios. The ratio measures the number of times, on average; the inventory is used, or turned, during the period. The ratio used to measure the liquidity of the inventory. However, this is not always a great measure of purchasing effectiveness as seasonal requirements for having items in stock can make this measurement inaccurate.
Purchasing Functionality
Purchasing performance can be measured against the functional requirements of the purchasing function. The primary function of the department is to provide the correct item at the required time at the lowest possible cost. The performance measurement can take into account these elements, but it does not take into account factors that may relate to the supplier stability, material quality issues and supplier discounts.
Performance Measurements
The performance of the purchasing function can be measured using a variety of measurements. A company can decide which of these measurements of effectiveness are relevant to the performance of their purchasing department. The measurements can include,
•Cost Savings; If the purchasing department procure an item at a lower price than they did previously, then it is a cost saving. This can occur when a new supplier is found, a less costly substitute item is used, a new contract has been signed with the vendor, a cheaper transportation method has been found or the purchasing department has negotiated a lower price with the existing supplier.
•Increased Quality; When an item has improved quality either by using a different supplier or by negotiating with the existing supplier, the improvement will be reflected in a reduction of waste or production resources.
•Purchasing Improvements; Efficiencies in the method used in the purchasing department will increase effectiveness. These can include the introduction of EDI, e-procurement systems, vendor managed inventory and pay on receipt processes.
•Transportation Improvements; When a purchasing department negotiates with a carrier or number of carriers to reduce the cost of transporting items from the vendor to the production facilities, the unit cost of the item will be reduced. This cost saving can be used as a measurement of effectiveness.
Purchasing Performance
A number of studies have been carried out on purchasing performance and the results have noted that there is no one method that will cover every purchasing department. However, there are a number of key measures that are found to be common in evaluating performance, namely; cost saving, vendor quality, delivery metrics, price effectiveness and inventory flow. Although these key measures are common, the weight placed on these measures is by no means uniform and will vary between industry to industry and business to business. In addition the importance of these measures to the overall effectiveness of a purchasing department will change over time and therefore need to be assessed and modified on a periodic basis.
Source: http://logistics.about.com/od/strategicsupplychain/a/measure_purchasing.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
