Two plants. One shared standard. How much needs to be the same?
Standardisation has been debated for generations. In my experience, one question often makes the difference: how much detail do we want to standardise?
One plant produces small batches, while the other runs a highly automated line. A simplified example: the same quality requirements do not determine every sequence of work.
For me, a useful standard starts with its purpose: what must we reliably achieve everywhere? And which requirements are needed to make that happen?
Where safety, regulatory approval or a stable manufacturing process requires a particular procedure, that procedure is mandatory.
Further details need a reason. Local equipment, batch sizes or regional customer needs may call for different approaches. There must be enough room for these.
Anyone using that flexibility must demonstrate that the shared requirements are met. It must also be clear who is responsible for the deviation and when it will be reviewed.
Standardisation must not become an end in itself. Its value also depends on how well it allows necessary adaptations.
Where does your standard go into more detail today than the outcome requires?
#Organisation #Leadership #Transformation
