Analysis of product quality and rejection loss
The history of the development of product quality indicators has developed various analytical tools for its evaluation: single and complex. Single, or private, indicators characterize the level of individual parameters of the functional purpose or utility of the product. These include, for example, the productivity of machine tools, the carrying capacity of cars, the fat content of milk and cheese, reliability, etc. Earlier on the emergence of a system of individual (private) indicators of product quality suggest the use of verbal methods for their evaluation. The main disadvantages of using single indicators and related verbal methods of assessing quality, and therefore, competitiveness of products, are as follows.
• The analysis of individual parameters of the compared models of technology often yields conflicting results, as estimating their ratios by the principle "best-worse" are almost always multidirectional and this seriously complicates the generalization of the data obtained.
• An additional difficulty in generalizing the analysis data arises from the differences in the units of measurement of particular product quality measures.
• Having the option of the artificial result of comparisons by purposeful limitation of the number of analyzed indicators and forced expert choice of a more competitive type of product on the basis of a verbal description of its advantages.
The practical consequences of these shortcomings in the application of private indicators for assessing the competitiveness of products consist, as a rule, in a preferential orientation to indicators of functional purpose, which in itself does not raise any objections, and in some cases technical and economic characteristics are overlooked.
The importance of this aspect of analysis is determined by the fact that economic parameters are often associated with functional ones. For example, it is well known that a significant increase in the productivity of machine equipment (the desired dynamics of the functional indicator) causes an increase in energy consumption (an undesirable direction of the economic criterion change), and, therefore, leads to the need to calculate additional indicators - the energy intensity per unit of productivity (or in other situations - per unit of power).
Particularly obvious drawbacks of comparisons of individual indicators for assessing the competitiveness of products are visible when using their graphic interpretation (Figure 4.1).
The individual coordinate axes show the absolute values of the parameters or points (points) for parameters that do not have real dimensions.
Fig. 4.1. An example of a graphic illustration of a comparison of individual quality measures of products:
PR - machine productivity, pieces/machine-shift; Ee - energy intensity, kW-h; Pv - the need for workers, people; O - waste materials,%; Pl - occupied area, m2; Goiter - maintenance costs, thousand rubles/year; ELV - preparatory-final time, min; 34 - the need for spare parts, points; B - safety, points; Ш - noise level, dB; RP - maintainability, points; D - level of production aesthetics, scores
Such diagrams clearly show, according to which parameters the product is better or worse compared to competitors' samples, which allows to determine the direction of finalizing its design and production technology in order to provide competitive advantages. However, a general (integral) assessment of product quality and the identification of the degree of lagging (or exceeding) its competitiveness in a quantitative measurement using single criteria is impossible.
Complex, or integral, indicators are multi-component and allow you to evaluate several characteristics of products in one indicator. Among the integral indicators of product quality are grading and scoring systems.
Grading involves the distribution of products according to grades - the highest grade, the first, the second, etc. Varieties are characteristic, for example for food, light, leather industry (for example, flour and pasta or cotton). As a characteristic of quality, the grade assesses nutritional value, quality of processing and feedstock. Thus, long-fiber cotton is higher in quality than short-fiber, but the level of its contamination and the presence of impurities are additionally assessed. Generalizing indicators for enterprises of similar industries is the coefficient of grade and the average weighted price of products.
The coefficient of grade can be determined by the ratio of the cost of production of all varieties to the estimated value of the volume of commodity output at the price of the highest of the varieties or through the ratio of the quantity of production of the higher of the varieties to its total volume. Accordingly, the method of calculating the first variant of the grading coefficient is characterized by the formula
where Ksor is the grade factor; In & quot ;, B}, ..., B - the volume of output or sales of products for each of their kind in natural or conditionally-natural meters, respectively, in grades from the highest to the lowest; C, C, ', ..., C - prices by types of products and corresponding grades.
The maximum value of the grade factor may be equal to 1.0, provided that all types of products are of the highest quality. The second variant of the coefficient of grade shows the share of the output of the higher of the varieties in the total volume of production or sales. It is calculated by the ratio of the volumes expressed either in natural units (where possible) or in value terms.
The weighted average unit price reflects the level of product quality in competitive sales markets. When it is calculated, the scales are the volumes of production or sales of products in natural or conditionally-natural units.
When analyzing and assessing the quality of products, it should be borne in mind that the correct results can be obtained under the condition of sufficient uniformity of the products and packaging. For enterprises with product groups that differ significantly in their function, it is unlikely that such a valuation method will be applicable. For example, the range of manufacturers of household appliances includes washing machines, electric kettles, toasters, irons, etc. And it is absolutely obvious that the differences in the prices of washing machines and irons are due to their functional purpose and resulting constructive and mass-dimensional characteristics. If it is a question of flour or pasta, then it is clear that for such enterprises this method of generalized valuation is applicable as an indirect indicator of their quality, since prices are influenced by inflation and the saturation level of the market. A convincing argument in favor of this conclusion can serve as the data of Table. 4.2.
For example, chocolate candies in boxes cost more than caramel 2.6 times, but this does not mean such a great difference in quality. The main reason for these differences in prices of sales are the differences in prices for raw materials used. Chocolate and chocolate sweets use cocoa imported from abroad, the prices for which are not only high, but also continue to grow significantly due to the decline in the harvest of cocoa beans in recent years. Prices for chocolate are accordingly 1.5 times higher than the cost of candy in boxes, as its formula presumes a noticeably larger share of cocoa.
As for other products of the confectionery factory, the highest prices are for it. The reasons for this situation are that this group includes festive and gift sets, seasonal nature of demand (New Year, February 23, March 8) and more expensive packaging, including using souvenirs. Thus, not only in industries producing sophisticated equipment, but even in the food industry, average prices do not always reflect objectively the differences in the level of product quality.
Integral assessments of the technical and economic level of products and their quality become possible:
• Using multiplicative generalizations of parameters;
• on the basis of generalizing economic indicators in monetary form.
The first variant appeared historically before the others, but due to obvious and significant drawbacks (multiplying indicators with different units of measure and differently directed desired dynamics, as well as giving the same importance to the parameters of products), it is practically not applied at present.
The generalization based on the monetary valuation does not have the first of the named shortcomings, but the second remains inherent to him. In addition, it is extremely difficult to translate all the necessary parameters into a monetary valuation. For example, the level of noise or vibration damages the health of workers, but how to determine its monetary equivalent? In practice, this leads to a limitation of the indicators included in the evaluation and, as a result, to the occurrence of inaccuracies in it.
The last of the above is the most accurate. In full, the method of integral evaluation of product quality is used, as it was shown in Ch. 3, for a comparative assessment of the competitiveness of products by its designers and manufacturers. Customers, as a rule, are limited to one or two basic functional parameters and the level of operational costs (energy consumption, fuel, maintenance and repair costs) in relation to the price.
The level of marriage in production refers to the indirect characteristics of product quality in accordance with the logic according to which enterprises with lower rates of marriage have higher levels of production technology, personnel qualification, technological and labor discipline. In aggregate, these factors also ensure a higher quality of products.
In the analysis, the marriage is determined to be fixable and final. The differences between them are related to the level of costs and losses of the enterprise. Correct marriage, as the name implies, is subject to correction, and in this regard, the company has additional costs. Losses of the enterprise from the corrected marriage are equal to the sum of expenses on its elimination with the minus of deductions from concrete perpetrators in cases of their establishment.
The final marriage is not subject to correction, and the losses associated with it are equal to the total amount of expenses for the manufacture of defective parts and assemblies also minus deductions from specific employees who are the perpetrators of marriage and suppliers of defective materials.
The level of losses from marriage is determined by the ratio of their amounts in absolute terms to the production cost of output in the same period:
where РБ11С - expenses for the correction of marriage, thousand rubles; BDS - the cost price of finally rejected parts and assemblies, thousand rubles; VB "r - reimbursement of the costs of marriage with its perpetrators (workers); VBPYM - reimbursement of costs from suppliers of defective materials; TPG1S - the production cost of manufactured goods for the same period.
For enterprises where technological marriages are unavoidable, its level is planned and assessed to what extent the actual level is higher or lower than planned.
Unrecovered amounts of losses from marriage increase the cost price of manufacturing products and reduce the profit of the enterprise accordingly.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay