FredD Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 Was going to post this in the Lounge but don't have enough posts yet to allow me to !! Reading this thread has been very interesting, and if the many posters who have mentioned 'Quality Control' at Gibson, are correct in their description of the quality function at Gibson as being 'Quality Control' / 'Inspection' procedures, then that could explain a lot. The far more effective (and modern) type of 'quality program' known as Quality Assurance Systems, now in use around the world, may be what is needed at Gibson to improve their obvious product quality issues. I have first hand experience of these, having had quality issues with both my SG and LP Jnr. Many of the tools and techniques of the modern QA System originated in Japanese manufacturing companies some years ago. Think early MIJ guitars and then the recent large quality improvements in guitar products from the Pacific rim and China ! As a retired manufacturing engineer, with responsibilities in the Quality Assurance systems of a number of manufacturing companies in the UK, I have learned that 'ownership' of the Quality Assurance Systems and initiatives employed, must be shared equally throughout all the company employees, from the workshop floor, through the management team, to the CEO. Most importantly, the CEO must be totally 'sold' on, and 'supportive' of, the Quality Management Systems that have been implemented in the company to assure the finished quality level of the product. From my experiences, if the CEO is any less than 100% committed to the management of quality, through the QA System, then failures in the quality system will occur, and quality of the product will suffer. As a previous poster said : "... you can't just 'inspect out' faults !" It's too late at the 'inspection stage', when the mistakes have been made earlier in the production process, and the materials/labour costs have been spent ! I would hope that Gibson will have some sort of quality assurance menagement system in place, and are not just trying to rely on 'Quality Control/Inspection'; but wonder if the commitment from all employees, INCLUDING the CEO (Henry), is at the level it should be ! :( Anyway, having reworked my SG neck and stripped and rebuilt my LP Jnr, they are now my favorit and most played guitars \:D/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanH Posted January 8, 2012 Share Posted January 8, 2012 Interesting point. I'd say that full blown QA systems are very much required where lives are at stake e.g. aeronautical or pharmaceutical industries but that costs money. Guitar manufacture is more of a craft. Would QA be needed to the same extent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredD Posted January 9, 2012 Author Share Posted January 9, 2012 I think that unless one puts a properly implemented Quality Assurance System in place, that will enable you to monitor and continuously improve the quality of the companies product, no matter if the company is in the service sector or manufacturing industries, then you will probably fail to control the quality of your end products or services. And it is a well known fact that a properly implemented quality assurance system will provide far greater financial savings and customer satisfaction than the old blinkered 'Oh that's OK, Quality Control deal with it....' mentality ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-poland Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 I too have some QA perspective, particularly in manuf./machinist for 39 yrs., the last 20 yrs.with cnc machining. In the last, say 10 yrs.with all the supposedly new QA thinking which some think that it was a new idea,is not! While in principle is a good idea even might be thought of idealistic. as so many times seen, idealistic things don't mean they work ideally! the reason I say this there are many pressures / temptations that will cause PEOPLE to do or not do things, be it at work or in daily life. now consider how that may play out in say a plant mgr's, foreman's, engineer's, machinist's life! some may want to do the best others may be trying to impress,yet others maybe dealing with personality conflicts. I think we see the effects of these things/influences wherever we live or work. which makes for less than desirable consequences that then will need to be dealt with! so I would think that as long as imperfect people are doing/ making things, there will be things that are not quite right. the bigger the group /organization the more chance of it happening! so if ya find that perfect pc./guitar relish it because it was made by the imperfect! +:-@ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredD Posted January 9, 2012 Author Share Posted January 9, 2012 Good observation sir ! If you were a machinist working within a QA System, then I suspect you came across one of the QA Tools that help you monitor your output with reference to dimensional tolerancing. Statistical Process Control, or SPC as it is known in quality speak ! Hopefully you were able to enter your own measurements onto a 'chart', and react to 'mean deviations' as you saw fit ? In other words : you were responsible for, and owned, the quality of your output. So from there on, it is down to HONESTY. If you cheat the system, then you will undermine it, and it will fail I am going to play some blues on my LP Jnr now, 'cause that's what I love Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-poland Posted January 9, 2012 Share Posted January 9, 2012 Most certainly, as you have said, is correct! but as a machinist these were things already being done . all that was lacking is the new speak/jargon! I'am personally one that appreciates,inspired by craftsmanship. so these QA things are really old school things for the most part, centuries old when looking at the craftsmanship that's been seen throughout history in the things made by humans! [thumbup] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.