Category Archives: Reliability@Risk™ – Fred Schenkelberg

#370 – VALUE OF MAKING BETTER DECISIONS – FRED SCHENKELBERG

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

We make decisions every day. Our project teams and organizations have many individuals making decisions every day. Most of these decisions have little to do with product reliability, yet a surprising number of design, marketing, production, and customer care decisions that have a direct impact on product reliability performance.

As a reliability professional, do you work to make better decisions? Do you work to enable the individuals designing, producing, marketing, etc your organization’s products to make better decisions concerning reliability? Continue reading →

#369 – CHANGING SUPPORT FOR RELIABILITY ENGINEERING – FRED SCHENKELBERG

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

In most organizations being a reliability engineer is a lonely position. I like to think we’re so effective that one or just a small team is all any an organization needs.

As with any engineering position, we have specialized training and skills. We view the world and problems just a little differently than others. Then we use statistics, which tends to future isolate us from our peers. Continue reading →

#368 – QUALITY & RELIABILITY: SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES – FRED SCHENKELBERG

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

I like to say Reliability is all of quality over time. Quality professional tend to say reliability is an element of quality. David A. Garvin of the Harvard Business School suggests there are eight dimensions to quality, including reliability.

Either way one relates quality and reliability we need to remember that quality or reliability is not a department, team, the engineering down the hall. Quality and reliability is part of the culture of the organization. It is how we make decisions the impact how the product or service performs for customers. Continue reading →

#364 – WHAT IS THE RELIABILITY OF THE RELIABILITY FUNCTION? – FRED SCHENKELBERG

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

Jezdimir Knezevic of the MIRCE Akademy published a paper with the title above and I have a few comments.

In the article, Jezdimir suggests that the statistical approach to describing the world about us is fundamental flaws and not inherently useful for our use. He compares a mathematical/statistical approach to a scientific approach and finds the stats wanting.

Let’s take a critical look at the topic of this paper and conclusions. Continue reading →

#362 – FUTURE OF QUALITY – DIANNA DEENEY

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

The current state of the quality profession is affected by shifting business infrastructures and changing definitions of brand quality.

Businesses need to react and change against external pressures like increased frequency of consumer communications, the availability of big data, expanding regulations and standards, and the expectations to innovate quickly. The quality profession is at risk of losing its effectiveness in the overall business operations if it does not proactively change with the business. Continue reading →