224 Quality Assurance
Presenting Findings
When the team nishes studying the problem and has indeed gured out
a solution to the specic defect, they present the results to the management
team, which is the nal judge as to whether the solution is acceptable. This
means that the mistake-proong team must do some preparations, starting
with
• Deciding what information you are going to present
• Deciding how the information will be presented
• Deciding who will present (may be more than one person)
• Deciding if there is a need for practicing the presentation
Within these four categories, the predominant factors are the consequences
of the defect (the reason for the study) and the specic x with the associated
potential benets. The rst one is addressed (at least the minimum informa-
tion) by focusing on
• Mistake-proong location
• Potential defect (escape and detecting)
• Mistake that could cause this defect
• How is this mistake prevented?
• Appropriate recommendation (prevention, detection or correction)
The second one is addressed by summarizing the benets with quanti-
able data. Without data, the mistake-proong work will not be accepted.
The benets for any mistake-proong undertaking are generally tradi-
tional costs and savings based on the number of defects eliminated. Do
not include unquantiable costs and undesirable situations as part of the
presentation just because they sound good. They will distract from the
focus and waste time. Typical unquantiable costs and undesirable situ-
ations are
• Business costs: Cost of additional energy and equipment required to
manage a poor-quality production environment.
• Liability costs: Cost of losing business due to poor product qual-
ity or inefficient compliance to government regulations and
safety.
• Cultural costs: Reduction of worker morale and work standards.
In some cases, the community acceptance may play a role in the
decision.
225Poka-Yoke
Next Steps
The knowledge and skills you gained from conducting the study should
be used (1) as a regular part of your work, and (2) diffused through-
out the organization as applicable. Remember that success begets suc-
cess! Remember also that mistake-proong should come from everyone.
Therefore mistake-proong applications should be simple. Recommended
next steps are
• Follow through on mistake-proong projects.
• Use a mistake-proong opportunity and tracking form to develop
other mistake-proong opportunities. A typical format for this is to
• Identify the problem
• List possible errors
• Determine the most likely error
• Propose multiple solutions
• Evaluate solutions effectiveness, cost, and complexity
• Determine the best solution
• Develop implementation plan
• Analyze preliminary benets
• Develop plan for long-term measure of benets
Typical tracking items may be in the form of
• Percentage of errors proofed
• Percentage of errors detected versus percentage of errors prevented
• Percentage of errors attributed to design
• Percentage of errors attributed to process
Bring your knowledge and skills of error proong back to your work group.
References
Fantin, I. (2014). Applied Problem Solving. Method, Applications, Root Causes,
Countermeasures, Poka-Yoke and A3. How to Make Things Happen to Solve Problems.
Milan: Createspace.
Quality Portal. (May 2013). Poka yoke or mistake proong: Overview. The Quality
Portal. http://thequalityportal.com/pokayoke.htm. Retrieved July 19, 2014.
226 Quality Assurance
Robinson, H. (1997). Using poka-yoke techniques for early defect detection.
http://facultyweb.berry.edu/jgrout/pokasoft.html. Retrieved on July 19,
2014.
Shimbun, N.K. (1988). Poka-Yoke: Improving Product Quality by Preventing Defects.
Portland, OR: Productivity Press, 111.
Shingo, S. (1987). The Sayings of Shigeo Shingo: Key Strategies for Plant Improvement.
Portland, OR: Productivity Press, 145.
Shingo, S. and A. Dillon. (1989). A Study of the Toyota Production System from an
Industrial Engineering Viewpoint. Portland, OR: Productivity Press.
Selected Bibliography
Hinckley, C. M. and P. Barkan. (1995). The role of variation, mistakes, and complexity
in producing nonconformities. Journal of Quality Technology 27(3): 242–249.
Shingo, S. (1986). Zero Quality Control: Source Inspection and the Poka-Yoke System.
Portland, OR: Productivity Press.
..................Content has been hidden....................
You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.