Throughout my career in industry and as an independent consultant, I have noticed a recurring theme, even in successful companies.

That theme is one of failure of products, failure of processes, customer disappointment, and a lack of understanding of why these things seem to recur continually.   We solve the same problems over and over, yet they always seem to come back.  We launch products that are not fully tested or ready for market and are then amazed when they need to be recalled, repaired, or modified soon after launch. 

My disappointment and frustration at observing these failures led me to a quest to determine why we can’t (or don’t) just “make it right the first time”.

My quest has not ended, nor do I claim to have all the answers.  I doubt that I ever will, but I do hope that what I have discovered so far will help you understand what can and does go wrong, why, and what you can do about it.

In most companies I’ve visited or in which I’ve worked, most people -  management, customers, suppliers, design, manufacturing, quality, program managers, purchasing, line workers, clerks, and all the other assorted people who make up a company all want to “make it right” the first time and are frustrated by their inability to do it right the first and every time.   They do their best every time, but frequently, it just isn’t good enough.

Most people have a strong desire to make good “product”.  They are unhappy when their product is bad.  If you doubt this, spend some time with the workers in a manufacturing plant.  Any manufacturing plant, anywhere in the world.  Ask them their opinion of the product they are producing. 

Frequently, they will tell you that they are frustrated because some condition (whether due to poor design, mistakes on drawings, insufficient testing, inadequate tools, improper conditions, “bad” suppliers, etc.) prevents them from making the product right.  These folks are FRUSTRATED, and eventually, they become apathetic.  Once that happens, it’s all downhill!  Regaining lost momentum is a lot harder than maintaining it, just as it’s much more cost effective to keep a customer than it is to have to go find new customers.

One problem is that everyone has a different idea of what constitutes “making it right”. 

Is it right if we get it out the door on time, but it fails within the warranty period?  Is it right if it fails just after the warranty period (don’t laugh, I have personally encountered companies whose entire business plan is based on the product failing immediately after the warranty ends – they make their money on the replacement parts).   Is it right if it fails during the manufacturing process, but we fix it and ship it?  Is it right if it works forever, but costs twice the targeted cost?   What is the company’s definition of quality?  What is the average consumer’s definition of quality?  What are their expectations?  There are many different perceptions of what “making it right” means.

These different ideas frequently clash, to the inevitable detriment of customer satisfaction.

How many of us have fought to implement structured, rigorous product development plans, spent countless hours working to meet all their milestones (sometimes for years), only to have the customer tell us a few months (or weeks!) before launch to throw it all out, start over, but still meet the original deadlines and cost targets?  What do you think happens to the quality of the product when that occurs?  If we have gone through six rounds of prototypes with in-depth, long-term testing, only to redesign major portions of our product at the last minute, we end up launching an untested, unknown product.  When we violate our policies and procedures, we put ourselves and our customer at significant risk. 

Think it doesn’t happen?  It does, all the time!  It’s a major symptom of what I consider to be one of the primary reasons we don’t “make it right” the first time – our inability to completely, precisely, and concretely nail down the actual product requirements right from the beginning.

As soon as product requirements change mid-stream, risk, errors, and cost increase exponentially.

Much of my philosophy is rooted in what I refer to as “Back to Basics”.
I am a firm believer in NOT adhering to the “Program of the Month”.  Most of the elements of currently popular “movements” are simply old concepts repackaged for popular consumption. 

“Six Sigma” is a great example of this type of “Movement”.  Today, companies are rushing to require that their employees become “Six Sigma Black Belts”, frequently at great cost to the company.

The basic tenet of Six Sigma is rooted in reduction of variability, a concept that has been around since at least the 1930’s, when Walter Shewhart introduced statistical process control and counseled us on the evils of excessive, uncontrolled variability in our manufacturing processes.  Six Sigma has taken a collection of tools such as SPC, Design of Experiments, etc. and “packaged” them.

Beware, though!  Institutionalizing Six Sigma as its own goal takes away from the goal of variability reduction.  Training personnel in the tools and techniques used in Six Sigma is a good thing – requiring all managers to become Black Belts (as Ford Motor Company did recently) is the surest way I know to ensure that most people won’t take it seriously, it will flourish, then die on the vine as yet another “program of the month”.