Improvement in rejection rate reduction that is not measured tends to be reversed quietly. Variation in the wider quality and productivity management agenda is the enemy; averages conceal it. The result is the confidence to make and defend decisions about the quality and productivity management capability under scrutiny. It is designed for mixed groups, so that rejection rate reduction is examined from more than one functional angle. The difficulty is not agreeing that the wider quality and productivity management agenda matters — it is deciding what to stop doing to make room for it. Participants test their assumptions about the practice within quality and productivity management against scenarios designed to break weak ones. The programme is built to be used, and every section of rejection rate reduction it covers ends in something applicable. Practitioner evidence points the same way: the wider quality and productivity management agenda improves fastest where responsibility for it is named and owned. The programme ends where implementation begins, with the quality and productivity management capability broken into steps someone can start on Monday.
Expected Learning Outcomes
✓
Sustain gains achieved in rejection rate reduction through control and review.
✓
Design the internal audit programme covering rejection rate reduction.
✓
Select indicators that show whether rejection rate reduction is improving, and reject those that only look useful.
✓
Adapt recognised practice on rejection rate reduction to local constraints without hollowing it out.
✓
Build a continuous improvement routine around rejection rate reduction that survives busy periods.
✓
Link improvement in rejection rate reduction to a financial outcome leadership recognises.
✓
Test the organisation's response to rejection rate reduction under conditions that are less than ideal.
Who Should Attend
✓
Technical staff being prepared for supervisory responsibility over rejection rate reduction.
✓
Inspection and testing staff verifying rejection rate reduction.
✓
Quality staff verifying that rejection rate reduction performs as designed.
✓
Training officers building problem-solving capability in rejection rate reduction.
✓
Certification and accreditation coordinators preparing evidence on rejection rate reduction.