Social Bookmarking
Digg, delicious, NewsVine, Furl, Google, Spurl, BlinkList, Simpy, StumbleUpon, BlogMarks, Facebook
You must log in to comment. Please log in or register. Comments FAQ

Excellent article Govind. You have given an age-old tool a twist. I see a lot of merit in separating causal analysis and ranking. This is in some way similar to a Baldrige process of discussing comments first and then the score. Tends to remove bias.
--Anshuman Tiwari, 03-18-2009

Very good analysis of breaking down a technical concept into a more understandable teaching tool. The only suggestion that I have is that when talking/discussing human interaction to change the term/word "soft skills" to "support skills". There is nothing "soft" about how we humans interact with each other and technology, and it takes a lot of work to do that well. Support skills is a lot more descriptive of what is needed.
--Roderick Munro, 03-17-2009

A good paper. Unfortunately, very very few companies are willing to invest even the time it takes to think through an FMEA like this one. I work with clients from five persons to 2000 persons. In fifteen years, less than five have been willing to think though a real FMEA. They invariably opt for intuitive assumptions first.
--Hugh Gillogly, 03-09-2009

This was a good article. I especially liked the 'pitfalls'. I think I have experienced every one of those at some point or another.
--Mike Valencia, 03-06-2009

An excellent paper that offers achievable and implementable innovative solutions to improving the efficiency of conducting a FMEA.
--kenny Clarke, 03-04-2009












It's an excellent article. The idea of forming two groups is really innovative, time saving and will help completion of FMEA on time.
Only one thing I would like to understand is which people from which functions should be involved on the FMEA team, and once you try to review other teams ratings, will the group have the expertise to do it.
--Nilesh Pande, 11-09-2009