Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1193979
DECEMBER 2019 I PCB007 MAGAZINE 39 In step 6, we have a written process or stan- dardization candidate. Again, this is another area where failure can occur. If the process or standard is released at this point, you may find that the result may not even be close to what you outlined in step 1. Unfortunately, for many, this is the case and can lead to unpredictable results, loss of time or materials, and ultimate- ly, failure. The process needs to be tested. This should not be done by any person writing the micro and macro levels of the process or stan- dard. This should be an independent third party. This provides an unbiased view of the task and will quickly identify inconsistencies. The result of this step is really a "go or no go" on whether the process or standardization is functional. With step 7, we want to know the continuity of the process or standardization with respect to ergonomics, movements, tool accessibil- ity, repetition, lighting, etc. If the steps of the task are correct from the testing done in step 6, are they being done efficiently? Just having the steps for repeatability doesn't mean it is efficient. Here is where efficiency is taken into consideration and applied. In step 8, we review the actions of steps 6 and 7. Adjustments are made to correct incon- sistent results and to improve efficiency. I can- not state enough how important steps 6 and 7 are when building a process or standardizing. Omitting those steps and going right to a ma- ture process is almost a guaranteed failure. After the corrections and optimizations are done in step 8, we move to step 9: test it again. This time, use another third party candidate to perform the tasks. Use a fresh pair of eyes and abilities to perform the tasks. We may identify yet another anomaly that was not detected pre- viously. This also adds to the continuity of the process or standard. We want it capable of be- ing performed by anyone qualified to perform the task or set of tasks outlined with the same predicted results. Step 10 is the home stretch. We have a final working process or standard. It's ready for re- lease, right? Not so fast. Here is another pitfall that many fall into; release the document, post it to the databases for online reference, and it's done. Here, we must remember that we need to educate those who are in this department, area, or team that will be responsible for the results. That means training and review of the process or standard. We can write standards all day long, but if our teams are not educat- ed or aware of the standard, how can we hold them to it? Conclusion Hopefully, I've given you some solid building blocks for creating your processes or standards within your circle of the world. Of course, there are other guidelines and building techniques out there, but I've found a very high degree of success with the tools I've outlined above. In my time doing process audits and standard re- views, there is an overall design which can be characterized by "staying in your lane." We've all seen it; we may all be driving in the same direction to the same destination, but there is always that "one guy" who is drifting over the lines, looking at his cellphone, eating a burger, or who knows what. Sure, he is probably going to get there, but with reduced efficiency, more steps and unnecessary corrections (and maybe a ticket too!). Thanks for reading this year. I appreciate your readership! I hope you all have a great holiday season as we look forward to a pros- perous 2020. PCB007 Todd Kolmodin is VP of quality for Gardien Services USA and an expert in electrical test and reliability issues. To read past columns or contact Kolmodin, click here. We can write standards all day long, but if our teams are not educated or aware of the standard, how can we hold them to a standard?