0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)
985 Ansichten3 Seiten
This document compares the quality principles of Deming, Juran, and Crosby. Some key differences include:
- Deming focused on reducing variability through continuous improvement, while Juran emphasized managing human aspects and Crosby prevention.
- Their structures for improvement consisted of Deming's 14 steps, Juran's 10 steps, and Crosby's 14 steps.
- Views on performance standards differed, with Deming focusing on predictability and low cost, Juran on fitness for purpose, and Crosby on conformance to requirements.
- They had varying views on costs of quality, goals/targets, team approaches, and supplier relationships. Overall the document outlines the similarities and differences in their philosophies
This document compares the quality principles of Deming, Juran, and Crosby. Some key differences include:
- Deming focused on reducing variability through continuous improvement, while Juran emphasized managing human aspects and Crosby prevention.
- Their structures for improvement consisted of Deming's 14 steps, Juran's 10 steps, and Crosby's 14 steps.
- Views on performance standards differed, with Deming focusing on predictability and low cost, Juran on fitness for purpose, and Crosby on conformance to requirements.
- They had varying views on costs of quality, goals/targets, team approaches, and supplier relationships. Overall the document outlines the similarities and differences in their philosophies
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Verfügbare Formate
Als DOC herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
This document compares the quality principles of Deming, Juran, and Crosby. Some key differences include:
- Deming focused on reducing variability through continuous improvement, while Juran emphasized managing human aspects and Crosby prevention.
- Their structures for improvement consisted of Deming's 14 steps, Juran's 10 steps, and Crosby's 14 steps.
- Views on performance standards differed, with Deming focusing on predictability and low cost, Juran on fitness for purpose, and Crosby on conformance to requirements.
- They had varying views on costs of quality, goals/targets, team approaches, and supplier relationships. Overall the document outlines the similarities and differences in their philosophies
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Verfügbare Formate
Als DOC herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
Points for Quality Improvement ( C –14, D - 14, J – 10)
Sl Deming Juran Crosby
No. ( 14 Points) ( 10 Points) ( 14 points) 1. Constancy of Build awareness of Make it clear that purpose need and management is committed opportunity for to quality. improvement.
2. A new philosophy Set goals for Form Quality improvement
improvement. teams with each department represented.
3. Cease dependence Organize to reach Determine where current
on inspection goals and potential problems lie. 4. End lowest tender Provide training Evaluate the cost of contracts quality and explain its use as a tool 5. Improve every Carry out projects to Raise the quality process solve problems awareness and concern of all employees 6. Institute training Report progress Take actions to correct on the job problems identified. 7. Institute Give Recognition. Establish a committee for leadership the ‘Zero defects’ program 8. Drive out fear Communicate results Train supervisors to actively carry out their role in quality improvement.
9. Break down Keep score Hold a ‘zero defects day’
barriers for all employees to highlight the changes.
10. Eliminate Maintain momentum Encourage individuals to
exhortation by making annual establish improvement improvement part of goals regular process of the company 11. Eliminate targets Encourage communication with management about obstacles to improvement 12. Permit pride of Recognize and appreciate workmanship the participants.
13. Encourage Establish quality councils
education to aid communication.
Doc No 19 Quality Improvement Page 1 of 2
Syntel CQA Forum Comparison of Quality Principles CQA Doc No 7
14. Create top Do it all over again to
management show it never ends. Structures.
Doc No 19 Quality Improvement Page 2 of 2
Syntel CQA Forum Comparison of Quality Principles CQA Doc No 7
Comparison of Principal ideas of Deming, Juran and Crosby
Deming Juran Crosby
Definition Predictable degree Fitness for Conformance to
of uniformity and purpose Requirements dependability at low cost
Senior Responsible for Responsible for > Responsible for
management 94% of problems 80% of problems Quality responsibility Performance Many scales: use Avoid campaigns Zero defects standard SPC to exhort perfection
General Reduce Variability: Emphasis on Prevention
approach Continuos management of Improvement human aspects
Structure 14 steps 10 steps 14 steps
SPC SPC must be used Recommends SPC Rejects
but cautions Statistically against tool based acceptable level of approach quality
Basis for Continuos: Project based A process, not a
improvement eliminate goals approach: set program goals Team work Employee Team / Quality Quality participation in circle improvement decisions teams
Costs of No optimum, Optimum, Quality Quality is free
Quality Continuos is not free improvement
Purchasing Use SPC through Complex Supplier is
strong co- problems, use extension of operation formal surveys business