Hi to All,
Joe wrote: "SQC highlights incremental assessment but to my
limited knowledge of the topic, does not include step change
improvements."
It's been some time since I read W. Edwards Deming's work.
But unless I don't recall correctly, two key aspects of
Deming's SQC work are these: 1. Ongoing identification of
step change improvements was emphasized. 2. Moreover, each
and all workers are expected to have responsibility and
contributions indicating where and when improvements are
needed and can be made. No matter what position of authority
one may have, each worker could go so far as to stop the
production line when need for improvement exists.
I'll be interested in seeing whether other readers have
different views or can comment further about this.
Glenn Snelbecker, Temple University
---- Original message ----
>Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 19:34:27 -0700
>From: Joe <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Statistical Quality Control, the science of
design, and other matters
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>Once again my knowledge on the topic is trumped by greater
minds :-)
>
>Re: The science of design. I could not agree more, we can
actually make progress!
>
>SQC highlights incremental assessment but to my limited
knowledge of the topic, does not include step change
improvements. But this is not necessarily detrimental to
R&D's association with design science.
>
>I guess my question is: Does the science of design include
ad hoc approaches to problem solving? While the answer it
seems obviously yes, at least to me; has this been
formalized?
>
>Sincerely, Joe
>www.ActiveDisassembly.com
>
>--- On Tue, 3/10/09, Don Norman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>From: Don Norman <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Statistical Quality Control, the science of
design, and other matters
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Received: Tuesday, March 10, 2009, 1:19 PM
>
>I have changed the name of this thread to represent the
topic we are now engaged
>upon.
>
>I am delighted to be able to agree with Ken. So perhaps
we should state that
>the enemy is SQC as currently practiced, not to be confused
with SQC as Deming
>developed it and argued for.
>
>A strong undercurrent here, though, is yet another topic of
great interest to
>this group: Can we have a science of design?
>
>Wait! I know. This is a topic that has been beaten over
and over again. I am
>as tired of the old discussions as I am tired of the
discussion "What is
>design?". Still, although the topic has been beaten, it
has not been
>beaten to death -- it is still alive and thriving.
Moreover, some of us think
>we can actually make progress.
>
>And the reason this comes up in this discussion is that
many of those who
>preach today's version of SQC also preach their version of
Design Science,
>which means optimization methods. Algorithmic methods. If
people make errors,
>it means we need better rules and better training. Design?
What has that got to
>do with it.
>
>Aesthetics? Where does it fit in the equations? Yes,
aesthetics and emotions
>matter, so show us how to put them into the matrices.
>
>I keep trying to explain to these people that they are
being too logical. They
>have to take people the way they are (the way we all are),
not the way they
>would like people to be. Logic, I explain, is an artificial
way of thinking.
>Otherwise, why would we have to teach it? Why would it be
so difficult to learn?
>
>Mind you, even engineers reason emotionally. First their
emotion tells them the
>solution, then they invent a logical explanation and
rationalization. So they
>pretend it was all done with equations. Hah. It's much more
like we all do
>budgets. We know what answers we want, so we twiddle the
numbers until it comes
>out right. That's how scientific design is done. Twiddle
the weights on the
>matrix rows until the answer comes out right. Hypocrisy
rules, even if it is
>subconscious, fooling even the person who does it that way.
>
>But I digress.
>Good to hear you agree with me, Ken.
>Don
>
>
>
_____________________________________________________________
_____
>Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and
bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
>http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Glenn E. Snelbecker, Ph.D., Professor, Temple University
|