letters
Survey Accuracy Questioned
Paul Scicchitano's article "ISO 9000: Not Just For the Big Guys"
[February 1996] did little to convince me of the benefits of registration
for a small company.
Since Mr. Scicchitano refers to a survey questionnaire that asked each ISO-registered
company about its annual sales, it is assumed this information was not already
known. Therefore, the respondents may have been weighted either more heavily
toward large companies or small companies. It is anyone's guess as to who
would be more likely to take the time to answer the questionnaire.
In one sentence, Mr. Scicchitano uses the words "about 24 percent of
all U.S. registrants . . . " and then later uses the words "about
12 percent of the respondents . . . " He can correctly refer to a certain
percentage of respondents, but he is confusing an unscientific survey with
wished-for accuracy when he talks about a percentage of all U.S. registrants.
Also, the percentages that relate to the different companies which responded
add up to more than 117 percent. This is fantasy, not math.
In the article, the companies that responded are grouped according to their
financial sizes, with each group assigned a percentage of the total number
of respondents. The only group that isn't assigned its own percentage is
the smallest group in terms of annual sales ($10 million or less). This
group is said to be 10 percent of the other group ($25 million or less-the
24 percent group). If the author had wished to be direct, he could have
said that the smallest financial group represents only 2.4 percent of the
respondents. This doesn't sound as if registration is not just for the big
guys.
-Sam Finley
Reseda, California
Scicchitano Responds
I thank Mr. Finley for his interest. The article was not intended as a scientific
paper. The opinions expressed are my observations on the results.
The respondents represent 26.9 percent of the approximately 7,000 U.S. certificate
holders at the time of the survey.
Out of 1,880 total respondents, 184, or 9.8 percent, report current annual
sales volumes of $10 million or less. Another 266 respondents, or 14.1 percent,
of the total report current annual sales volumes of $11 million to $25 million.
Added together, these two groups account for 23.9 percent of the total respondents.
In my opinion, this is a substantial number. The balance of respondents
may be grouped as follows with respect to current annual sales volumes:
31.1 percent current annual sales between $26 million and $100 million;
27.7 percent current annual sales between $101 million to $1 billion; 11.6
percent current annual sales exceeding $1 billion; 5.6 percent did not answer
this particular question. Please note that the numbers add up to 99.9 percent.
Unabridged survey results may be purchased for $150 from Irwin Professional
Publishing at (800) 773-4607.
-Paul Scicchitano
Why Cover ISO 14000?
William Heintz's letter [February 1996 Letters] seeks justification for
linking quality management (ISO 9000) with environmental management (ISO
14000). I am a quality professional driven to improve the quality of environmental
management and the quality of everything else we do. The new quality professional
thinks this way. The old focuses only on the quality of the intended product.
Some of us have been made to think (by the gurus) of the "customer"
as anyone affected by the results of our work. We are all in the business
of anticipating and meeting customer needs. Modern quality professionals
no longer ignore the environmental impacts of the enterprises they work
for.
We also see the growing use of defined management systems to achieve any
set of objectives. Systems influence behavior by improving accountability,
creating a store of corporate knowledge and by supporting the decision-making
processes where the work is done. Key skills of the modern quality professional
therefore include: systems thinking, systems design, systems auditing and
using systems to achieve continuous improvements in performance.
As we strive to make quality management normal management (and quality engineering
become normal engineering), we must reengineer or reinvent ourselves.
With one management system, large or small enterprises can meet any set
of objectives related to quality, the environment, health and safety or
profit. This is the new world of quality management being explored by Quality
Digest, and I urge faster progress. To ignore environmental quality would
put us back in the Dark Ages.
-John R. Broomfield
Exton, Pennsylvania
Labor Act Restricts Teams
We were very interested in your article on the Teamwork for Employees and
Managers Act ["Proposed Law Could Loosen Legal Choke-Hold On Teams,"
February 1996]. Not only have employees changed, but management styles have
changed to facilitate a new type of worker. The people who make the product
are our competitive advantage in today's globalized market. It is in everyone's
best interest to listen to each other's ideas and suggestions because this
leads to the survival of the entire organization.
Section 8(a)(2) of the National Labor Relations Act had viable purpose
in 1935. The problem is that the work environment has changed dramatically
over the past 61 years. This section has a finite life. The section's original
intent was to protect the employees' best interest. Ironically, today it
is being used to suppress positive relations between employer and employee.
Why would anyone stand in opposition to teamwork when it serves the same
purpose as was intended by section 8(a)(2), to improve the work environment?
While we realize that there may be some abuse of the team concept, as with
any management style, the Democrats' assertion that the Team Act will set
the stage for employer domination demonstrates their clear misunderstanding
of smart business. The concept of employer domination neglects to effectively
utilize our most vital resource, which is our people. Long-term survival
of any company depends on the effective use of a dynamic and involved work
force.
-Thad M. Harrill
and Tommy R. Beheler
Caroleen, North Carolina
Zuckerman Off-Base
I would like to comment on the editorial by Amy Zuckerman in your December
1995 issue of Quality Digest. As a consultant who specializes in the transition
from MIL-Q-9858 to ISO 9000 in defense and aerospace industries, I feel
obliged to tell you that there are several incorrect statements in this
editorial.
The editorial states that "In June 1994, Deutch made good on his promise
to remove all military specs." This was actually done by Secretary
of Defense William Perry in his June 29, 1994, memo to all elements of the
Department. [Editor's note: This was an editing error, not Zuckerman's.]
Secondly, the editorial states that "Q9001 replaces MIL-Q-9858"
and "Q9002 replaces MIL-I-45208." This is absolutely wrong. The
application of these two military specifications was based on product criticality
and complexity. The application of the ISO standards is based on the supplier's
need to demonstrate his capabilities in design, development, production,
installation and servicing. If the supplier has a design requirement, he
would apply Q9001. If not, he could apply Q9002. It is feasible that a defense
contractor who was required to comply with MIL-I-45208 may indeed be required
to comply with Q9001 (ISO 9001).
The third statement that needs to be corrected indicates that this system
(mixed auditing system) "would ruin the third-party registration system
that ISO 9000 advocates." As an active member of the U.S. Technical
Advisory Group to ISO TC 176, I can say with certainty that ISO 9000 does
not in any way advocate any third-party system. The words "registration"
and "third party" are not even mentioned in the standard.
The transition to ISO 9000 and other nongovernment standards is difficult
when one has the correct information. The difficulty is compounded when
incorrect information is provided. Quality Digest should provide accurate
information.
-Ira J. Epstein
Arlington, Virginia
