Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T04:03:16.152Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Teamwork and Statistical Quality Control at Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2013

Manoj K. Choudhary
Get access

Extract

The terms “teamwork” and “statistical quality control” (SQC) have become an established part of U.S. manufacturing vocabulary, though not necessarily of manufacturing practice. Much has been written on these subjects, as even a cursory glance at the literature reveals (e.g., see References 1–11). This article will describe the organization and functioning of an SQC team at Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation. My observations are not necessarily novel, but I hope they provide some useful insights into team building, teamwork, and SQC in a U.S. manufacturing environment.

SQC is not a new concept at all, but it was largely ignored in the United States. The contribution of SQC (more accurately, Deming's and Juran's SQC precepts) to Japanese manufacturing quality has by now become a matter of folklore. This does not mean, however, that the SQC “philosophy” is correctly understood by U.S. companies. SQC is often viewed too narrowly as a production tool, or S and C in SQC are given undue attention. SQC is much more than a collection of statistical techniques. Indeed, the major impact of SQC results not from its engineering or technical attributes but from the changes it brings about in attitudes and in a factory's social organization. Drucker has identified SQC as one of the four concepts in the emerging theory of manufacturing.

Type
Materials Manufacturing
Information
MRS Bulletin , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , April 1992 , pp. 50 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

An earlier version of this article was published in the Journal for Quality and Participation, December 1991, Association for Quality and Participation. Printed with permission.

References

1.Peters, T., Thriving on Chaos (Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1988) p. 211-217, 297–303.Google Scholar
2.Wolf, M.E, “Before You Try Team Building,” Res. Technol. Management 31 (1) (1988) p. 6–8.Google Scholar
3.Maccoby, M., “Different Teams for Different Folks,” Res. Technol. Management 32 (3) (1989) p. 42–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Mower, J.C. and Wilemon, D., “Rewarding Technical Teamwork,” Res. Technol. Management 32 (5) (1989) p. 24–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Huszco, G.E., “Training for Team Building,” Training & Dev. J. 44 (2) (1990) p. 37–43.Google Scholar
6.Versteeg, A., “Self-Directed Work Teams Yield Long Term Benefits,” J. Business Strategy 11 (6) (1990) p. 9–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Deming, W.E., Quality, Productivity, and Competitive Position (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, 1982).Google Scholar
8.Tribus, M., “Applying Quality Management Principles,” Res. Technol. Management 30 (6) (1987) p. 11–21.Google Scholar
9.Drucker, P.F., “The Emerging Theory of Manufacturing,” Harvard Business Review 90 (3) (1990) p. 94–102.Google Scholar
10.Roth, W., “Try Some Quality Improvement Process Glue,” J. for Quality and Participation (Dec. 1989) p. 20–27.Google Scholar
11.Juran's Quality Control Handbook, 4th edition, editor in chief, Juran, J.M. and associate editor, Gryna, F.M. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1988).Google Scholar