Originator, Checker and Approver 3

[code1]

In cases when something does go wrong, e.g. calculations performed wrongly, specifications missed out, or drawings not properly checked and it causes some problems in the shop, what is the typical apportion of 'blame' or fault?

In my first company, I was told: Originator (typically an engineer) ~40%, Checker (Senior Engineer or Assistant Design Manager)~50% and Approver (Design Manager)~10%

In my second, not much was checked because every one was very busy, but that did not cause much problems because most people were responsible and motivated to keep errors to a minimum, and we had a boss who checked everything anyway.

In my present, the third, on the drawing side, the originator is responsible for the design, I do not see much people really checking (because everyone is busy), and the Approver is merely the Project Manager to signify that he transmitted the document to the customer. In general, calculations are slightly better monitored.

It is the third company's practice that I have yet to get used to because it is a design company after all, and pales when compared to my first.

What are the proportion of responsibility to be carried by the Originator, Checker and Approver when something does go wrong, and knuckles must be rapped?

 

[MadMango]

Everyone has their function to perform, ergo everyone should be held accountable an equal amount. If I am the Originator, I don't like to let mistakes slip through. If I am the Checker, I don't like to miss any prior mistakes. If I am the Approver, I had damn well ensure what I am approving is correct.

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[JStephen]

I've never seen percentages. Seems like the expression is that it all rolls downhill, though, where it then hits a fan.

 

[JAE]

Engineer-of-Record - 100%

 

[Ashereng]

Name on stamp - 100%.

"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[RossABQ]

Code1, Are they saying they're going to dock people according to those percentages?! What is the point of assigning percentage of blame?

 

[JAE]

I think it might be some engineering managers with,

a) too much time on their hands,
b) brains that are exceedingly anal retentive, or
c) a strategic business plan that anticipates failure.

 

[code1]

RossABQ,

In the 1st case, the percentages makes personnel aware of their responsibilities. Upper management is aware that the Design manager (Approver) is this case is taking more of a management role of the department. So the responsibilities fall on the Originator and Checker. The percentages can come into play when the boss's boss decide to admonish the staff for mistakes i.e. how long the lecture for each person is. And when appraisal time comes. No one has gotten canned though as a result of these percentages.

Reason I posed this question is because I am relatively uncomfortable in case 3, where the Approver appears just for the record purposes. I have heard instances where the person says, "Well, if the checker is okay with it, then I'm ok" and "I always approve 5 minutes after the document (Specification, drawing, etc) has been checked by the Checker"

I strongly believe in teamwork, responsibility and having pride in good work. So it does get on my nerves hearing the comments above, but hey, he is the Senior Project Manager afterall. I am wondering how the role of the Originator, Checker and Approver is treated elsewhere.

 

[JAE]

code1 - my somewhat flippant comment above actually has some seriousness to it. The Originator, Checker, and Approver may be selected, assigned, directed, whatever by the management of the company to perform certain tasks on projects.

But in my book, if I am the Engineer of Record, I put it upon myself to be the Originator, Checker and Approver.

Anyone else repeating these tasks is simply another eye adding to quality. But it's my responsibility to do all three of these tasks and I believe that I should bear the full responsibility if anything is wrong.

 

[GrimesFrank]

In my place of work we have those designated titles, however the responsibility is slightly different.

The approver is a manager and their role is to ensure that the appropriately qualified people have performed/verified the work. In addition they are responsible to ensure that the product answers the question asked.

The verifier is responsible to ensure that the product has met all codes and standards required, and that the preparer has carried out his due diligence.

The preparer is resposnible to ensure that they have addressed and completed all items to the best of their abilities......crossing all tees, etc.

In the event of failure the preparer is held responisble primarily however the verifier is held secondary in regards to future work assigned, performance pay, etc.

Legalities are one thing, but my pocketbook is certainly another.

Frank "Grimey" Grimes
Rule 25. of Swanson's "Unwritten Rules of Management"
Have fun at what you do. It will reflect in your work. No one likes a grump except another grump.

 

[SylvestreW]

If everyone felt 100% responsible, errors will be significantly reduced.
I've found that when people believe that someone else is actually responsible for checking or signing, they aren't as detailed as they should be. It's expected since we aren't as careful when there's a safety net.

Everyone is responsible and should be admonished accordingly.

 

[KENAT]

The standing joke at my first place was that any mistakes that got through were the Checkers fault, and that certainly since 3 people signed the drawing after the originator (Checker, Stress Approved, Approved [typically chief eng/tech director]) it certainly couldn't be the originators fault!

In practice we all took pride in our work and our aim was to create a perfect drawing every time, I especially tried my hardest to get drawings through check without getting bled on.

At my current place we've only just introduced drawing check and most people try to avoid it, the drawings are of a generally low standard, it's a miracle the company manages to make anything. To me their avoiding it is a sign that they don't care about making mistakes.

To me trying to get through checking without any red ink was a motivator, not a safety net of someone else catching my mistakes.

I've seen the 'safety net' argument before and while it may apply to people that don't have a good work ethic/take pride in their work I don't think it holds true for the rest of us.

Then again I'm a firm believer in Checking, as some may have seen from my other posts, while I know many think it unnecessary or at best a luxury.

In the civil type world I'd assume whoever’s stamp is on the drawing would get the blame legally.

 

[kchayfie]

The virtual percentages applied vary according to who is occupying the roles - if one of the new graduates does a calculation and I check it then I should take more responsibility and if the approver has faith in my ability to pick up mistakes the balance is likely to be 20% originator, 60% checker and 20% approver. If I do the calculation and a new graduate checks it, the newbie can't be expected to pick up on everything and the approver will need to take more interest before signing it off. That way it would be more like 50% originator, 20% checker and 30% approver. With varying experience levels, the balance of responsibility changes.

If the final signing off stage is merely signing off that the design has been done and not looking at the veracity of the design, its not really an "approval" stage and can't really be responsible for problems with that design. I wouldn't want to be working for a company where a design is 100% my responsibility, even though I strive to ensure that I get it 100% correct.

 

[dozer]

Right on, SylvestreW. I've worked with people who just put any crap on paper and then expected the checker to catch everything. I agree with the sentiment that the originator's goal should be to get a clean print back from the checker.

I think the assigning percentages thing is wrong headed. The people who give a care will ignore the percentages and do the best they can, feeling responsible for the overall design. The others will just use it as an excuse for their own sloppy work. "Oh well, it's not my fault. I was only 20% responsible."

 

[gerhardl]

Managing director: 100%

Reason: The QA system established and used is to ensure that everybody has knowledge enough and backing systems to ensure that any job is done to specificatins.

If this in general does not work the person responsible for the total QA system is the one to blame. If something goes wrong the QA systems task is not to put blame on anyone, but ensure what has got wrong and avoid repetition by education of persons or improvement of systems.

However, statistics will almost always have the posibility to lead you to wrong conclusions. We once had an engineer found responsible for about 60% of registered faults in a certain task area. He was promptly asked to leave by the management. It later turned out that he had been given, and done, almost 80% of the work in this area by his immidiate superior.......!!! The young engineer naturally quit anyway, - to a better job of course. First after this oocurance somebody had the bright idea to check instructions, standards required, routines and department education to improve engineering skill in the area.

 

[Dinosaur]

I think it should be this way:

Originator 100%
Checker 100%
Project Manager 100%
Department Manager 100%

I take full responsibility for all the decisions I make. If I am told not to do it that way, I usually write an e-mail saying I will do this such and such a way as you requested.

 

[fel3]

Around here we blame the drafters!

The engineer-of-record (i.e. the one who stamps and signs the drawing or document) is the first one who is 100% responsible. However, for many/most of us in civil engineering, the firm carries the actual liablity and is contractually 100% responsible.

I like Dinosaur's list. Unfortunately, the sense of responsibility for the last three often doesn't measure up.

Fred