Juran in his book: Managerial Breakthrough makes a distinction between innovation or "breakthrough" and "control". David Hoyle in his book; ISO 9000 Quality System Development Handbook associates Deming's PLAN, DO, STUDY, ACT cycle with control and discusses the Juran "Breakthrough" sequence. I think the Deming cycle is more that merely a control cycle. Properly, used the process sequence would identify the need for "Breakthrough". I think Process Control is the act of monitoring process variables to limit variation in process results to "common" or unassignable causes. SPC is the use of statistics to identify when a process has come under the influence of variation from a "special" or potentially assignable input variable(s) Management must enable both control and breakthrough. Breakthrough is glamorous. Control is not a normal state, it is achieved as a result of the application of knowledge and great effort. How do we create a managment system that encourages innovation and control? Maybe we should not use the term Process Control, rather Process Managment. We don't want SPC but SPM. > -----Original Message----- > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Earl Moon > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 11:00 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: [TN] A SERIOUS QUALITY QUESTION > > > Kind folks, > > Before I go off in the frozen tundra in my current MI location, > to finish my > book, I need some input on the following: > > Process control is defined as using process capabilities > in an efficient, effective, consistent manner. To say a process is > in control means the process is operating without assignable cause. > If assignable cause is found, the process is out of control, and > must be corrected, redesigned, and re-characterized. If a process is > found to be in control it does not mean it is capable of meeting > product acceptance specifications. It simply means it is consistent ? good > or bad. > > Process capabilities charts (Cpk) describe the relationship > between process > control and product quality. When process capabilities are statistically > proven to provide specified product quality, they are capable of providing > product meeting customer/contract requirements. > > The above factors should be considered at the design concept level. Then, > DFM/CE has a firm footing so a concept may be turned into a design capable > of being manufactured as a product meeting specified customer contract > requirements. > > Just a bit wordy, as usual, but do these words have validity in today?s > ?just do it? world. I mean, does what Juran, and others, have > been preaching > so long, have meaning for us in light of some of the previous discussions > concerning quality systems, ISO, too much restraint, not enough creative > freedom, and all the rest? > > MoonMan