Make It Work Or Make It Right?

Hey Anonymous Hero, My problem is with shops where every problem is fixed expediently, and never root cause corrective action taken. Difficult to get control and stability if we have patches on top of fixes on top of field expedients on top of duct tape secured by wire.

Not denying the need to make expedient fixes from time to time. Am denying that this is a recommended method of operating a business. I have fixed exhaust systems with Food cans and wire to get me back on the road. I would not set out on a cross country trip so "repaired."

I think that we agree that short term expedients have their place. But I believe that an shop that relies on them is addicted to unsustainable policies. I think that we agree that we do not live in the world where zero defects and 100% on time is a given. Expected, but not a given.

Thanks for the thoughtful challenge.

Milo

Sorry if you already had made that point. Missed it.

It would seem obvious to observation that a chronic problem of fixing it quick is not a generic solution. Then again, there are companies that are constantly in firefighting mode, which is another indication of a systemic problem.

there are companies that are constantly in firefighting mode, which is another indication of a systemic problem.

EXACTLY!

Milo

GA. I last worked at a disability centre where a person would be in a faulty wheelchair. They needed to be hoisted out of the chair and a repair made. Depending on the skill of the technician the repair would be of the gaffer tape sort or a properly engineered and fabricated replacement. The demeanor of the disabled person could also influence the type of repair, as could the time of day ( time available ). Sometimes the repair only needed to be enough to get them home so that the empty chair could come back in to be fixed properly over a day or two. The OP was talking about manufacturing specifically but i can also think of examples where a quick repair with fencing wire and a lump of wood did the job until the 'run' was finished.

Horses for courses.

Jim

I tend to agree with Anonymous Hero but I take exception to the overall context he presents it in. First, a project has to overseen, right down to the methods used, equipment and the order in which they're used. Secondly, tolerances make allowance for deviations. Stay in the tolerance and the component is good. A good mechanic (machinist, millright or tool and die maker) can plan this out time-wise, with reasonable accuracy. Management now carries the ball. Notify the client of proposed schedule or authorize the overtime if the client's business means that much to the company. Losing a handful of money or just breaking even is better than losing a client. Or, get competent employees even if you have to pay a little more. I realize that last sentence sticks in a lot of throats, but hey, it's true.

This is a question of repetition and repair. So that all parts are interchangeable - when first used and when replaced - and work when fitted.

And who decides if it works and who decides it is right?

I bought a Wedgwood dinner service 50 years ago. I was told by the shop that I was the final judge of of quality. Well it was pretty obvious the plates 'worked' perfectly, but not so obvious that they were 'right'. The plates had been shipped from the pottery in perfect condition - according the the quality inspector.

I asked about 'minor flaws' that the inspector might have missed - and I was told that any plate would be changed without question for one that I thought perfect. With the shop saying I should not change plates due to minor flaws in decoration because they were proof the plates were hand painted....

The 'faulty' one if replaced being returned to Wedgwood. Years later I visited the factory (by narrowboat) on a conducted tour and saw they had a retail shop selling 'seconds'....which quite honestly looked perfect to me.

So this quality is all subjective. A personal opinion. In terms of a strict objective quality system something is needed to remove the subjective guesswork - but whatever is chosen you are often left with a subjective decision - someone decides the acceptable tolerance.

Obviously it makes sense to ensure the the machine turns out parts that pass the test. Hopefully to capture wear and tear problems before they cause numerous rejects - but what happens to rejects - a costly exercise - or just a nuisance?.

Years ago I was chatting to a supplier of cheap screws. I asked how they made a profit at those prices. Cheap they said, because they bought up 'off-tolerance' quality rejects from various nut and bolts makers by weight paying at little over scrap value, and by hand (the kids do it for pocket money) matching oversize bolts with oversize nuts - and vice versa - and sold them to the public as matching pairs.

In our business it is make it work and make it right - first time at that!

If the make it work scenario does not give you good parts then how can you say that you made it work? To me make it work gives you a machine that makes part that can be used.

I prefer the make it right when doing work myself.

True! We have Microsoft as a showcase example.

Another example of money following a perverse trajectory

Oh, the injustice!

An attempt to "make it work" may cause the "make it right" to be more costly.