Why is this still the case?
My starting position is:
Use your procedures as training material.
If you cannot do that, something is wrong with your procedure.
If you have separate training material, consider making that your QMS procedure.
If you have separate training material, consider making that your QMS procedure.
You see overlap between customer documentation and training material.
Are you sure this is minimized?
My starting position is:
Use single sourcing where possible.
Use customer documentation as training material where possible.
Or the way around.
Or the way around.
Or do you have an overlap in what's shown in the user interface of your software and your documentation? Or do you want documentation material in your user interface?
etc.... etc....
But why is this still an issue?
Isn't that normal? Isn't that the standard?
Isn't that normal? Isn't that the standard?
...well, apparantly not.
Because of history...
"we are giving training using presentations already for decades"
"because it would cause company internal tensions - reducing work for the training division"
"because we do not have the tools"
"because we do not know how to start"
"because it is the responsibility of different departments - and I do not want to pick-up that ball!"
"because we're happy with the way things are"
So most of the "Reasons" I encounter are reasons focused on a status quo - and since that is not an acceptable term, typical the term "stability" or "unwanted change" is used.
"we are giving training using presentations already for decades"
"because it would cause company internal tensions - reducing work for the training division"
"because we do not have the tools"
"because we do not know how to start"
"because it is the responsibility of different departments - and I do not want to pick-up that ball!"
"because we're happy with the way things are"
So most of the "Reasons" I encounter are reasons focused on a status quo - and since that is not an acceptable term, typical the term "stability" or "unwanted change" is used.
But life is change.
Survival is change.
Optimization is survival.
Innovation, efficiency and effectivity are required for survival.
So what's the lesson?
There are few!
1 It is easier to manage handling continuous improvement and change,
than to handle a process - in status quo - in innovative environments.
than to handle a process - in status quo - in innovative environments.
2. Sometimes the question is just not asked: 'Do I perform double work, and
what would be the profit in optimizing this?'
what would be the profit in optimizing this?'
And this doesn't need to take long...
An analysis is only taking maximum a few days.
Suggestions to imrpove, and building a related business case, same.
And if you need guidance, or someone else to do so?
Just call us !!