November 2011

Financial Condition Report

Minnesota Section of ASQ is the largest section within the ASQ society with approximately 2300 members. Over the last year, MNASQ has provided a wide variety of offerings and services including monthly Program meetings covering topics from the Future of Quality study conducted by ASQ; certification prep classes for a number of ASQ Certification exams; workshops on a multitude of contemporary topics offered through the Biomedical Consortium; and a multi-track multiple day Minnesota Quality Conference. The Section has also provided specific networking opportunities for members. Through the hard work and planning done by our committee volunteers and leaders, MNASQ provided these valuable programs and services while maintaining fiscal responsibility.

At the end of our 2010-2011 program year in June our financial position was sound. We are fortunate to have very adequate reserves to fulfill our program needs and provide needed services to our members over the next year and beyond. The Executive Board completes a Budget for each program year and submits the budget to ASQ headquarters in Milwaukee. Annual financial audits on the previous program year are completed in July/August time-frame. We successfully completed this year's audit and submitted at the end of July where it was accepted by ASQ. A more detailed financial report is available upon request.

We look forward to continuing our tradition of maximizing our financial resources to bring you high quality programs and services.

Volunteer of the Month

Julie Baker

Julie is a valued member of the Executive Board of MNASQ currently serving as a Director. She served as the Section Treasurer for the last two years. Prior to that position, she served as the Treasurer for the Minnesota Quality Conference. She came to us highly recommended for her previous experience in handling financial books.

During Julie's first year with the Conference, she completely reorganized the financial records to allow the books to balance. During the financial audit after her first year of service, she successfully corrected the previous two years financial records so they could be audited before the current year's books were audited. Julie took on the job with a lot of enthusiasm and a can do attitude that instills confidence in her and her work.

For the past two years, as Section Treasurer, Julie took the lead in reorganizing the financial records and successfully balanced the books, a feat that had not been accomplished for the Section records for several years. She has organized the records using Quicken which allows quick analysis. In addition, she has instituted a practice now well accepted by the Executive Board members that requires quick submission of bills and then, quick follow-up to get checks issued. Her insistence that adequate evidence be submitted with Check Requests assures that the annual financial audits required by ASQ occur without a hitch.

On top of her financial skills, Julie brings a great attitude and a pleasant approach along with her energy to help MNASQ operate efficiently. She remains a valued member of the Executive Board as she starts her new assignment as one of the Directors for the Section for the 2011-2012 year.

MNASQ Long Range Planning (LRP) Team Meeting
by Meena Chettiar, Year 1 Director, 2011-2012

Back Row, left to right: Jonathan Port (Member at Large), Ash Sahni, (Past Chair), Doug Stohr (Conference Chair), Greg Olson (Vice Chair, Member Development), Bob Mitchell (Chair-Elect), Julie Baker (Director)

Front Row, left to right: June Rowley (Advancement Committee Chair), Annette Borrelli (Senior Director), Wayne Ellison (Chair), Meena Chettiar (Director), Karen Maskell (Vice Chair, Marketing), Jan Schutz (Programs Chair)

MFESTS Engineer / Professional of the Year Award

It is time again to recognize outstanding individuals who contributed significantly to the quality field and the ASQ community in the past year.

Minnesota Federation of Engineering, Science & Technology Societies (MFESTS) is an umbrella association of professional societies in the Minnesota area. It has 17 major member societies, including ASCE, ASME, ASQ, IEEE, MPSE, and SME. It broadly represents the science and engineering community in the Minnesota region. Each year, MFESTS recognizes outstanding contributors in the science and technology community in four categories:

• Young Engineer of the Year
• Young Science Technology Professional of the Year
• Distinguished Engineer of the Year
• Distinguished Science and Technology Professional

Details regarding these awards can be found through the MFESTS website. The Distinguished Engineer / Science and Technology Professional Award is designed to recognize outstanding lifetime achievements in the practice of engineering and science, contributions to the engineering profession, and actions enhancing the image of engineering in our society. To qualify, nominees must have a minimum of 25 years of professional service/contributions since graduating with a Bachelors Degree.

The Minnesota Young Engineer / Young Science and Technology Professional of the Year Award is designed to recognize outstanding achievements by an engineer or other science and technology professional less than 35 years of age. Nominees are judged based on educational and collegiate achievements; professional society activities; technical society activities; civil and humanitarian activities; continuing competence; engineering achievements; and professional experience.

Many MNASQ members have been nominated and recognized through these awards in the past. Last year, Bob Mitchell and Gary Floss were both honored in Distinguished Professional category.

MNASQ recipients in the past include Jim McLinn (Distinguished Engineer recipient, 2000), Karlene Silvera (Young Engineer recipient, 2002), Dr. Darrel Untereker (Distinguished Scientist recipient, 2006), Manie Vaidyanathan (Young Engineer nominee, 2007), Wayne Ellison (Distinguished Professional recipient, 2008) and Connie McLinn (Distinguished Professional recipient, 2009). However, there are many more wonderful members who have made significant contributions to the community yet to be recognized.

Historically, MNASQ has been more active in the Distinguished category than in the Young category. MNASQ is calling for nomination to these awards, especially for young members who have made significant contribution in the past year. Send suggestions to news@mnasq.org. All members are eligible to nominate and/or be nominated for these awards.

MNASQ is a non-profit organization who relies on member volunteers to remain successful. The more people that get involved, the stronger our community will be. MNASQ has a wide variety of volunteer opportunities available. Volunteers have learned that volunteering contributes greatly to their personal and professional growth. With more member volunteers we will make the community stronger. Let's mobilize to discover and recognize the outstanding contributors among our community.

Did You Know ...

By Susan Donaldson, Project Manager, Thomson Reuters

Did you know that the certification tests are created and updated by volunteers? This is one of many volunteer opportunities with ASQ headquarters.

Certification tests are reviewed and updated on a regular basis. Each certification follows a test development process. The test development process includes several workshops, made up of volunteers. These workshops include:

The workshops are two day workshops, usually a Friday and a Saturday at ASQ Headquarters in Milwaukee. For each workshop, ASQ selects 12 volunteers from across the country and across industry to participate in the workshop. These are people with the given certification and ASQ membership. They try not to use 2 people from the same industry or region in a given workshop. This assures that the test is not biased towards one industry or region. Half of the attendees have attended a workshop previously, half are new to the workshop experience. This assures that the team can move efficiently because half already understand the rules and how to play. The workshops are facilitated by an ASQ Headquarters employee.

Each workshop's agenda is time-boxed. The facilitator will stick to the time specifications for each step of the process. The goal of the workshop will be met. If you participate in a workshop, you are asked to not leave early. You must stay for both full days, until the workshop officially ends.

I had the opportunity to participate in the Exam Review Workshop for the Certified Software Quality Engineer Exam recently. I'd like to share that experience with you.

The purpose of the Exam Review Workshop is to review the exam questions, and rewrite anything that needs to be improved. Questions need to be clear, have only 1 correct answer, and have reasonable distracters for the other choices. The answer must also be cited in one of the specified references. The full exam must be reviewed an updated in the 2 days allotted.

Prior to attending the Exam Review Workshop, all attendees take the exam prior to the workshop. While taking the exam, we must also comment on the exam questions.

The group's exam results and comments are compiled and provided to us at the start of the workshop. We also receive the statistics on how each test question performed previously. (When the results of a question are statistically graphed, there is a certain curve that ASQ is looking for. If the results return this curve, the question "tests well"). Any question that elicited comments, or had disagreement on answers (i.e. we all didn't get it right), is up for discussion.

The first step in the workshop is to review each question as the full group, determine if anything needs to be rewritten, make sure there is only 1 correct answer, etc. Another option is to say that a question is good based on the current statistics, even if we didn't get the answer correct. We can also elect to replace the question with another question from the pool. If we feel that the question is not a good test question and can't be salvaged, we can elect to "kill" the question, which is to remove it from the question pool (so that It cannot be used in future tests.) The activity is time-boxed. We must come to resolution in 3 minutes/question or it goes to the parking lot for small group work.

The next step is to work in small groups, rewriting the questions, and answers, and updating references. Finally, all of the small group results are reviewed by the full team again, time-boxing at 3 minutes. Anything we can't agree on goes into the parking lot for a second round of small group work. At the end of the work shop, the team of volunteers has agreed on all the rewrites. These are the questions that will be used on the next exam (i.e. June 2010).

ASQ reimburses each volunteer for expenses to attend the workshop. Guidelines are provided and expenses are reimbursed within those guidelines. Since the workshops are on a Friday, it requires you miss a day of your regular work. I've participated in these workshops several times. My employer has always allowed me to use a "training" day, rather than requiring me to use vacation to attend. You also receive 2 RUs for certification for volunteering at a workshop.

This experience gave me a chance to meet other quality professionals and give back to ASQ by volunteering, while at the same time building/refreshing my quality knowledge.

For those of you that are members of ASQ, I recommend that you look into volunteer opportunities at both the local and national level. They are always looking for fresh faces for the certification workshops. Contact Mary Martin or Michael Byrnes at ASQ Headquarters to volunteer.

Tips on Performing a Process Capability Study

By: David DeVowe, The QC Group

A process capability study is performed for two primary reasons:

1. to predict future capability of the process to produce product within specification.
   
2. to identify process improvement opportunities.

Process capability is a statistical analysis of variation of the process output compared to the allowable specification limits. Cpk is most often used in a manufacturing process to express process capability.

There are common problems that occur in process capability studies that can be overcome with proper planning and implementation before the study begins.

Process Potential Study vs. Process Capability Study
Should process potential (Ppk) be calculated or process capability (Cpk)?

A Ppk calculation is used to define, in statistical terms, what has already happened in a single lot of product. It is often used in the early phases of a project to obtain an estimate of process variation when only a small number of parts have been produced. The data points represent only a "snapshot" of the process and only a small window of its potential; hence the term "process potential study".

A process capability study (Cpk), on the other hand, results from sampling of a continuous process over planned intervals. It is a prediction of what is likely to occur in the future based on sample subgroups taken over a length of time. It is a method of predicting future capability of the process; hence the term "process capability study".

Sample Frequency and Handling during the Capability Study
For statistical accuracy, the capability study samples should be taken in subgroups at planned intervals throughout the production run. One way to assist in the accuracy of sampling is to establish a container or storage location for each sample set to be taken. Number the container to identify the sample sets in sequence or prepare tags for the samples in advance so that your capability study is not adversely affected by miss-handling of the samples. Identifying the sequence of your samples may prove to be valuable in the problem-solving portion of your capability study.

Process Interruptions During the Capability Study
More often than not, the production process is interrupted for an un-planned reason during your capability study. Before the study begins, establish a minimum number of sample sets that you will perform statistics on, and a "goal" number of sample sets you would like to collect. If the process was interrupted after the minimum samples were collected, end the study at that point. Remember that your Cpk numbers are based on the assumption that your data is gathered from a "normal" process, represented by the bell curve labeled "Process Capability", above. If an interruption occurs, there is a greater risk that you've introduced a "special cause" into your capability study. If your minimum sample number has not been met, it's best that you start over with the study. Determine ahead of time what is an acceptable process interruption, and which interruptions will not be tolerated during the study.

Measurement System Capability
Before beginning your process capability study, determine the bias, stability, linearity, repeatability, and reproducibility of your measurement system. At a minimum, know your gage R&R as a percentage of the part tolerance. If an in-depth study of the measurement methods has not been done, get assistance to perform a capability study on the measurement system. It's important to understand the total error that will be introduced into your study by the inspection equipment and people performing the work. A certified inspection lab can assist with this task as needed.

Process Changes and Improvements
Process changes (for the right reasons and at the right time) can have a positive outcome on the product. If they are done during the capability study, a process change only serves to introduce error and uncertainty. Involve the operators of the process in your plan so they will understand the importance of holding the process stable during the study period. Once the study is complete and special causes have been identified, introduce changes that will improve the process. Then perform another process capability study to confirm the improvements.

Planning for Success
If this is your first time developing a capability study, look for assistance to gain insight from others' past experiences. Pitfalls range from cultural resistance to statistical errors, to process instability. A seasoned expert that has applied real statistics "in the trenches" can be a great savings to you in time and in the company's resources. In any case, success lies with the implementation of what was learned from the study. Proper implementation will make your capability study move from an organizational cost to a value-added activity.

David DeVowe is the Vice President and General Manager of The QC Group, Inc. He has over 25 years of experience in applying quality principles from operations through top management. David's industry experiences include aerospace, die casting, precision stamping, quality services, and quality-related training.

For classroom or on-site training for Measurement Uncertainty Analysis, Measurement and Calibration, Measurement System Analysis, or any number of 100's of courses, contact The QC Group at 952-895-1150 or view our training offerings at http://www.qcgroup.com/quality-assurance-training/ .

About ASQ Minnesota Section 1203

In 1948, 18 quality-minded professionals came together to form the Minnesota Section of ASQ. Today MNASQ has grown to be the largest section within the ASQ community. With more than 2300 members, serving a geographic region that encompasses Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wisconsin and Iowa, we provide a wide variety of products and services to employers and individuals seeking to connect with like-minded professionals and increase their ability to make our world work better.

MNASQ sponsors professional development activities like program meetings, certification prep courses, workshops and seminars, as well as face- to-face and online networking opportunities.

Visit our website at www.mnasq.org.