LO and ISO LO27971

From: Andrew Wong (360qcom@360q.com)
Date: 03/13/02


Replying to LO27960 --

Elixabete wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
However, you are now telling me that experimenting can be in accordance
with ISO.

However, when experiments are carried out (I refer to experiments in
the company procedures), how do we ensure consistency in the product or
service? Are you referring to small/incremental changes?

And if this were the case, would you include these changes in the
quality
manual of the company once approved and adopted so consistency can be
ensured from that moment onwards? I don't know if I am answering my own
questions or just guessing.

..., most companies avoid having non-conformances
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
I read your mental models as follow:

(I apologize if I am too direct, as this is the approach I use in my
email-coaching service to paid clients helping them to increase their
capacity to create the future they truly desire)

 - "ISO (procedures) may stifle learning / creativity with
experimentation"
 - "Learning and experimentation may lead to rewriting of procedures / re-
documentation" This may lead to next question "Is it practical? In what
situation? .. small changes or large changes?"
 - "Learning and experimentation may lead to in-consistency of products
and services"
 - "Conformance to requirement culture may lead to managers not using
their own thinking, hide important things under procedures that
eventually do damage to organization and human relationship"

The above are very much linear and logical thinking, either leading to
dilemma or no action arising possibly from the following underlying mental
models

 1.0 Organization or Quality System treated as machine, governed by a set
of rules and regulations, or manuals and procedures.

Machine-system (Vs organism-system)is only one aspect of the system, which
do needs some rule and regulation to guide and govern behavior.

 2.0 Either-Or type of logical thinking. (use in most of the above
statements)

But Systems Thinking teaches us otherwise, not either this or that, but
how one variable affects another, the relationship and consequences.

 3.0 Not making distinction between Convergent Problem and Divergent
Problems

Trying to apply procedural approach to divergent problem may produce more
problems.

If we make a shift in the above thinking framework, there will be lot of
creativity and fun to not only resolve the dilemma posted above, but
create emerging new learning phenomena, helping individuals and
organization towards shared visions.

Regards

QuaSyLaTic, Andrew,
http://www.360q.com
QuaSyLaTic Knowledgebase

-- 

"Andrew Wong" <360qcom@360q.com>

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>


"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.