Outside the Standards LO27976

From: Fred Nickols (nickols@att.net)
Date: 03/13/02


Responding to John Zavacki in LO27969 --

(Original thread was Intro -- Elixabete Escalona)

John, responding to "one of At's avuncular missives," draws an important
distinction between production processes and other areas of organizational
endeavor.

> My dear Don Quixote, I understand the your sadness at seeing no
> references to creativity or authentic learning in the standards. I
> make fuel and brake lines for passenger cars, trucks, and buses.
> Daily we turn out hundreds of thousands of these items in 14 locations
> in five countries around the world and all are so nearly alike in
> their appearance and functionality as to bore me. And yet, because
> each is made in accordance with the standard, you can safely
> accelorate and stop your vehicle.
>
> I abhor the language of the standards and their minimalist approach to
> systems thinking, but they serve their purpose, which is to ensure the
> safety of the consumer, whether financial or in health. And yet, in
> our factories, there are Aha!s, Eureka!s, new products, new processes,
> new ideas, and communities of practice emerging continuously. The
> standards drive the infrastructure, the timing and volume of material
> tests, the certification of laboratories, the traceablity of measuring
> equipment and calibration pieces.
>
> Leadership and love breed creativity. I must have processes which
> meet 6 sigma capability in order to ensure on time delivery of parts
> that work to my customer and this means a repeatble, not creative
> process. But to make the next generation faster, easier to use, more
> precise, I must go outside of the standards and inside of the
> community of practice and brain storm laughingly and lovingly.

That drove me to one of my many versions of Bartlett's for what I knew to
be a biblical verse (Ecclesiastes 3:1-8):

         To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose
under the sun.

         A time to be born and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time
to pluck up that which is planted.

         A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a
time to build up.

         A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time
to dance.

         A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together;
a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing.

         A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to
cast away.

         A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a
time to speak.

         A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of
peace.

The ISO standards, as John points out, have their time and place (mainly
in ensuring standardized products as the primary outputs of production
processes it would seem). But, as At points out, they do not seem to
address the act of creation.

One of my favorite tests of anything is to turn it on itself and see where
"it" (whatever it might be) comes up wanting. It seems to me that the ISO
standards could conceivably be applied to standards in general (i.e., as
standards for standards) but they cannot be used to derive or account for
their own existence. (Oh well, I can't account for mine, either.)

So, the ISO standards, as John points out, are situationally relevant and,
in relevant situations, very useful and valuable. And, as At points out,
they don't cover the entire waterfront and much of what they don't cover
is also extremely useful, valuable and important.

Hmm. Was this e-mail necessary?

Regards,

Fred Nickols
740.397.2363
nickols@att.net
"Assistance at A Distance"
http://home.att.net/~nickols/articles.htm

-- 

Fred Nickols <nickols@att.net>

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>


"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.