🚀 go-pugleaf

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 23:43:07 -0500
From: Michael Kirk <makirk@wcnet.org>
To: "'quality@pucc.princeton.edu'" <quality@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU>
Cc: "'rmjdme@CONNIX.COM'" <rmjdme@CONNIX.COM>
Subject: FW: Non-Critical  vs. Critical Quality Characteristics (CQC)

Yes, a control plan and FMEA allow you to distinguish between Critical and
Non. These both when utilized properly are tools for process monitoring as
well. There are computer programs available to in put data to or connect
locally to the process, that will also provide monitoring of the process.
One of the easiest way is to use SPC at the machine or process to record,
monitor and document processes and improvement

----------
From:   Richard Jennings[SMTP:rmjdme@connix.com]
Sent:   Saturday, December 19, 1998 1:28 PM
To:     quality@pucc.princeton.edu
Subject:        Non-Critical  vs. Critical Quality Characteristics (CQC)

Assuming that Quality Is Not Dead and that we are all working for
Continuous Quality Improvement, we still, all, have only limited
resources to apply to Quality Improvement.

Is there a formal, published methodology which helps to segregate
Critical Quality Characterisitics (CQC) from non-critical so that
companies and practicioners can concentrate their limited resources in
the most productive areas?

And are there planning tools which can help us track progress in these
critical areas?

I will appreciate any references that you can offer to any published
articles, books and papers on these topics.    I will also apreciate any
internal studies that you may be willing to share.

Thanks,
Richard Jennings
rmjdme@connix.com