Ah, the age-old question of quality improvement - hire more inspectors, or just get the machines to work right in the first place? I say we go with option E: hire the inspectors to monitor the machines, and then give them all kazoos to play whenever they find a defect. That'll really boost morale!
I'm not even going to dignify 'hire more inspectors' with a response. That's like trying to catch water with a net made of holes. Reduce that variability, and the quality will follow.
Reducing process variability is the clear winner here. It's like fine-tuning a Formula 1 car - the more consistent you can make the engine, the better it's going to perform.
A quality first slogan? Seriously? That's like putting lipstick on a pig. If XYZ wants real results, they need to tighten those tolerances and get their processes under control.
Hiring more inspectors? That's like trying to extinguish a forest fire with a garden hose. Reducing process variability is the way to go - get to the root of the problem, not just slap a band-aid on it.
Jesse
1 months agoIzetta
12 days agoMari
1 months agoSon
1 months agoValentine
5 days agoLavera
10 days agoGlory
21 days agoTheola
1 months agoDorothy
6 days agoTherese
10 days agoYuki
30 days agoTammara
2 months agoMilly
13 hours agoJesus
2 months agoCharlie
2 months agoCamellia
2 months ago