BF2S Forums First World Problems

Is it a scam?
Is it really a stupid system which forces you to login to read what they could have simply sent you?

You only have one quality system?

The erp is from 1989 and we're going to it in 1.5 months.
The lead dev is sooo defensive of it too. Yea you got it to work after 20 years. It's still shit.
But saying it's used by Ikea is somehow a good thing. Yea, we spent millions and 25 years making a warehouse management system into a manufacturing erp system.

Last edited by RTHKI (2023-06-20 07:07:44)

I'm not sure if we have two QMS or just one which is a patchwork with overlaps and gaping holes.

Pretty amazing how bad it is really.

For a batch of parts made last week would it be possible to determine:

Who made them
What parts they used
What materials they used
What tools they used
What settings they used
What method they used

The answer is no

Further out than a week it gets harder

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2023-06-21 02:31:56)

A while back I discovered that a machine was not earthed at all, thanks to plugging the wrong kind of plug into the wrong kind of powerboard.
It also had live terminals which were pretty much exposed, a gentle flick of the little bit of plastic covering them and they were exposed.

But it got through all the risk assessments and safety audits so thats OK.

Audit day, not as bad as "the CEO is coming!" day - that triggered the production supervisor to run around "tidying up".
Typically we would lose ~$10,000 worth of custom made tooling each time.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Yeah your manufacturing process should only be beholden to one QMS, and that QMS should be reflecting whatever certification you have (ISO or AS91XX).

I would love to hear an argument for a company site needing multiple quality systems.

We have an ERP, a PLM, a QMS, an engineering document repository, and the most exhaustive system of them all, excel!

Hahahaha my comments about this aged like milk. We were in the process of moving to a new quality system. It has taken so much longer than it should have. Turns out the new one might not work for all the stuff they want. Really amazing. Not surprised at all.

Last edited by RTHKI (2023-06-21 10:39:52)

The best is when a business decision is made to only migrate *some* data to a new system. It's half-asses all the way down!

pirana6 wrote:

Congrats, you're now on two different systems indefinitely. Half-in and half-out of each one but you'll never arrive at the finish line for either.

Wrong wrong wrong

The company will hire someone, typically working from home and only contactable via their hotmail account, to write a third program to bind the two together.
This will stagger on for a little while until windows updates render it useless, the dev will have disappeared and the original champion of the whole stupid business left the company.

Oh yea. The head of IT had no idea about the project which made it even more hilarious.

You have a security team?

Dilbert_X wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

The best is when a business decision is made to only migrate *some* data to a new system. It's half-asses all the way down!

"We'll just put new projects on the new system and leave the old ones where they are"
Of course no parts or materials are ever shared between projects.

Because why spend an extra $10k up front when you can spend $100k in labor hours over the next 3 years going back and forth?

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

The best is when a business decision is made to only migrate *some* data to a new system. It's half-asses all the way down!

"We'll just put new projects on the new system and leave the old ones where they are"
Of course no parts or materials are ever shared between projects.

Because why spend an extra $10k up front when you can spend $100k in labor hours over the next 3 years going back and forth?

I'm not sure you understand how efficiency works.

AussieReaper wrote:

RTHKI wrote:

You have a security team?

Do you not?

welcome back