Bbcompton@aol.com wrote:
> Despite all of these problems, things work remarkably well. I have a
> problem with 4.5 because it forces an organization to treat learning --
> and the subsequent knowledge replication -- as a mechanical process. It
> totally fails to account for the complex and unpredictable way in which
> people learn and share knowledge. As we struggle to find a solution to the
> problem of how to comply with section 4.5, I get progressively nervous. If
> we make learning too tedious and beurocratic I'm confident that the amount
> of information that will actually make it to the database will
> dramatically decrease.
This is a very nice way to state one of the greatest limitations of
quality standards: it requires you to ensure that the database is
consistent, but if the bureaucracy prevents some information from going
into the database, that is ok! Another example: you must handle customer
complaints effectively (4.14), but complaints not registered by the system
are not considered. Quality is customer satisfaction, but ISO does not
include any means to check with customers what they feel about the
product.
Durval
-- Durval Muniz de Castro <durval@ia.cti.br> Fundacao Centro Tecnologico para Informatica <http://www.ia.cti.br/> Campinas - Brasil - Fone: 55-19-2401011 - Fax: 55-19-2402029Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>