Continuous Quality Clues: A New Approach to Quality Control

“Trust the coincidences. They are the whisper that betrays the bond between the possible and the inevitable.” (Anonymous)

[edit] Introduction

In the realm of quality control, we often hear about audits and inspections. These are well-established methods based on an human direct approach for ensuring that a product or service meets specified requirements. A more systematic method is continuous quality monitoring, aimed at monitoring performance and security of processes via automated tools and technology.

Something that sits in between, and offers a unique approach to quality, is Continuous Quality Clues.

[edit] What are Continuous Quality Clues?

In extreme synthesis, Continuous Quality Clues (CQC) are a continuous collection of inputs to be analysed for early identification of weaknesses or hidden issues. Similarly to a data collection system, it focuses on collecting as many details as possible from the daily activities; details that usually get lost regardless of the fact they may be revealing systemic problems that are giving early-stage signals. Such signals can be indication too light to trigger alarms. They are not the dogmatic non-conformity reports, audit reports, six sigma DMAIC analysis results. The clues can be the small dots that require a seasoned investigator to be noted at first sight. They may be too small, almost insignificant, if taken on their own. However, when collected and analysed, they may reveal what the problem is or, at least, that there is a problem that can justify further investigation with more traditional tools like audits or inspections. It is critical to understand that CQC do not replace existing tools: they integrate them by creating a framework of information that can guide towards a more effective resolution of a situation.

This system to collect and analyse CQCs is designed to be integrated into the regular workflow, making it a proactive process rather than a reactive one.

[edit] How are Continuous Quality Clues Different?

They are intended to be part of daily work activities, unlike audits which are typically scheduled periodically and performed following a more formal process. CQC differ from inspections in that they do not require reporting or an investigative approach during the inspection. Inspections often involve a detailed examination of processes, products, or systems to assess compliance with regulations. In contrast, CQC are casual and more flexible, focusing on the monitoring of potential issues.

They also support the proper identification of a hidden problem. The analysis has the benefit to remove uncertainty and offer a clearer picture. Uncertainty doesn’t come only from the lack of data but also from doubts, lack of information, insufficient training and all the other causes well-known to auditors and inspectors.

[edit] The Process of Continuous Quality Clues

The process begins with taking notes of any potential issues encountered during the day. This could even include issues identified during conversations with stakeholders. These notes are then entered into an overall database, documenting the potential issue, analysing its relevance and identifying where follow-up is required.

When an analysis confirms the initial concerns, feedback can be shared with the interested parties. Different than with audits and inspections, the feedback can be more subjective at times, if no data has been found to support the concern. In other cases, the outcome can be presented as for any other root cause analysis: with evidence, graphs, pareto analysis and so forth.

The CQC are inputs to be evaluated: from that point onwards, they can be treated as nonconformities/observations/potential improvement notices or any other system already in place.

[edit] Some examples

To clarify the use of the methodology, let’s consider some typical work-related scenarios.

• Request for clarification from a coworker

If a member of the team is enquiring about a topic, it may be an indication that something more is needed than a simple reply. Was the topic something the coworker was supposed to know already? If so, why the request? If not, are we the most appropriate reference source to put the question to? If not, why has the question been asked of us?

• A client makes a comment on the service received

Usually, client feedback would be captured trough a feedback form or a client satisfaction survey. But, if the comment happens randomly or the client doesn’t want to pass through a formal process, why lose that input? It may give an indication that the client has spotted a weakness or that they are not aware of all the benefits of the service/product received. Restraining the action to a simple reply, may not suffice: how many other clients with similar views are not sharing their feedback?

• A weakness in a process is spotted by us

Even though it may initially look like a small glitch, why lose the record of it? By including it in an overall table, a check is possible on “if and how many similar cases exist” and a proper analysis can be done.

[edit] Example of the overall table

[edit] The Role of the Database

The database serves as a central repository for all potential issues identified through CQC. It is not merely a record-keeping tool, but a source of improvement. By reviewing the entire list of potential issues, we can identify areas where training may be needed, processes that need to be changed, risks that are growing.

The database neither needs to be complicated nor does bespoke software need to be requested. A simple excel spreadsheet would be suitable. The level of detail and the process of analysis can be tailored based on the available resources, their skills and time availability. In the end, it can be the same as doing a root cause analysis: either the team can perform it with internal resources, or they can seek external support.

[edit] The Impact of Continuous Quality Clues

The implementation of CQC supports a culture of continuous improvement. It encourages everyone to take ownership of quality control, rather than leaving it to a specific team or department. Furthermore, it feeds on elements usually ignored during an inspection. This system fosters a proactive approach to identifying and addressing potential issues, ultimately leading to higher quality products and services.

[edit] The dos and don’ts

CQC are supposed to be easy to manage:

• no complicated tables,
• no mandated forms,
• no interviews,
• no notifications,
• no agendas.

They are a kind of diary, in the first instance. The analysis and investigation can be done later.

The main requirement is to be able to record an input when needed. Recording the input should remain a priority. However, if it cannot be captured on the spot, it can be done at the end of the day.

Ideally, the system works even better if people are unaware of what we are going to record. We can capture information from body language, words used in the conversation and other elements that the person may be oblivious of, and so, proposing a different narrative when receiving our feedback. Phases like “closure meetings” or “review of the non-conformity report from the auditee” are missing, it is not needed to share with the other person our comprehension of the problem or the wording we want to use. Sharing our understanding with the other person can be good on one side, but unwise on another: what if the person disagrees on us taking a note of the input just received? What if the other feels threatened or believes to be facing consequences with their management line?. Remember that CQC are an informal system that does not include formal meetings or a report on which take the agreement of all parties. In the end, it is not about the other person. We are looking for a hidden problem: anything else is only a support to find the problem, regardless of how we arrive at that. Our starting point might even have been faulty but if we arrive at the core problem, the target is reached. As such, it may appear a very subjective approach. In a way, it is exactly that. Its objectivity comes from the subsequent analysis, when a cold eye review is done to really understand if the point is substantiated by evidence, or it is a rumour. Eventually, even a rumour may trigger an improvement action: why does the rumour exist? Is there anxiety around an ongoing issue? Is it an isolated case – which still needs to be addressed – or the tip of the iceberg?

[edit] Conclusions

The good part of this informal process and one of the most important differences against audits and inspections, is that it does not involve approval from others.

A comment of the colleague would be altered or denied, if the colleague fears to face consequences; a client’s comment may not justify a formal investigation on the matter and it would be lost; a minor or apparent weakness would not stop production from continuing their work, until a serious and substantiated report is offered to them. The Continuous Quality Clues approach serves to satisfy that need.

Differently from an automated process, CQC requires individual commitment. However, CQC does not take time or involve a complicated process. The critical part is recording the topic; then, at an early opportunity, copy it into the overall database and perform the analysis. From there, the continuous improvement takes off.

“I believe that the only sure things in this world are coincidences.” (Leonardo Sciascia)

Original article written by Giorgio Mannelli & reviewed by Kevin Rogers on behalf of the Construction Special Interest Group (ConSIG) Thought Leadership Group (TLG former CWG). Article peer reviewed by the TLG and accepted for publication by the ConSIG Steering Committee 31/05/2024.

--ConSIG CWG

[edit] Related articles on Designing Buildings

• Building regulations inspection.
• Building sector failing on supervision.
• Construction quality.
• Design quality.
• Plan, Do, Check, Act (PDCA).
• Project quality plan.
• Quality control.
• Quality in construction projects.
• Quality management systems (QMS) - beyond the documentation.
• Quality manuals and quality plans.
• Samples and mock-ups.
• Site inspection.
• Site inspector.
• Standards.
• Testing construction materials.
• Tolerances.
• Top seven trends that will dominate the future of the construction industry.
• Total quality management in construction.
• Track record.
• Wallcovering.
• Workmanship.