Category Archives: Reliability@Risk™ – Fred Schenkelberg

#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 →

#360 – HOW MUCH RELIABILITY DATA IS ENOUGH! – FRED SCHENKELBERG

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

Some may argue that just enough reliability data is just the right amount. Too much may lead to confusion, too little doesn’t inform well. The reliability work we do helps others make decisions, and recent work in how humans make decisions may help us prepare and present our results effectively.

If preparing reliability data-based recommendations, consider using less information. Ed O’Brien and Nadav Klein have found decision-makers tend to use much less data or information to make a decision than they think they will need. Continue reading →

#359 – THREE WAYS TO IMPROVE YOUR RELIABILITY THINKING – FRED SCHENKELBERG

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

I often joke that being a reliability engineer makes it difficult to get on an airplane. Yet air travel is by far the safest method of transportation. Maybe I just think about failure too much.

When a project manager views the day’s tasks, she sees timelines, connections, dependencies. When a marketing manager views a product idea, she sees benefits, sales channels, and profits. When a reliability engineer views a prototype, she sees the many ways it can fail

Continue reading →