This kind of behavior only continues if you (not you, necessarily, but the management directly
responsible for the performance of the people performing the work) don't hold people accountable
for doing the work the way it's documented. You write a procedure, train the people on the procedure,
get their signature on the training record, and then hold them accountable for performing the operation
per procedure.
If they don't they get a talking to, or a ding on their review, or a paltry increase when it comes time for
a raise if they're prone to poor performance. Termination is always an option too. I worked for
a company that went from very few proceduralized operations to documenting every move, and verifying every
move with a second operator. You'd be surprised how people get used to it as standard ops. after doing it
for a while. This was in medical device mfg., too, so non-compliance was a precursor to a line stop.
People CAN follow procedures, and it CAN make for a very efficiently run operation, but you have to demand
compliance. I've seen it work, and work very well. Maybe if the management and tech. support staff
believes it can work, it will? I just know it's far from impossible. Whether or not it costs you more than
it saves you in a Class 1 or 2 operation, I don't know. In Class 3 it's mandatory, at least in med. products.
-----Original Message-----
From: rgrant [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 1:02 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] First Article Buy-off Process for SMT & Wave Solder
Poh,
I have read all the other replies, and in spite of them I agree with you.
Unless an operator has a reputation for fouling things up, his peers will
usually rubber stamp the buy-off with out actually thoroughly checking the
machine set up. As I'm sure you have seen, thoroughly checking and buying
off can often take up to a half hour or more. With pressure to get the line
running, people will either just spot check or just buy-off without checking
at all. There are lots of reasons why this doesn't work. However, like you
said, EVERY company I have been to uses this fallacy. We collectively seem
to believe that humans will follow a procedure like a machine, totally
ignoring human psychology. The question is, what is the alternative? I
have seen it where a production line will drop the buy-off procedure because
it wasn't working, only to put it back in place after a major misbuild. I
guess its like a car alarm, you get this sense of *security* that really
isn't real.
Pick and place machine manufactures and AOI manufactures have been working
this problem for years. I think we are very close to a solution.
Ryan Grant
-----Original Message-----
From: Poh Kong Hui [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 9:54 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] First Article Buy-off Process for SMT & Wave Solder
Hi Technetters,
I would to share some experience with you all.
I have been working for 5 companies. I realize that every
company that I worked for, has a buy-off system; so called
the first article buy-off before releasing the either a SMT or
wave soldering line for mass production.
I am rather curious why the people who are managing the
lines cannot perform their own self check, but rather
depends upon someone to check their work and to ensure
they loaded the right to the machine or to the boards.
I would like to hear your opinion about this system as I find it
rather stupid and it is wasting time.
Poh
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700
ext.5315
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
