Comments on: Why Standardize?

By: bhyde

bhyde — Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:32:22 +0000

yeah mike, drinking deeply from the cup of six-sigma are we? That stuff is only useful if the you can achieve a sufficient scale in your operations, a scale where the time constants are small enough, the sample rates large enough, and the process context stable enough for a valid feed back loop to set in. That only happens in the largest firms; usually in the presence of large capital investments. Outside that context the process of standardization is driven by other drivers. Real markets are very unlikely to pick one on one or two measures and focus down on those. Inside those firms standardization of that kind can be useful as a change management tool; but it is so often coop’t by other agendas.

By: mike van andre

mike van andre — Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:01:06 +0000

task accomplishment standards are required if measurement is to be valid. from a statistical and process improvement perspective, measurement of a task is a pre-cursor to improvement of the task. in order for the measure to be valid, all parties accomplishing the task must do exactly the same steps in the same manner, or else the measure will not be valid. the measures must be valid in order to plot them on a control chart, to determine if the process is under statistical control or not.

By: Ascription is an Anathema to any Enthusiasm » Viral Communications

Ascription is an Anathema to any Enthusiasm » Viral Communications — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

[...] e each new cow adds grass.” I need to go back and add “future proof” to the reasons why people standardize; it’s a varation on what I call there “ [...]