Quality Alchemist (品質煉金術師)

HKSAR CE Candidates' Capability - Overall Summary (以品質管理原則看特首候選人能力的調查(總體概要))

2012-01-27T08:26:00.000-08:00

After survey design, questionnaire distribution, data collection and analysis, an overall summary had been consolidated below.

The details of Survey Design was located at http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2012/01/hksar-ce-candidates-capability-survey.html

Overall Summary

The questionnaires weredistributed via email to 1053 professionals. The response rate was about 7% (73 valid reply). The survey period was from 1 to 14 Jan 2012 and three reminder emails were followed.

The participants' background information were shown as follows.

Participants at the Top and Senor Management Level was about 71%.

Participants having more than 10 years working experience was about 82%.

Participants serviced in sectors of Service, Manufacturing and Government/Non-profit/Univerity was about 95%.

The codes used in this analysis were given again.

HKSAR Chief Executive Candidates 2012 on 1st Jan 2012 were:

- Mr. Henry TANG Ying-yen (唐英年) (HT)

- Mr. LEUNG Chun-ying (梁振英) (CY)

- Mr. Albert HO Chun-yan (何俊仁) (AH)

- Mr. Frederick FUNG Kin-kee (馮檢基) (FF)

Eight questions designed in the survey by adopting the Eight Quality Principles (code) were shown below:

一、市民為重 (Customer Focus) (CF)

二、領導才能 (Leadership) (LD)

三、全民參與 (Involvement of People) (IP)

四、流程方法 (Process Approach ) (PA)

五、系統管理 (System Approach to Management) (SM)

六、持續改善 (Continual Improvement) (CI)

七、據實決策 (Factual Approach to Decision Making) (FD)

八、互利關係 (Mutually Beneficial Supplier Relationships ) (MS)

The HKSAR Chief Executive (CE) Candidates' capability in each Quality Management Principle was summarized as follows.

市民為重 (Customer Focus): CY » HT ~ AH ~ FF

領導才能 (Leadership): CY » HT » AH > FF

全民參與 (Involvement of People): CY » HT ~ AH ~ FF

流程方法 (Process Approach ): CY » HT / AH / FF; HT > FF

系統管理 (System Approach to Management): CY ~> HT » AH ~ FF

持續改善 (Continual Improvement): CY » HT ~> AH ~ FF

據實決策 (Factual Approach to Decision Making): CY » HT ~ AH ~ FF

互利關係 (Mutually Beneficial Supplier Relationships ): CY ~ HT » AH ~ FF

Legend used in hypothesis test presentation:

"»" : statistically significant that p ~ 0.000

">" : statistically significant that p is below 0.05

"~>" : not statistically significant but p is around 0.1

"~" : not statistically significant

The details of Data Analysis was given at http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2012/01/hksar-ce-candidates-capability-data.html

The mean of means in the 8 Quality Management Principles was summarized in the following table.

Seven-point likert scale used as follows:

(Capability Level: 7－Very Capable，６－Comparative Capable，５－ Slightly Capable，４－Accepted Capable，３－Slightly Incapable，２－Comparative Incapable，１－Very Incapable)

(能力水平：7－非常有能力，６－比較有能力，５－稍多的能力，４－可接受的能力，３－稍遜的能力，２－比較沒能力，１－非常沒能力)

Graphical analysis for each HKSAR CE candidates was shown below.

By overlapping each candidate's capability chart, it found that CY's capability in all concerned aspects was close to score 5 indicating quality professionals believed that CY had "slightly capable" for the position of CE based on the Eight Quality Management Principles. However, HT's capability was found just acceptable. On the other hand, two democratic parties candidates' overall capability were below the acceptable level.

In addtition, data analysis for the mean of means was performed. Firstly, each candidate's data set was undergone Normality Test and all passed.

Then, ANOVA test was performed. The difference of candidates' overall capability was found statistically significant at 95% confident level.

Thus, the paired t-test was used to analyse the differences between two candidates. This procedure tested the null hypothesis that the true mean difference within pairs (md = m1 - m2) is equal to a hypothesized value (H0: md = m1 - m2 = m0). The alternative hypothesis can be left-tailed (md < m0), right-tailed (md > m0), or two-tailed (md ≠ m0).

The summary table was show below.

Ranking of the capability in "Overall Capabillity" of HKSAR CE candidates with statistically significant at 95% confident level was shown below.

CY » HT / AH / FF

HT > AH / FF

AH » FF

It concluded that CY had much higher overall capability score than the other candidates with statistically significant at 95% confident level. HT had higher score than the other two democratic parties candidates (AH and FF); moreover, AH had higher overall capability score than FF with statistically significant at 95% confident level.

(P.S. Recently, I found some young people "Born After 80" created a song for CY in Youtube voluntarily.)

Reference:

ISO 9000:2000 - Quality management systems -- Fundamentals and vocabulary

John McKenzie, Robert L.Schaefer & Elizabeth Farber (1995) "The Student Edition of MINITAB for Windows - Statistical software ... adapted for education" Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.

HKSAR CE Candidates' Capability - Data Analysis (以品質管理原則看特首候選人能力的調查(數據分析))

2012-01-26T07:19:00.001-08:00

When the survey period closed, all data were validated and analyzed. Firstly, Normality Test was performed to examine whether or not the observations followed a normal distribution. The hypotheses were shown as follows:

H0: data follow a normal distribution vs. H1: data do not follow a normal distribution

If Normality Test passes, parametric hypothesis test (2 sample t-test) would be employed to compare each candidate's capability (mean value) with 95% confidence level. If Normality Test fail, non-parametric hypothesis test (Mann-Whitney test) would be used to compare each candidate's capability (median value) with 95% confidence level.

One of the simplest versions of the Central Limit Theorem (CLT) says that if it is a random sample of size n (say, n> 30) from an infinite population finite standard deviation, then the standardized sample mean converges to a standard normal distribution or, equivalently, the sample mean approaches a normal distribution with mean equal to the population mean and standard deviation equal to standard deviation of the population divided by square root of sample size n.

73 independent responded data set were collected and CLT could be used with assumption of a normal distribution. However, all data failed the Normality Test. It may be the result of using seven-point likert scale in which each data point was an integral. Therefore, both parametric and nonparametric hypothesis test were used to exam the data sets. If same conclusion is obtained from both hypothesis tests, it would be taken as final result.

The codes used in this analysis were given again.

HKSAR Chief Executive Candidates 2012 on 1st Jan 2012 were:

- Mr. Henry TANG Ying-yen (唐英年) (HT)

- Mr. LEUNG Chun-ying (梁振英) (CY)

- Mr. Albert HO Chun-yan (何俊仁) (AH)

- Mr. Frederick FUNG Kin-kee (馮檢基) (FF)

The 8 questions using the Eight Quality Principles (code) were shown below:

一、市民為重 (Customer Focus) (CF)

二、領導才能 (Leadership) (LD)

三、全民參與 (Involvement of People) (IP)

四、流程方法 (Process Approach ) (PA)

五、系統管理 (System Approach to Management) (SM)

六、持續改善 (Continual Improvement) (CI)

七、據實決策 (Factual Approach to Decision Making) (FD)

八、互利關係 (Mutually Beneficial Supplier Relationships ) (MS)

Seven-point likert scale used as follows:

(Capability Level: 7－Very Capable，６－Comparative Capable，５－ Slightly Capable，４－Accepted Capable，３－Slightly Incapable，２－Comparative Incapable，１－Very Incapable)

(能力水平：7－非常有能力，６－比較有能力，５－稍多的能力，４－可接受的能力，３－稍遜的能力，２－比較沒能力，１－非常沒能力)

Hypothesis test presentation:

"»" is statistical significant that p ~ 0.000

">" is statistical significant that p is below 0.05

"~>" is not statistical significant but p is around 0.1

"~" is not statistical significant

Data Analysis

一、市民為重 (Customer Focus) (CF)

Data distribution of each candidate in normality test:

Boxplot (Summary) for Customer Focus of each candidate: (The circle (+) is mean and (x) is median.)

Hypothesis test I (for different - two tailed test):

Hypothesis test II (for greater - one tailed test):

Conclusion:

It found that CY had much higher score than other candidates in the Customer/Citizen Focus which was statistically significant for 95% confident level.

CY » HT ~ AH ~ FF

二、領導才能 (Leadership) (LD)

Data distribution of each candidate in normality test:

Boxplot (Summary) for Leadership of each candidate: (The circle (+) is mean and (x) is median.)

Hypothesis test I (for different - two tailed test):

Hypothesis test II (for greater - one tailed test):

Conclusion:

It found that CY had much higher score than other candidates in the Leadership which was statistical significant for 95% confident level; and HT had much higher score than the other two candidates. AH was found statistically significant and had higher score than FF.

CY » HT » AH > FF

三、全民參與 (Involvement of People) (IP)

Data distribution of each candidate in normality test:

Boxplot (Summary) for Involvement of People of each candidate: (The circle (+) is mean and (x) is median.)

Hypothesis test I (for different - two tailed test):

Hypothesis test II (for greater - one tailed test):

Conclusion:

It found that CY had much higher score than other candidates in the Involvement of People which was statistically significant for 95% confident level.

CY » HT ~ AH ~ FF

四、流程方法 (Process Approach ) (PA)

Data distribution of each candidate in normality test:

Boxplot (Summary) for Process Approach of each candidate: (The circle (+) is mean and (x) is median.)

Hypothesis test I (for different - two tailed test):

Hypothesis test II (for greater - one tailed test):

Conclusion:

It found that CY had much higher score than other candidates in the Process Approach which was statistically significant for 95% confident level. HT had higher score than FF with statistically significant for 95% confident level.

CY » HT / AH / FF

HT > FF

五、系統管理 (System Approach to Management) (SM)

Data distribution of each candidate in normality test:

Boxplot (Summary) for System Approach to Management of each candidate: (The circle (+) is mean and (x) is median.)

Hypothesis test I (for different - two tailed test):

Hypothesis test II (for greater - one tailed test):

Conclusion:

It found that CY and HT had much higher score than other candidates in the System Approach to Management which was statistically significant for 95% confident level. CY had slight higher score than HT which was statistically significant for 90% confident level.

CY ~> HT » AH ~ FF

六、持續改善 (Continual Improvement) (CI)

Data distribution of each candidate in normality test:

Boxplot (Summary) for Continual Improvement of each candidate: (The circle (+) is mean and (x) is median.)

Hypothesis test I (for different - two tailed test):

Hypothesis test II (for greater - one tailed test):

Conclusion:

It found that CY had much higher score than other candidates in the Continual Improvement which was statistically significant for 95% confident level. HT had higher score than AH and FF which was statistically significant for 90% confident level.

CY » HT ~> AH ~ FF

七、據實決策 (Factual Approach to Decision Making) (FD)

Data distribution of each candidate in normality test:

Boxplot (Summary) for Factual Approach to Decision Making of each candidate: (The circle (+) is mean and (x) is median.)

Hypothesis test I (for different - two tailed test):

Hypothesis test II (for greater - one tailed test):

Conclusion:

It found that CY had much higher score than other candidates in the Factual Approach to Decision Making which was statistically significant for 95% confident level.

CY » HT ~ AH ~ FF

八、互利關係 (Mutually Beneficial Supplier Relationships) (MS)

Data distribution of each candidate in normality test:

Boxplot (Summary) for Mutually Beneficial Supplier Relationships of each candidate: (The circle (+) is mean and (x) is median.)

Hypothesis test I (for different - two tailed test):

Hypothesis test II (for greater - one tailed test):

Conclusion:

It found that CY and HT had much higher score than other candidates in the Mutually Beneficial Supplier Relationships which was statistically significant for 95% confident level.

CY ~ HT » AH ~ FF

The overall conclusion and consolidated summary would be issued.

Reference:

John McKenzie, Robert L.Schaefer & Elizabeth Farber (1995) "The Student Edition of MINITAB for Windows - Statistical software ... adapted for education" Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.

HKSAR CE Candidates' Capability - Survey Design (以品質管理原則看特首候選人能力的調查(問卷設計))

2012-01-25T07:49:00.000-08:00

Recently, many surveys about Hong Kong citizen's perspective on HKSAR Chief Executive candidates were performed by different universities. I had already proposed to evaluate HKSAR Chief Executive capability based on Eight Quality Management Principles on 28 Nov 2011 in my blog (at: http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2011/11/blog-post.html in Chinese). Then I conducted a survey which based on Quality Professionals' Perception to evaluate the capability of HKSAR Chief Executive (CE) candidates using the Eight Quality Management Principles.

The experiment was designed as follows:

- 8 questions designed in relation to the Eight Quality Principles with seven-point likert scale

- 3 questions for background information collection such as "Position", "Working Experience" and "Industry"

Seven-point likert scale used as follows:

(Capability Level: 7－Very Capable，６－Comparative Capable，５－ Slightly Capable，４－Accepted Capable，３－Slightly Incapable，２－Comparative Incapable，１－Very Incapable)

(能力水平：7－非常有能力，６－比較有能力，５－稍多的能力，４－可接受的能力，３－稍遜的能力，２－比較沒能力，１－非常沒能力)

The 8 questions in accordance with the Eight Quality Principles (code) were shown below:

一、市民為重 (Customer Focus) (CF)

二、領導才能 (Leadership) (LD)

三、全民參與 (Involvement of People) (IP)

四、流程方法 (Process Approach ) (PA)

五、系統管理 (System Approach to Management) (SM)

六、持續改善 (Continual Improvement) (CI)

七、據實決策 (Factual Approach to Decision Making) (FD)

八、互利關係 (Mutually Beneficial Supplier Relationships ) (MS)

The questionnaire was designed to distribute to quality professionals included quality professional association/society members, quality professionals in manufacturing, testing & certification industry, and education institutions, as well as in related government department. It was distributed via email to 1053 professionals. The response rate was about 7% (73 valid reply). The survey period was from 1 to 14 Jan 2012 (within two weeks) and three reminder emails were followed. Before the commencement of survey, CE Primary Pan-Democrats (泛民特首候選人初選) was not performed (It was held on 8 Jan 2012.). Therefore, four candidates were considered in this survey.

HKSAR Chief Executive Candidates 2012 on 1st Jan 2012 were:

- Mr. Henry TANG Ying-yen (唐英年) (HT)

- Mr. LEUNG Chun-ying (梁振英) (CY)

- Mr. Albert HO Chun-yan (何俊仁) (AH)

- Mr. Frederick FUNG Kin-kee (馮檢基) (FF)

The participants' background information were shown as follows:

Position:

1) Top Management (e.g. CEO/VP/Director/Professor/GM) 14 (19.2%)

2) Senior Management (e.g. Sr. Manager/Manager/Consultant) 38 (52.1%)

3) Middle Management (e.g. Sr. Engineer/Teacher/Auditor) 9 (12.3%)

4) Technical Staff (e.g. Engineer) 11 (11.5%)

5) Front Line Staff (e.g. Technician) 1 (1.4%)

The Top and Senor Management was 71.3% (~71%).

Working Experience (WkEx):

1) 0yr to 5yr 5 (6.8%)

2) 6yr to 10yr 8 (11.0%)

3) 11yr to 20yr 23 (31.5%)

4) Above 20yr 37 (50.7%)

Participants had more than 10 years working experience was 82.2% (~82%).

Industry:

1) 服務業 (Service) 22 (30.1%)

2) 製造業 (Manufacturing) 29 (39.7%)

3) 金融業 (Finance) 2 (2.7%)

4) 地產業 (Land/Construction) 2 (2.7%)

5) 政府部門 / 非營利的 (Gov/Non-profit / University) 18 (24.7%)

Service, Manufacturing and Government/Non-profit/Univerity was about 94.5% (~95%).

The 8 capability survey results based on quality management principles would be analysized by using different statistical methods in "Survey Result and Analysis" and would be issued.

Reference:

ISO 9000:2000 - Quality management systems -- Fundamentals and vocabulary

Symposium on Food Identification and Authentication (Part 2)

2012-01-18T08:42:00.000-08:00

Symposium on Food Identification and Authentication was organized by Hong Kong Council for Testing and Certification (HKCTC) and Hong Kong Accreditation Service on 17 Jan 2012. The symposium is focus on general issues about food adulteration and authentication, as well as technical aspects of food authentication. The contents were summarized below for sharing.

Afternoon Session

The first speaker in afternoon session was Dr. Terence Lau (Chief Operating Officer, Hai Kang Life Corporation Limited, Hong Kong) and his topic named "Application of nucleic acid detection methods on food identification and authentication: an industry experience"

Dr. Lau introduced different applications of Nucleic Acid Testing (NAT) included Medical (Hepatitis, HIV, TB), Forensic (DNA profiling, paternity testing), Bioarchaelogoy (human/animal origins), Pharmaceutical (Drug screening) and Veterinary (animal virus screening). Recently, NAT employed for food testing included Food Allergen, Bacteria and Viruses. The following table compared the culture method and NAT method (PCR).

Then some applications of NAT on Food Safety and Quality Control were discussed.

Dr. Lau introduced that NAT Technology included Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), Nucieic Acid Sequence Based Amplification (NASBA), DNA Sequencing and biosensors, etc. He explained the advantage of NAT method such as Rapid, Accurate, Capable to handle virtually all sample types and matrices, and Able to detect targets that cannot be (or difficult to be) detected by other methods. (e.g. Norovirus, Campylobacter sp, etc.)

The following diagram showed that this method used for authentication of Chinese Medicinal Material. The other applications were included Cordyceps sinensis (冬蟲夏草) and Edible Bird Nest (燕窩).

This technique had three major techical considerations.

1. DNA degradation

2. Adulteration such as presence of small amount of true product in fake product

3. Requirement of reference materials (CRM).

Finally, Dr. Lau concluded that nucleic acid based detection methods were useful for species identification. Moreover, regulatory agencies including China SFDA and AQSIQ recognized the needs for the development DNA based methods for such purposes. A good and reliable approaches as provided by DNA based methods could help quality control and assurances in industry.

The second speaker was Dr. Claude Guillou and his presentation entitled "Progress in food products authentication and traceability with stable isotopes and spectroscopic fingerprinting techniques through European Research Projects".

Dr. Guillou questioned "You do not have a molecule or ion such as "Sauvignon" or "Bordeaux" in a wine! So how to check the variety and geographic origin?" Then he gave a detection of adulteration formula as following diagram.

It used the food chain to detect the isotopic based on their distribution.

The following diagram introduced NMR specific carbon isotopic ratios to determinate spirits and alcoholic drinks.

Using principal component analysis (PCA) on NMR fingerprinting grouped different wine characteristic. Dr. Guillou said that the isotopes and fingerprinting was based on the regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 and No 2082/92 including Protected Designation of Origin (PDO), Protect Geographical Indication (PGI) and Certificate of Specific Character (CSC). Finally, he concluded very powerful analytical systems was needed to develop a platform for sharing reference analytical data (e.g. TRACE).

The third speaker was Dr. Helen Grundy and her topic was "Does my food contain undisclosed products such as pork derivatives? Has my wine been adulterated? Proteomics, Metabolomics and IRMS methods to study food authenticity".

Dr. Grundy introduced gelatine which was a protein and lacked essential amino acids. It used extensively in the food industry.

Then she briefed the gelatine production in Europe that 70% were used in food. She said consumer needed for accurate product labelling, to be able to scientifically verify species and to support paper trail.

After that she mentioned application of NMR for different food product. For instance, 1H NMR spectroscopic analysis was able to observe biological processes that occurred during meat storage. The concentration of specific amino acids increased linearly over time, and the rate of increase was related to storage temperature.

Dr. Grundy introduced the use of isotopic as an unique fingerprint. The diagram showed the analysis of Chicken HCNS stable isotope data. Finally, Dr. Grundy summarized LC-MS/MS for gelatine species origin and addition of binding products; Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) for maturation of beef and authenticity of manuka honey; and Isotope ratio mass spectrometry for identifying geographic origin, synthetic or natural.

Mr. Matthew Ashworth (Institute of Environmental Science and Research Ltd, New Zealand) was the fourth speaker and his presentation named "Development of an ISO 17025 accredited, quantitative species identification assay for mixed meat products - a work in progress".

Firstly, Mr. Ashworth introduced his institute's background and its capability on food safety program as follow.

The he briefed the meal species identification through techniques, Instrumentation, QA approach and validation. The current techniques included Qualitative PCR based analysis using common primer and MultiNA microchip electrophoresis system.

The detection limits with PCR/MultiNA was discussed.

The QA and Quantitation challenges such as calibration and reproducibility were mentioned. Finally, he planned to assess capability of PCR based technique and considering to use of mass spectrometry.

Dr. Philippe Corbisier (European Commission Joint Research Centre, Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements, Belgium) was the fifth speaker and he presented the topic "Challenges for the Reliable Quantification of Genetically Modified Organisms by PCR Methods".

GMO control was requested from consumers.

Analytical method using real time-PCR to measure food and feed products which containing GMO based on the requirement of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003. (>0.9% GMO have to be labelled)

The analysis workflow from sample to result was showed in the diagram.

Certified Reference Material with known GM mass fraction was used for calibration.

Comparison of the calibration curves were discussed.

Proficiency test result was showed and HK Government Laboratory got a good result. Finally, Dr. Corbisier said GM quantification by PCR methods depended on a broader set of conditions that often considered. The qPCR had limited robustness and precision. Moreover, reference measurement systems (included adequate calibration) needed to be estblished and properly applied.

The last speaker of afternoon session was Dr. Daria CH Wong (HKAS) and her topic was "HKAS Accreditation Criteria on Molecular Testing of Food".

Limitations on applicability for DNA sequencing technique was discussed.

Dr. Daria introduced the HOKLAS Supplementary Criteria No. 43 - Species Identification by DNA Sequencing for Authentication Purpose.

1. Personnel

- Degree in molecular biology, biology, biochemistry or other relevant subjects

- 3 year relevant testing experience and 6 months experience in DNA sequencing

2. Environment

- Separate area for Post-PCR product purification and DNA sequencing

- Unidirectional movement of DNA material

3. Reagents and Equipment

- Extraction kits, PCR kits, sequencing kits

4. Method Validation

- Selection of target sequence

- Discriminatory power against different species

- Length of sequence (>500 base pairs)

-False positive rate and False negative rate

5. Measurement Traceability

- it shall match the relevant CRM/reference sequence at 98% or higher

6. Quality Assurance

- QC plan, Blanks, etc. (See diagram below)

Q&A Session

Reference:

HKCTC - http://www.hkctc.gov.hk/en/about.html

HKAS - http://www.itc.gov.hk/en/quality/hkas/about.htm

Symposium on Food Identification and Authentication (Part 1)

2012-01-17T08:49:00.001-08:00

In the beginning, Prof. Kwan Hoi Shan (Centre Director of Food Research Center, CUHK and Chairman of the Accreditation Advisory Board, HKAS) gave a welcoming remarks. He said that Food is one of four selected trade to be focus for development.

Group Photo

Morning Session

The first speaker was Dr. Roger Wood (Chairman of Analytical Methods Committee of the Royal Society of Chemistry, UK) and his topic entitled "Interesting tension between economics (fraud/adulteration) and safety"

Dr. Wood said "Food Fraud is a current issue but an old problem; it is economically significant. Foodadditives were commonly used and in the 18th and early 19th centuries many of them were poisonous."

Then Dr. Wood briefed food crisis history in European Union. (See the following two diagrams)

Finally Dr. Wood concluded that adulteration was widespread often with large economic consequences. But analytical procedures required now were very sophisticated, but so is the adulteration. However, economic considerations were driving forces for those who adulterate foods - safety concerns were normally secondary.

The second speaker was Dr. Claude Guillou (EU Wine Stable Isotope Databank, European Commission Joint Research Center, Ispra, Italy) and his presentation named "The European Union Wine stable isotope databank".

World distribution of vine area was showed below and it was used Isotopic techniques for the control of wine in the European Union.

Without control the wine in the past caused methanol wine terrible disaster.

The measuremens of the ratios (X-heavy/X-common) provided information about the botanica animal or geographic origin of the products.

NMR spectrum of isotopic ratio (D/H) was demonstrated.

The environmental isotopes were absorbed by the vine and were found in the wine. If it was out of reference data, the wine was identified as a Fraudulence.

Dr. Claude Guillou introduced an official method adopted by international Organization in Vine and Wine multi-component and multi-isotopic analysis.

Dr. Helen Grundy (Food and Environment Research Agency, UK) was the third speaker and her presentation was "Protection of consumers against false or misleading trade description of food"

Fera is a science agency of a UK government department - Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) and it provides high quality food and environment research to support other government depts, industry and EU.

Dr. Grundy briefed the definition of food adulteration and UK food fraud below:

Food adulteration definition - "... the process of extending or completely replacing a premium food product with cheaper ingredients for financial gain".

UK Food Fraud Definition - "... when food is deliberately placed on the market, for financial gain, with the intention of deceiving the consumer".

She introduced four techniques for identifying food adulteration

1) Authenticity by IRMS methods (Authenticating geographic origin)

2) Protein studies: Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometry

3) Metabolomics Applications - NMR

4) DNA techniques

"Proteomics: Determine species origin of gelatine" using second method was shown in following diagram.

"Identification and characterisation of antimicrobial components of Manuka honey" using NMR technique was demonstrated below.

Q&A Session

Prof. Kwan Hoi Shan was the fourth speaker and his topic was "DNA marker sequence database for authentication of dried seafood and tonic foodstuff in Hong Kong"

In the beginning, Prof. Kwan explained the role of a university to assist in the testing and certification industry.

He said the first stage development of platform for authentication of dried seafood and tonic food products were used Next Generation DNA Sequencing techniques to establish multiple DNA markers database, which targeted on 5 main dried seafood and tonic products included Fish Maw, Abalone, Dried Scallops, Sea cucumber and Bind's nest.

The simple workflow (in Chinese) was described.

BLAST result of DNA sequences for Abalone were showed.

Finally, Prof. Kwan demonstrated the sample DNA sequence database.

The fifth speaker was Mr. Tse Hon-ying (Customs & Excise Department, HKSAR Government) and his presentation entitled "Local legislation and enforcement situation for protection of consumers against false or misleading trade description in respect of foods sold in Hong Kong".

Mr. Tse introduced Trade Description Ordinance (TDO) Cap.362 in which aimed to prohibit false or misleading trade descriptions, false marks and mis-statements in respect of goods in the course of trade or business. There were 16 trade descriptions were under control in the following 3 diagrams.

Any person who commits an offence under the TDO is liable to a maximum fine of HK$500,000 and imprisonment for 5 years.

There were two enforcement works under TDO included Quick Response Team (QRT) and Product Monitoring Scheme (PMS). Then Mr. Tse said about testing involved in Food Identification and some cases sharing (e.g. Vegetables falsely represented as organic products and Fake Canned Abalone in Food Expo 2010)

The last speaker in the morning session was Mr. Ken Chung (General Manager, DCH Logistics Company Ltd.) and his presentation title was "Food safety visibility and traceability management application across the food supply chain".

Mr. Chung said Hong Kong food supply chain was not visiable and traceable. It needed to cross over each part in the food supply chain from the production original to customer.

He introduced one of his food supply chain management in red wine monitoring the temperature and humidity through RFID technology.

Then he proposed to establish establish a food safety public information platform between Mainland and Hong Kong.

Q&A Session

Reference:

HKCTC - http://www.hkctc.gov.hk/en/about.html

HKAS - http://www.itc.gov.hk/en/quality/hkas/about.htm

Hong Kong QFD Symposium 2012

2012-01-14T09:04:00.001-08:00

Hong Kong QFD Symposium 2012 was organized by Hong Kong Quality Function Deployment Association (HKQFDA) and supported by Six Sigma Institute (SSI), Hong Kong Society for Quality (HKSQ), The Institute of Purchasing & Supply of Hong Kong (IPSHK) and Hong Kong 5-S Association (HK5SA) on 14 Jan 2012. The aim of the symposium is to introduce Quality Function Deployment (QFD) to Hong Kong enterprises. The contents were summarized below for sharing.

In the beginning, Dr. Catherine Chan (President, HKQFDA) gave a welcome speech. She said that QFD had been widely applied in various industries for doing product and service development all over the world and it was a Japan-originated methodology. Then she introduced Prof. Yoji Akao who is the founder of QFD.

Prof. Sam Ho (Founder, HK5SA) was invited to be a Facilitator for the whole symposium. Moreover, he presented his magic for fun.

Mr. Glenn Mazur (Honorary President, HKQFDA) gave an opening speech and he said QFD was a strategy in organization. Moreover, he told us that he studied Japanese in 1969. Then he become Prof. Yoji Akao's interpreter and learnt QFD from him.

The first speaker was Prof. Yoji Akao (father of QFD) and his presentation entitled "Historical Development of QFD".

Prof. Akao said that QFD originated in the latter half of the 1960s in Japan. It aimed companies on doing product development. Recently, two major achievement were demonstrated as below.

1) In 2003, the "Guidelines for Quality Function Deployment" was included into JIS Q9025.

2) Microsoft has launched Visio-QFD Tool and "MindManager DS"made the construction of deployment table by Excel.

Then Prof. Akao shared his opinion on the accident of Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant. The nuclear reactor was built with many components and each component consists of a hug number of elements ranged from functional equipment, parts and processes. Those components were very important to the "quality of the system". Since QFD was able to visualize the enormous network and to locate the critical points of the network, all the demanded qualities (tacit knowledge), both the existing and hidden qualities, had to be extracted from the voice of the customer of each of the stakeholders. Therefore, he recommended to use QFD to view the "quality of the system" to secure the safety, including the location, for nuclear power plants.

After that Prof. Akao introduced the birth of QFD.

In 1960, companies started to pay attention to design the product to achieve quality.

In 1966, Oshiumi of Bridgestone Tire proposed a chart as "true quality was converted into substitute characteristics and connected to process parameters of production".

Prof. Akao had the idea of "viewpoint of quality design" when conducting a consultancy project at Fuji Automobile; and then he started the development of Quality Deployment (QD).

The first application of QD was conducted by Ueda, Nakamure and Watanuki; then the case was presented at the QC Congress in 1968.

After the project in Kobe Shipyard of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Co. on "What is the design quality for a ship?" QFD was developed for determining design quality.

During Q&A session, the most important parts was discussed to be "understanding what customer want". One interested question was "how to force government to use this concept?"

The second speaker was Dr. K.S. Chin (Associate Director, Centre of Systems Informatics and Engineering, SEEM Dept., CityU) and his topic named "QFD and Product Development". His talk included Lean Product Development (Lean PD), Customer-oriented PD, as well as, QFD and Lean PD.

Lean PD included Customer Focus, Design for Quality, Design for Cost and Time to Market to enhance the effective and efficient of Quality, Cost & Delivery (QCD).

The following diagram showed Lean PD by customer focus and demonstrated the waste that the product characteristics did not met customer requirements.

Customer Focus Cycle was introduced for Customer-oriented PD. QFD was employed in the step 2.

The whole process of Customer-oriented PD was showed in the following diagram.

Then Dr. Chin shared two case studies for QFD application experiences included software company and product with technological features. At the end he concluded that "QFD is not an easy process. It takes leadership and determination on the part of many people to dedicate the time and energy needed. But that effort pales in comparison to the effort expended in a poorly planned project."

The third speaker was Dr. Y.K. Chan (Chairman, Six Sigma Institute) and his presentation named "Application of Six Sigma in QFD Projects". Firstly, Dr. Chan introduced the concept of Six Sigma.

Then he briefed the Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) which used to design the product and process to eliminate defects before they occurred. Its structure framework was DMADV (Define, Measure, Analyze, Design and Verify). Moreover, he identified the QFD's position for Business Growth.

After that Dr. Chan introduced the combination of QFD and DFSS through different steps as following diagrams. QFD would be started after the Define Phase of DFSS.

QFD Phase 1 and DFSS Measure Phase: Voice of the customer was tied with measurable solution-independent critical customer requirements into design process.

QFD Phase 2 and DFSS Analyze Phase: Identify product characteristics related to critical customer requirements and then establish relationships, priority and targets of that requirements.

QFD Phase 3 and DFSS Design Phase: The highest priority process characteristics relating to key characteristics of the product design would have been identified and would be focus on any manufacturing process design work.

QFD Phase 4 and DFSS Verify Phase: The key controllable elements relating to the manufacturing process would have been identified and it would be the input of the process control plan.

Dr. Y.K. Chan concluded that QFD translated customer needs and expectations into appropriate design requirements and the results of being customer-driven would achieve total quality excellence.

Dr. Catherine Chan (QFD Black Belt & President, HKQFDA) was the fourth speaker and her topic called "Total Quality Management and QFD".

Firstly, she introduced different TQM approaches included Guru's Advocate, QCC activities, and application of QC & QM tools.

ISO 9001 certification, quality awards and model application were also a common TQM approaches.

Then she briefed three important issues of QFD included:

1. Shifts quality assurance from production planning to product development

2. Attains competitiveness by achieving customer satisfaction

3. Skillfully applies TQM principles and tools

Based on those issues and QFD characteristics such as logically alignment, Vertical & Horizontal Communication, and implementation via projects, she had a confident that QFD could support TQM on meeting today's challenges through innovation.

Finally, Dr. Catherine Chan concluded that QFD was a strategy for sustaining survival and attaining prosperity

Mr. Glenn Mazur (QFD Red Belt, Honorary President, HKQFDA) was the last speaker and his presentation named "Jurassic QFD". It was a very interesting topic.

This talk was related to the movie "Jurassic Park". The aim was to build the most realistic dinosaur ever seen. However, it was met many challenges.

Gemba (現場), observation in the real place, was employed for this project. It was found that 70% of the interaction between small children and animals is at the head and eye contact was essential.

It employed QFD to collect Voice of Customer (VOC) as follow table.

Mr. Mazur said that project was very successful and obtained different awards. One important term emphasized by Mr. Mazur in this topic was "Emotion Quality"!

After presentation of appreciation certificates to speakers, we took a group photo.

HKSQ members took a photo with Prof. Akao.

I took a photo in front of the symposum banner for memory.

Reference:

Hong Kong Quality Function Deployment Association (HKQFDA) - http://www.qfdhk.org/

Six Sigma Institute (SSI) - http://www.sixsigmainstitute.org/

Hong Kong Society for Quality (HKSQ) - http://www.hksq.org/index.asp

The Institute of Purchasing & Supply of Hong Kong (IPSHK) - http://www.ipshk.org/

Hong Kong 5-S Association (HK5SA) - http://www.hk5sa.com/hk5sa/hk5sa.htm

Evaluating Measurement Uncertainty (Part 2)

2012-01-13T08:07:00.001-08:00

Hong Kong Accreditation Service (HKAS) arranged "Analytical Quality Training Programme" from 9 to 13 Jan 2012. LGC experts were invited to provide this training. LGC is the UK’s designated National Measurement Institute for chemical and biochemical analysis , the National Reference Laboratory for a range of key areas, and is also the host organisation for the UK’s Government Chemist function.

The third training course named "Evaluating Measurement Uncertainty" from 12 to 13 Jan 2012. The training content was summarized for sharing.

Measurement Uncertainty (Part 2 on 13 Jan 2012)

Dr. Stephen Ellison continued the training and the morning topic named "Using data from validation studies". Most of content in this session was similar to the course "Method Validation - Part 2" on 11 Jan 2012. Such as the following methods employed for routing testing:

1. Collaborative trial method (self-explanatory)

2. In-house validation studies (self-explanatory)

3. Ad-hoc methods (exploratory studies in the short term)

4. Empirical methods (a standardized method agreed on for comparative measurement within a particular field of application)

He mentioned a "Fast Track" to measurement uncertainty estimates through effective data use. The diagram showed general procedure for uncertainty estimation. Then he summarized three points. They were to exam validation data, to check if any sources of uncertainty covered and factors not covered.

Ms. Vicki Barwick presented the topic "Cause and effect analysis - A tool for uncertainty estimation". She briefed five steps for uncertainty estimation below.

1. Specify what is being measured

2. For each stage of the measurement procedure list sources of uncertainty

3. Quantify the uncertainty components (Included Type A and B uncertainties)

4. Combine the values

5. Multiply by the coverage factor

She introduced four method to resolve duplication after constructed cause and effect diagram. There were:

1. Cancelling effects (Remove factors which had no net effect on the result)

2. Combining factors (Same effect, same time)

3. Re-labeling factors (Different instances)

4. Additional measures (restructure to group similar effects)

The following case showed combining (2) and grouping (4) the factors such as Temperature and Precision.

Cancellation (1) of the calibration bias was showed in the following case.

Reduced ambiguity in the following diagram showed Re-labeling (3) effect.

After that Ms. Vicki Barwick lead a Workshop named "Estimating the uncertainty for a complete analytical method - The determination of cholesterol by gas chromatography".

The scope of method was "The determination of cholesterol in animal and vegetable fats and oils" and the calculation formula was showed as follows.

The typical chromatogram was showed.

The final cause and effect diagram was illustrated and the workshop requested to resolue the duplication.

Afternoon session, Dr. Stephen Ellison introduced "Dealing with recovery data" which uncertainties associated with bias estimates. There were two main components that Rm was the method recovery and Rs was the matrix effect.

The following diagram was demonstrated the Rm. Rm = Cobs / Ccert

With u(Rm) = Rm x √{(u(Cobs)/Cobs)^2 + (u(Ccert)/Ccert)^2}

There were four cases:

Case1: Rm is not significantly different from 1 and no correction

Case2: Rm is significantly different from 1 and correction applied

Case3: Rm is significantly different from 1 and no correction (for operational reasons)

Case4: An empirical method is in use.

Case 1 - insignificant bias

Case 2 - with correction

Case 3 - without correction

The ISO approach did not allow for this situation. This allows the customer to decide for themselves how to deal with the recovery issue, and to estimate the uncertainty should they decide to correct the value.

Case 3 - without correction but increasing reported uncertainty

Overall uncertainty for bias with contribution of matrix effects was formulated as follows.

After that Ms. Vicki Barwick discussed "Precision data from validation".

Firstly, she explained the variation increased from repeatability condition (within batch) to intermediate precision (between measurement batches) to reproducibility condition (between laboratories).

The following table showed the effect of different factors. It was found that sample preparation and extraction were most important in these three conditions.

The following diagram showed a model of the relationship between measurement uncertainty and precision experiments. Its implication was "A factor that was representatively varied during the course of a precision experiment requires no further study".

"Precision from several estimates" was very important topic. It was due with different matrix or concentration level sample to calculate pooled relative standard deviation (pooled rsd).

The model would be used for calculating uncertainty at a single analyte concentration / precision.

The model would be used for calculating uncertainty over a range of analyte concentrations (precision proportional to concentration).

Dr. Stephen Ellison briefed other effects in validation studies. He discussed four common methods for considering additional effects included "Significance tests", "Calculations", "Experiments" and "Professional Judgement".

Calculations based on "worst case" changes in an uncertainty source was able to show quickly whether an effect was worth pursuing. Typical criteria were demonstrated.

Finally, Ms. Vicki Barwick presented the uncertainty for large concentration.

The diagram showed the uncertainty for routine methods included fixed term (s0) and concentration-dependent term (xs1). The two contributions were separately and as a combined curve in solid line. There were three regions.

Region A (Low levels): The uncertainty was generally effectively independent of observed analyte concentration.

Region C (High levels): The uncertainty was come from the concentration-dependent term and the contribution of fixed term was negligible.

Region B (Intermediate levels): The uncertainty estimation was neither dominated by a fixed term, nor by a relative term. (Further details in EURACHEM guide)

Last but not least, Dr. Stephen Ellison taught us "Using and conveying uncertainty information.

We discussed the interpretation against limits. Dr. Ellison said it only concluded that result (a) was compliance and result (g) was non-compliance. For more information, please refer to "Use of uncertainty information in compliance assessment" in Eurachem website.

Dr. Ellison (LGC, UK) is one of editors of EURACHEM/CITAC Guide "Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement" Second Edition (2001). I am pleasure to have his signature in my guide which I kept for more than ten years.

Reference:

HKAS - www.hkas.gov.hk

LGC - http://www.lgc.co.uk/

ISO/IEC 17025: General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories

UKAS M3003: The Expression of uncertainty and confidence in measurement - www.ukas.com

EA-4/16 EA Guidelines on the expression of uncertainty in quantitative testing - www.european-accreditation.org

ILAC G17:2002 Introducing the concept of uncertainty of measurement in testing in association with the application of the standard ISO/IEC 17025 - www.ilac.org

B Magnusson & S LR Ellison (2008) "Treatment of uncorrected measurement bias in uncertainty estimation for chemical measurements" Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 390, pp201-213.

Use of uncertainty information in compliance assessment - www.eurachem.org

Evaluating Measurement Uncertainty (Part 1)

2012-01-12T08:15:00.000-08:00

The third training course named "Evaluating Measurement Uncertainty" from 12 to 13 Jan 2012. The training content was summarized for sharing.

Measurement Uncertainty (Part 1 on 12 Jan 2012)

In the beginning, Ms. Vicki Barwick introduced What and Why to evaluate measurement uncertainty.

She quoted the ISO definition of Measurement Uncertainty as "A parameter, associated with the result of a measurement, that characterises the dispersion of the values that could reasonably be attributed to the measurand"

Ms. Barwick explained the different between Error and Uncertainty.

- ERROR is a difference (measured value - true value).

- UNCERTAINTY is a range.

- ERROR needs to know a true value, but UNCERTAINTY needs not be known.

Then she showed the comparison of different lab results based on precision and uncertainty.

After the introduction, Dr. Stephen Ellison performed a review session called "Statistics refresher". It is because measurement uncertainty estimation relies in part on statistical principles.

He introduced different distributions (i.e. Normal, Rectangular and Triangular) which were commonly used in calculating measurement uncertainty. And then mean, sample standard deviation (s), relative standard deviation (rsd), standard deviation of the mean (sdm) and confidence intervals were briefed.

Next session named "ISO measurement uncertainty principles" was presented by Ms. Vicki Barwick.

The background to the ISO Guide was briefed. The earliest ISO Guide had published since 1993. It is now very widely accepted because of globalization trades.

She said ISO recommended that uncertainties arose from several contributions (as standard deviation) and two ways of evaluating uncertainty components. They were statistical (Type A) and otherwise (Type B) uncertainty. The following assumptions were used in this ISO approach. It should be expressed as "expanded uncertainty" for additional confidence.

Dr. Stephen Ellison introduced some rules for uncertainty calculation included converting data to standard uncertainties and combining uncertainties. Firstly, he briefed standard deviation of the mean (s/√n) and the calculation of confidence interval (x + (t * s)/√n). (Details please see the training summary on 9 Jan 2012)

The most common Type B standard uncertainty was rectangular distribution and calculation was showed below (a/√3).

In combining uncertainties, sensitivity coefficient was discussed. It is the gradient of the line relating y and xi (variation).

The diagram illustrated how to calculate the uncertainty in a measured volume due to change in temperature. It is a very good example to explain the sensitivity coefficient in graphic method.

He said the combination of uncertainties had four types. They were Addition, Subtraction, Product and Quotient. Combination of uncertainties for Addition or Subtraction were to square root the sum of square for all standard uncertainties which had already considered the sensitivity coefficient. For Product or Quotient, the uncertainties were expressed as relative standard deviations (See diagram below).

Finally, the expanded uncertainty was combined uncertainty times coverage factor (k). k was set to 2 for most practical purposes.

The next session was "Quantifying Uncertainty Components" and Ms. Vicki Barwick explained it in five dimensions. They were Random Variation, Systematic Variation, Calculation, Published Information and Experience.

She discussed the random variation. In nested design experiment, ANOVA was the normal way of analysing the data.

Then she discussed the systematic variation using regression analysis. The experimental sensitivity coefficient (gradient) was calculated.

Numerical calculation was introduced. The uncertainty from individual factor (e.g. Volume) could be identified by the difference between concentration due to uncertainty in the volume and original concentration calculated without considered such uncertainty. Using spreadsheets to calculate all factors' uncertainty and then calculate the combined uncertainty. This calculation had already included sensitivity coefficient.

After that Dr. Stephen Ellison taught us to use spreadsheet to evaluating uncertainty.

Some advantages were mentioned below.

At the end, Ms. Vicki Barwick discussed how to handle precision data. There were two method to estimate precision:

1. By combining variability from input parameters (e.g. Replicate weighting of a check weight)

2. By directly observing output variability (e.g. Reproducibility data from a collaborative trial)

Then she introduced two approaches to dealing with precision. It was either to evaluate the individual precision terms or to obtain a single overall precision estimate for the method as a whole.

Reference:

HKAS - www.hkas.gov.hk

LGC - http://www.lgc.co.uk/

ISO/IEC 17025: General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories

UKAS M3003: The Expression of uncertainty and confidence in measurement - www.ukas.com

EA-4/16 EA Guidelines on the expression of uncertainty in quantitative testing - www.european-accreditation.org

ILAC G17:2002 Introducing the concept of uncertainty of measurement in testing in association with the application of the standard ISO/IEC 17025 - www.ilac.org

Method Validation (Part 2)

2012-01-11T07:28:00.001-08:00

The second training topic was "Method Validation" from 10 to 11 Jan 2012. The training content was summarized for sharing.

Method Validation (Part 2 on 11 Jan 2012)

Firstly, Dr. Stephen Ellison discussed "Selectivity". Selectivity and specificity relate to the ability of a method to provide an accurate answer in the presence of potential interferents.

Dr. Stephen Ellison briefed the definitions as follows:

[IUPAC]: Selectivity - The extent to which the method can be used to determine particular analytes in mixtures or matrices without interferences from other components of similar behaviour.

[ICH]: Specificity - ... the ability to assess unequivocally the analyte in the presence of components which may be expected to be expected to be present.

Then he introduced some typical experiments to identify interferents. (Usually use in biological material)

During the workshop, we identified the interferents through the results of interference check. In this example, Aniline and Ethanolamine were identified because it had much higher effects (+0.164 mg/l and + 0.114 mg/l) than typical standard deviation (0.002 mg/l and 0.007 mg/l).

After that Dr. Stephen Ellison discussed "Detection Limit". In some applications, particularly clinical and medical, the term sensitivity is often associated with the lower limit of applicability of a method. He told us three concepts to consider in discussing the lower limit of performance of a method below.

Critical Value - instrument response used to trigger action

Detection Limit - amount of substance leading to action

Quantitation Limit - lowest level at which uncertainty is acceptable

(An interesting statement quoted in the note from Kurtz (1988) about detection limit is "The usual reason we want to measure a detection limit is to stay away from it".)

(Another course entitled "Statistics for Method Validation" organized by HKAS on 27 Oct 2011 had also discussed it.)

The following diagram showed setting limits to control errors. There were two types of error.

1. False positive: (Type I error - α) Wrongly declaring a substance to be present

2. False negative: (Type II error - β) Wrongly declaring a substance absent

The following two diagram showed the equations to calculate critical value and detection limit.

where

x0 is a correction term to deal with baseline (or blank sample, correction)

s is the standard deviation observed during the LoD estimation study

kl is a constant used to correct s.

t(v,α) is the one-tailed value of Student's t for a probability α and v degrees of freedom (v=n-1).

The table showed How to choose x0 and kl.

Instrument's detection limit (iDL) estimated from some measure of the noise. The principle is very similar to setting a limit from the standard deviation of blank values; simply mulitply the standard deviation of the noise sn by an appropriate factor (usually 3). iDL = baseline + 3 * sn

In the second session, Ms. Barwick introduced "Linearity and Working Range". Linearity was "Defines the ability of the method to obtain test results proportional to the concentration of analyte." (AOAC-PVMC).

The diagram showed a typical response curve. Ms. Barwick said to establish what calibration strategy was appropriate which based how many levels and replication at each level.

Ms. Barwick discussed the linearity between instrument and whole method. The following diagram showed some calibration could be non-linear. Some theory / experience indicated that a particular technique should follow a known mathematical function.

Another workshop was to develop a validation plan based on Selectivity, Detection Limit and Linearity/working range.

Last topic was briefed by Dr. Stephen Ellison. It was "Measurement uncertainty and validation studies". ISO definition of measurement uncertainty is "A parameter, associated with the result of a measurement, that characterises the dispersion of the values that could reasonably be attributed to the measurand".

Dr. Stephen Ellison introduced five steps to quantify Measurement Uncertainty.

1. Specify what is being measured

2. For each stage of the measurement procedure list sources of uncertainty

3. Quantify the uncertainty components

4. Combine the values

5. Multiply by "coverage factor" (k)

The following diagram showed the step 3.

Finally, Dr. Ellison mentioned Measurement Uncertainty in different real situations below.

1. Collaborative trial method (self-explanatory)

2. In-house validation studies (self-explanatory)

3. Ad-hoc methods (exploratory studies in the short term)

4. Empirical methods (a standardized method agreed on for comparative measurement within a particular field of application)

Collaborative trial method (refer to ISO 21748)

- bias and precision verified in-house

- main effects studied by developers

In-house validation study

- precision, bias, major effects

Empirical methods (Coverage)

- it is nearly always collaboratively trialled before standardizing.

Reference:

HKAS - www.hkas.gov.hk

LGC - http://www.lgc.co.uk/

"Statistics for Method Validation" which was organized by Hong Kong Accreditation Service (HKAS) on 27 Oct 2011

Kurtz et al in LA Currie (ed) (1988) Detection in Analytical Chemistry. Importance, Theory and Practice, American Chemical Society, Washington DC.

ISO 21748: Guidance for the use jof repeatability, reproducibility and trueness estimates in measurement uncertainty estimation.

Method Validation (Part 1)

2012-01-10T07:31:00.000-08:00

The second training topic was "Method Validation" from 10 to 11 Jan 2012. The training content was summarized for sharing.

Method Validation (Part 1 on 10 Jan 2012)

Firstly, Dr. Stephen Ellison presented the topic named "Introduction to method validation". The definition of "Validation" in ISO/IEC 17025 is "Confirmation by examination and the provision of objective evidence that the particular requirements for a specific intended use are fulfilled". Dr. Ellison said the three important parts of validation are "specific intended use", "objective evidence" and "confirmation".

He explained why method validation was necessary. It was because of four dimensions to be considered such as Ethical, Commercial, Regulatory and Quality Assurance. For validation plan, the following parameters should be concerned. They were "Selectivity/specificity", "Trueness", "Precision", "Working Range", "Robustness" and "Sensitivity".

The Dr. Ellision told about how to build a validation protocol. It included "Purpose", "Performance Criteria", "Test Plan" and "Interpretation".

Method validation is a process of developing a sufficient picture of a method's performance to demonstrate that it is fit for use (or an intended purpose). The validation puzzle was shown. Dr. Ellision said we needed to decide what parts of the puzzle were essential and how sharp a focus was necessary.

Ms. Vicki Barwick presented the topic "Precision". Based on ISO 3534-2006, Precision defined as "The closeness of agreement between independent test/measurement results obtained under stipulated conditions".

Then she introduced different precision estimates as follows:

1. Repeatability - same lab, analyst, equipment, short time interval (it typically used for studying variation within a batch of analyses)

2. Intermediate precision - within lab variation, different days, analysts, equipment

3. Reproducibility - different lab, analysts, equipment (it typically used to study between laboratory variation in measurements)

The following diagram showed the effect of varying conditions.

The following diagram showed the confidence interval for the population standard deviation (σ), plotted against the number of independent replicates (n). It was observed that (n) beyond around 15 replicates had little change in the confidence interval.

Besides, Ms. Vicki Barwick introduced the structure and analysis of nested designs to evaluation the method's precision. It could be use analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare the variation in results between days, with the variation within days.

The following diagram showed the formula of the standard deviation of intermediate precision (Sbetween). The standard deviation of precision was Swithin and the standard deviation of reproducibility was Sc.

Lastly, Ms. Barwick mentioned about the comparison between results by using precision limits. The general form of the precision limit (r) is: r = t * Sr * √2

After that Dr. Stephen Ellison briefed the Bias which was different between observed mean value and reference value.

There were three expressions of bias as follows.

- Absolute value: x - x0

- Fraction or Percentage: (x - x0)/x0 or 100 * (x - x0)/x0

- Recovery (Fraction or Percentage): x/x0 or 100 * x/x0

Different situations demonstrated the statistical and practical significance bias. They were not necessarily the same.

Designing experiments to study the bias of a new analytical method, the sufficient replicates required. The following diagram showed the relationship between the change in standard deviation and number of replicates.

The last session, Ms. Vicki Barwick introduced "Ruggedness Testing" (also named Robustness Testing). It was defined as "Intra-laboratory study to examine the behaviour of an analytical process when small changes in the environmental and/or operating conditions are made ... Allows information to be obtained on effects of minor changes in a quick and systematic manner" by Association of Official Analytical Chemists - Peer Verified Methods Committee (AOAC-PVMC).

Ruggedness testing used to identify which parameters were required control when the method was used routinely. Therefore, it needed to identify key method parameters and used the results of ruggedness testing to control these key parameters. The typical key parameters were showed below.

Ms. Barwick briefed the Plackett-Burman experimental design as follows:

1. Identify 7 experimental parameters (A to G) for study

2. Identify normal (A to G) and alternative (a to g) values for each parameter

3. Carry out experiments on a representative sample or reference material

After run of experiments, calculation of the difference for each parameter was needed.

For parameter A, D(A) = [(s+t+u+v)/4] - [(w+x+y+z)/4], indicating normal results minus alternative results.

And then Ms. Barwick used the t-test to check significance.

The parameters in the diagram means were showed below:

Di = difference observed for parameter i

s = estimate of method precision as a standard deviation

n = number of experiments at each level for each parameter (n=4)

The √2 term is required to take account of the fact that Di is calculated from the difference between two mean values.

At the end, Ms. Barwick used the flow chart to explain how significant parameters on the method was controlled more tightly.

Reference:

HKAS - www.hkas.gov.hk

LGC - http://www.lgc.co.uk/

For study of Bias: NIST special publication 829: Use of NIST Standard Reference Materials for decisions on performance of analytical chemical methods and laboratories.

Statistics for Analytical Chemists

2012-01-09T07:35:00.001-08:00

The first day training topic was "Statistics for Analytical Chemists" and I was pleasure to be one of participants in the training. The training content was summarized for sharing.

In the beginning, Dr. John Ho (Accreditation Office, HKAS) introduced the two speakers. They were Dr. Stephen Ellison and Ms. Vicki Barwick from LGC.

Dr. Stephen Ellison presented the first topic entitled "Introduction to statistics". He introduced some fundamental statistic concept such as population, sample, distribution, mean, standard deviation, confidence intervals, etc.

He explained in general that the degrees of freedom is the number of data points (n) less the number of parameters already estimated from the data. (v = n - 1)

The concept of relative standard deviation (rsd) was introduced which also call coefficient of variation (CV). rsd = CV = s / ū

Then he also briefed the standard deviation of the mean (sdm) that the number of observations in each 'sample' increases, so the sdm values becomes smaller. It formed an estimate of the uncertainty of the mean value.

The second part speaker was Ms. Vicki Barwick and she introduced Significance Testing - Difference involving mean values: The t test.

She mentioned the two particularly common tests were called t and F, and were used for testing means and standard deviations respectively. There were 8 significance testing procedures below.

1. State the question

2. Select the correct test

3. Choose a level of significance (usually α = 0.05)

4. Decide number of tails

5. Calculate degrees of freedom from the data

6. Look up the critical value

7. Calculate the test statistic from the data

8. Compare test statistic with critical value or inspect 'p-values'

The follow diagram showed the decision of one-tailed or two-tailed for different hypotheses.

The Ms. Vicki Barwick introduced two types of t test for comparing means. The following form is valid only if the two data sets have similar standard deviations.

In the following diagram, the paired sets of results used the paired-t test that t was calculate using the mean difference. In each pair, the different coloured circles could represent different treatments, different method, or a different time, analyst or other change.

And then Dr. Stephen Ellison explained the F-test.

We used the F-test to comparing spread. The spread of sets of data were compared to:

1. Decide whether a difference in spread is real, or just a product of random variation

2. Decide whether two data sets really could be looking at the same thing

The following diagram showed the rules for the F-test. For one-tailed test, it is for s1^2 > s2^2; there is no need to carry out the test if s1^2 < s2^2. For two-tailed test, put the largest variance on the top line of the ratio to calculate F.

After lunch, Dr. Stephen Ellison demonstrated why use of ANOVA and some participants were invited to help for this demonstration.

The ANOVA table was explained that the Sum of Squares (SS) included Between Groups (b), Within Groups (w) and Total (tot).

The following diagram showed SS(b) = SS(tot) - SS(w), where F = MS(b)/MS(w). It uses one-tailed test and F>F-crit means the differences between groups of data are significant compared to within group variation.

In one-way ANOVA,

the null hypothesis (H0) is: There is no different between the within group Mean Square (MS) and the between groups MS.

the alternative hypothesis (H1) is: The between groups MS is greater than the within group MS.

Lastly, Ms. Vicki Barwick mentioned Linear Regression which used to establish or confirm a quantitative relationship (e.g. Calibration) and to find out whether a linear relationship exists.

Then She brief the 5 general procedures of linear regression step by step.

1. Inspect the data and scatterplot

2. Calculate the fitted line

3. Inspect the residuals

4. Inspect the regression statistics

5. Calculate the predicted values and their confidence limits

The residual plots were useful to interpret the nature of data such as curved response and showed below.

The following diagram is used for interpreting the correlation coefficient (r). The significance of the r value depends on the number of data points used to calculate it. If absolute r value lying in the shaded region, it is to be considered statistically significant at the 95% confidence level.

At the end, the prediction interval of using linear regression was briefed.

Reference:

HKAS - www.hkas.gov.hk

LGC - http://www.lgc.co.uk/

Time-Management Strategy - How to Make Managers More Productive and Happier

2012-01-06T07:19:00.001-08:00

The First Topic of January 2012 seminar named “Time-Management Strategy - How to Make Managers More Productive and Happier”, which organized by An Executive Study Group under the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) and the Hong Kong Science and Technology Parks Corp (HKSTPC) on 6 January 2012.

Mr. Mark Lee (MBA, CUHK) presentation content included “Working Hour Comparison of Hong Kong and Other Countries”, “The Importance of Energy for Managers”, “Organization Support” and “Group Discussion”.

Firstly, Mr. Lee introduced the survey of the opinions over 12,000 business people in 85 countries and found that over half of Hongkongers work nine or more hours per day and almost 40% regularly take home to finish in the evening.

It is because of negative loop of long working hours. Then Mr. Lee quoted Warren Buffett statement that "Chains of habit are too light to be felt until they are too heavy to be broken".

Mr. Lee explained Four Main Wellsprings which could help managers to manage energy stopping the negative loop. They were "Body", "Emotions", "Mind" and "Spirit". Why it needs to implement energy management program (Terms better than time management program)? He quoted Dr. Harry Levinson (Industrial Psychologist) that "Managers tend to rely on their best people; but best people are more vulnerable to becoming burned-out people". It could be verified by the case study that participants employed the energy management program and got the better outcome.

The 1st Main Wellsprings - The Body (Physical Energy)

It was found that managers were inadequate nutrition, exercise, sleep and rest. Mr. Lee said the most important was to have a sufficient sleep. He quoted Dr. Robert Stickgold (Asso. Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School) said "A midday nap reverses information overload". It was good for designed breaks to recharge.

The 2nd Main Wellsprings - The Emotions (Quality of Energy)

Mr. Lee said even good management could de-motivate people because of finger-pointing as feedbacks from management. He said management should use "appreciation", "empowerment" and "independence".

The 3rd Main Wellsprings - The Mind (Focus of Energy)

Mr. Lee said multitasking increased 25% amount of time because of long setup time. From case study, it suggested to concentrate the 1st hour before Email Inbox so as to avoid non-stop email reply.

The 4th Main Wellsprings - The Human Spirit (Energy of Meaning and Purpose)

Sense of meaning, purpose and value was very important after experienced the value of the other dimensions energies (Physical, Emotion and Mind).

Finally, Mr. Lee said that top management support for using Energy Management was the key successful factor.

The following diagram showed how to use energy management to align people between manager and leader.

At the end of the seminar, we had an exercise to find out two of the most difficult thing to do and one of the easiest thing to do from 9 items.

After the seminar, my interpretation for restoring four dimension of energies included: 1) Sleep Early (Body); 2) Think Positive (Emotion); 3) Focus and Plan in the Morning (Mind); and 4) Link Work with You Interested Item to be Win-Win (Spirit).

Reference:

The Centre for Logistics Technologies and Supply Chain Optimization, CUHK: http://www.logitsco.cuhk.edu.hk/

HKSTP - www.hkstp.org

ANQ Congress 2012 – Call for Paper

2012-01-01T05:44:00.000-08:00

Asian Network for Quality (ANQ) Congress 2012 was co-organized by China Association for Quality (CAQ), Hong Kong Society for Quality (HKSQ) and The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST) from 31 July to 3 August 2012 in Hong Kong. It is the 10th anniversity of ANQ Congress in 2012.

"Striving for Excellence through Product and Service Quality" – "優化品質、邁向卓越" is the theme of the Congress. Quality is multidimensional and it is a main driver of competitive differentiation among various types of organizations in Asia and around the world. Managing product and service quality involves a wide range of activities that span from the time when a new product/service idea is created to the stage of providing ongoing support and making contributions to improvement of human life. Product and service quality, stakeholder satisfaction, profitability and sustainable prosperity are intimately connected. The complete "product/service offering" is what customers look for and evaluate, as stated in the ANQ Way.

The following diagram showed the ANQ Way. (Details please visit at http://www.anforq.org/ANQWAY.asp)

Submission of Abstracts and Full Papers
Original paper contributions that are relevant to the theme are invited. The abstracts (2 A-4 pages) written in your local language or in English must be submitted together with a completed Abstract Submission Form (one form for each abstract) to a member of the local ANQ Organization of your region/country who serves on the ANQ 2012 Program Committee, by February 15, 2012. Contact information on the local Program Committee members can be found at the Congress website. If you are not from an ANQ region / country, please send your submission(s) in English only directly to the Program Committee of ANQ Congress 2012 by email. (For more information, please visit at http://www.anq2012.org/papers.html)

Summary of past ANQ Congress

Introduction of Asian Network for Quality (ANQ) - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2007/10/introduction-of-asian-network-for.html

1st ANQ Congress 2003 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2007/10/1st-anq-2003-in-beijing-china.html

2nd ANQ Congress 2004 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2007/10/2nd-anq-congress-in-new-delhi-india.html

3rd ANQ Congress 2005 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2007/10/3rd-anq-congress-in-taipei-chinese.html

4th ANQ Congress 2006 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2007/10/4th-anq-congress-in-singapore-2006.html

5th ANQ Congress 2007 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2007/10/5th-anq-congress-in-incheon-korea-2007.html

6th ANQ Congress 2008 -

Part 1 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2008/10/anq-2008-part-1.html

Part 2 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2008/10/anq-2008-part-2.html

Part 3 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2008/10/anq-2008-part-3.html

Part 4 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2008/10/anq-2008-part-4.html

Part 5 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2008/10/anq-2008-part-5.html

7th ANQ Congress 2009 -

Part 1 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2009/09/anq-2009-opening-technical-seminar-i.html

Part 2 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2009/09/anq-2009-technical-seminar-ii-closing.html

Part 3 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2009/09/anq-2009-farewell-party.html

Part 4 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2009/09/anq-2009-technical-visit-to-nissan.html

8th ANQ Congress 2010 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2010/09/8th-asia-network-for-quality-anq.html

9th ANQ Congress 2011 -

Part 1 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2011/09/anq-2011-board-meeting.html

Part 2 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2011/09/anq-2011-day-1.html

Part 3 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2011/09/anq-2011-day-2.html

Part 4 - http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2011/09/anq-2011-farewell-party.html

Reference:

Asian Network for Quality (ANQ) - http://www.anforq.org/

ANQ 2012 - http://www.anq2012.org/

HKSQ - http://www.hksq.org/index.asp

CAQ - http://www.caq.org.cn/Htm/English/Index.asp

HKUST - http://www1.ielm.ust.hk/

Activities Summary 2011

2011-12-30T03:44:00.000-08:00

I would like to summarize all quality related activities I participated in 2011 as follows:

Seminar x42, Training x3, Visit x7 and Conference x7;
Arrange visit to HKSTP x4, Invited Speaking x8 and Professional Gathering x 17

Seminar:
(YYYYMMDD)
20110107: Seminar on Characterization Methods for Printed Circuit Board (PCB) Industry (HKSTP & HKEIA)
20110117: Seminar on "7 Ways to Grow More with Less" (Executive Study Group of CUHK)
20110120: Seminar on Data Privacy: Practical Guides for Data Users in Business (HKSTP)
20110123: 「全球公民：全球化時代的通識教育」公眾研討會 (HKIEd & SynergyNet)
20110131: Seminar - The Meaning of Accreditation to Medical Testing (HKCTC & HKAS)
20110217: SUCCESS 2011/12 SME Mentorship Programme (SUCCESS of TID)
20110219: Seminar on "Applications of Tandem Mass Spectrometry Techniques in Food/Drug and Environmental Industry" (HKSTP, HKSMS & HKCS)
20110228: Seminar - Business Opportunities for Testing and Certification in the Mainland of China (HKCTC, TID, HKAS)
20110302: OUHK Testing and Certification Industry Summit (檢測及認證高峰會) (OUHK)
20110304: The President's Lecture Series: Excellence in Academia entitled "Reliability Challenges Using Nano Technologies" (CityUHK)
20110325: Seminar on Drug Testing Technology (HKCTC, NDSB, DoH, HKGovLab, HKTIC & HKSCC)
20110327: Technical Seminar on Product Testing and Certification (MEEM of CityU, IETHK, InstMC(HK) & PSES, HKSQ & HKTIC)
20110331: Seminar on Quantum Efficiency Measurements in Solar Cells (HKSTP)
20110401: Seminar on "Leverage Balanced Scorecard to Achieve Strategic Goals" (Executive Study Group of CUHK)
20110402: HKSQ student project competition presentation
20110408: Introduction to Certification for the Tourism and Hotel Industry (TUV)
20110411: Seminar on Reliability of Nuclear Power (HKIE)
20110416: Seminar on "From Tea to Business Philosophy (由茶道到商道)" (EngDS, CityU)
20110418: Seminar on QFD for Product Development (HKQFDA & PolyU)
20110428: Seminar on Toys Product Testing – Latest Development and Business Opportunities (HKCTC, HKTC, HKAS & VTC)
20110506: Seminar on "The Success Secrets of Japan's Richest Man from UNIQLO" (Executive Study Group of CUHK)
20110625: Seminar on "What is the direction of Hong Kong Competitiveness? How to establish the Innovation and Technology Bureau?" (TechMatrix)
20110715: Seminar on "China Strategy - 6 Strategies of Mainland Companies to Compete with Multinationals" (Executive Study Group of CUHK)
20110723: Seminar on "Chinese Medicine Development Strategy in Hong Kong" (「香港中醫藥發展策略」研討會) (PPRI, CBC of PolyU & MCMIA)
20110729: HKSQ AGM and Seminar on "Corporate Quality Strategies in a Globalization Environment (全球化環境下的企業質量戰略)"
20110803: Seminar on "Specifications of Competency Standards (SCS)-based Course and HKQF Support Scheme" (HKQF)
20110816: Seminar on "Service Gauge" (HKQAA)
20110826: Seminar on "Strategic Inventory Management: Successful Formulas that Market Leaders Are Using Everyday" (Executive Study Group of CUHK)
20110826: Seminar on "Quality Function Deployment (QFD)" (HKSQ & HKQFDA)
20110907: Seminar on "Responding to Nuclear Releases" (HKIE)
20110916: Seminar on Supports to Testing & Certification Industry (HKCTC, HKAS & HKSTP)
20110923: Seminar named "Steve Jobs and Market Leader's Innovation Secrets for Breakthrough Success" (Executive Study Group of CUHK)
20111019: Power Quality Workshop (HKSTP)
20111103: Ethical Management Seminar for Testing and Certification Industry (HKCTC, HKAS, ICAC & VTC)
20111104: Service Quality Seminar (HKSQ)
20111121: Seminar on "2011 Future of Quality Study - Emergence" (HKSQ & ASQ)
20111122: Seminar on "Business Excellence with Innovative Improvements" (HKSTP & HKSQ)
20111123: Seminar on "Supports to Construction Industry - How Product Certification Helps in Risk Management" (HKCTC & HKAS)
20111203: Seminar on Introduction to TRIZ (HKSQ & ISIHK)
20111206: Android Developer Lab in Science Park (HKSTP)
20111209: 深港「雲計算及數據中心」合作集思會暨交流計劃啓動式 (Cloud Computing & Data Centre Seminar) (ITC & ITJC)
20111217: Seminar on "Voice of Customer" (HKSQ & HKQFDA)

Training:
20110622: Technical Workshop - On-Site Detection of Radioactive Contamination (HKAS, HKCTC & CUHK)
20100911-1218: General Education and Public Affairs Certificate Course (通識及公共事務證書課程) (「新力量網絡」與香港教育學院合辦)
20111027: Training Course on Statistics for Method Validation (HKAS)

Visit:
20110121-22: Study Mission to visit ZhaoQing Asia Aluminium Factory Co., Ltd. (肇慶亞洲鋁廠有限公司) and Leading Edge Construction Materials Testing Co., Ltd (領鋒建材檢測有限公司) (HKSQ)
20110311: Factory Visit to TDK-EPC HK Ltd. (HKSQ Student Project Competition)
20110323: Visit BCH Laboratories in City University of Hong Kong (Personal for Zebrafish project)
20110402: HKSQ member & CityU student visit CMA Testing and Certification Laboratories Ltd.
20110423: Visit and Experience Exchange to HKSQ Corporate Member (TDK-EPC)
20110429: Technical Visit to JBT and ASD Shenzhen Factories (HKSQ)
20111105: Visit to Organic Farm in Hong Kong (HKSQ, ASQ & HKFSTA)

Conference:
20110416-18: ASQ World Conference on Quality and Improvement 2011
20110615-17: "TQM Kaz–2011" International Quality Forum in Kazakhstan (IAQMA)
20110927-30: Asian Network for Quality (ANQ) Congress 2011 in Ho Chi Minh City of Vietname
20111026: The 2nd Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Conference (HKSTP)
20111115-17: InnoAsia 2011 - Energy Efficiency, Sustainable Future (HKSTP)
20111126: HKQAA Symposium 2011 - Performing Your Social Responsibility to Recreate the World (HKQAA)
20111216: Digital Media Marketing Conference 2011 (WTIA & HKSTP)

Visit to HKSTP:
20110129: The Open University of Hong Kong (OUHK) student visit HKSTP
20110312: HKSQ & CityU Industrial Visit to HKSTP Laboratories 2011
20110419: Shenzhen Association for Quality (SZAQ) visit to HKSTP
20110628: MBA School of Zhejiang Gongshang University visit to HKSTP

Invited Speaking:
20110413: HKU Quality Management Student Forum (HKU)
20110611: Laboratory Management Workshop in the University of Macau
20110615-17: "TQM Kaz–2011" International Quality Forum in Kazakhstan (IAQMA)
20110901: My article entitled "Quality as a Service: Testing and Certification Industry in Hong Kong" was issued in Competitive Advantage which was published by ASQ Service Quality Division in Aug 2011.
20111026: Guest speaker to give a talk to HKUST students who are studying the subject “IELM 001/2: Academic and Professional Development”
20111104: HKU Guest Lecture for the subject "IMSE 2009 Quality Management"
20111110: Guest Seminar for CityU BETQE student in World Quality Day
20111202: IVE Open Day Seminar on Testing and Certification Industry in Hong Kong

Professional Gathering:
20110103: Qualifications Framework Cocktail Reception 2011
20110305: Hong Kong RFID Limited Grand Opening Ceremony (HK RFID Ltd. In HKSTP)
20110312: Hong Kong Association for Testing, Inspection and Certification Ltd. (HKTIC) 30th Anniversary cum Spring Gathering
20110318: ToloMix Gathering - iPad2 (Dr. Samson Tam)
20110326: Dinner with ASQ Service Quality Division Representatives (Ms. Lori Dellinger, ASQ Service Quality Division - Chair and Jan Peace,– Secretary) (HKSQ & ASQ)
20110328: Lunch with Mr. John Fowler (ASQ Global Managing Director) (HKSQ & ASQ)
20110330: CityU - Professionalism: The Authentic Recipe Dinner Event (CityUHK)
20110419: Lunch with Prof. Yoji Akao
20110420: CAQ & HKSQ meeting in HKUST
20110505: ISSC Six Sigma Networking Night 2011
20110609: Six Sigma Society of Hong Kong - Fellowship Dinner
20111010: Meeting with ASQ Global Representative - Mr. Tommy Tam (ASQ Global new market development director)
20111103: Dinner with Croatian Society for Quality Representative - Mr. Sinisa Prugovecki (Secretary of CSQ)
20111113: Celebration Dinner for EngD Graduates 2011 (SEEM of CityUHK)
20111210: Hong Kong Food Science and Technology Association Annual Dinner
20111213: HKTIC AGM and Annual Gathering
20111215: Dinner with SQI Vice Chairman (Mr. Chua Wee Kwang)

Christmas Trip in China

2011-12-27T06:16:00.001-08:00

I took this Christmas holiday to visit Chaozhou (The trip called “南澳島、汕頭市、饒平土樓、潮州古城聖誕節三天遊”). On the way, many wind turbines to generate electricity were observed, indicating that China needed more renewable energy.

We passed the Shantou Bridge.

Then I arrived at Raoping Earthen Building (饒平土樓).

Buildings were built according to the rule of Eight Trigrams (八卦). It used to defense the invader.

We stayed in Chao Zhou Hotel on 25 Dec 2011.

Next day, we went to Chao Zhou Ancient City. The guide explained the city model.

I took a photo in front of the House of Ancient Scholar (進士第).

The guide said scholar’s house was very luxury so that roof of house used many Tile (瓦片).

Moreover, there were many guide stations on the roof.

After that we visited the one of four Ancient Bridges in China called Xiang Zi Bridge (湘子橋).

The photo for night scene of that bridge

The special characteristic of that bride was the movable part in the middle of the bridge.

We went to Chaozhou Guangji gate tower (潮州廣濟門城樓).

The photo for night scene of that tower

Then we had a vegetarian lunch. The food was similar to Abalone (鮑魚).

The other food was similar to Squid (魷魚).

After the lunch, we visited the Ancient Temple called Kaiyuan (開元寺). (More than a thousand year!)

There were two Buddhism trees (培提樹).

This sculpture was corroded for a thousand years.

The guide explained why a wooden fish was found in every temple. It was because fish eyes were not closed, implying hardworking.

After visited the temple, we travelled the village by tricycle (三輪車) which used electricity rather than manpower.

The first day activities were completed. We went to Nanao Island through ferry.

Arrived the island, we visited Shantou Nanao Song Well (汕頭南澳宋井).

The sculpture memorized the last king of Song Dynasty.

I took a photo in front of the hotel in Nanao Island.

The photo showed the incomplete Nanao Bridge. After the bridge built, it could be driven to the island.

Photo of ferry

We went to the Garden of the Heaven Temple (天壇花園).

We took a cable chair up the hill.

And then we drove the roller coaster down the hill.

The video was taken.

Before the end of our trip, we had lunch in the restaurant called China Travel Restaurant. The most famous food called “Chaozhou 18-style meals(潮州十八式風味餐)”

潮州十八式風味餐
四小碟：潮汕酸咸菜、潮汕萝卜干（菜脯）、南姜咸欖、潮州烏欖
兩甜品：金瓜甜芋泥、清甜綠豆爽

六大菜：月浦鹵水鵝、新鮮烏頭魚、汕頭煎蠔烙、白灼游水蝦、生炒合時菜、郊外靚菜煲

六特色：牛魚丸湯、猪頭棕片、干炸果肉、糯米桃粿、煎茨殼粿、蕃薯米粥

It is a very good Christmas Trip for relaxing.

Upcoming Event: Hong Kong QFD Symposium 2012

2011-12-21T17:10:00.000-08:00

Hong Kong Quality Function Deployment (QFD) Symposium will be held on 14 January 2012 in N002 PolyU. The symposium is organized by Hong Kong Quality Function Deployment Association (HKQFDA), supported by Six Sigma Institution and Hong Kong Society for Quality (HKSQ). The aim of the symposium is to introduce Quality Function Deployment (QFD) to Hong Kong enterprises. It is a Japan-originated methodology that has a history of more than 40 years.

The first keynote speaker is Prof. Akao. He is the founder of QFD, along with the late Prof. Shigeru Mizuno. Moreover, Prof. Akao is one of the few in receiving the prestigious Deming Prize Individual Prize in 1978.
The second keynote speaker is Mr. Glenn H. Mazur (Executive Director, QFD Institute, USA). He received QFD Institute Akao Prize in 1998, Focusing Product & Process for Customer Satisfaction, which awarded for outstanding contribution to the advancement of QFD.

There are four experts invited to be speakers for different topics.
The 1st speaker is Dr. KS Chin (Asso. Professor, SEEM of CityU) and his topic is “QFD and Product Development”.
The 2nd speaker is Dr. YK Chan (Chairman, Six Sigma Institute) and his topic named “Application of Six Sigma in QFD Projects”.
The 3rd speaker is Dr. Catherine Chan (President, Hong Kong QFD Association) and her presentation title is “Total Quality Management and QFD”.

Since QFD has been widely applied in various industries, HKSQ and HKQFDA will organize a series of seminar to introduce QFD to different quality professionals.

Some past seminars are shown as follows:
Seminar on Quality Function Deployment (QFD)
Seminar on Voice of Customer (VOC)

Reference:
Prof. Akao - http://yojiakao.net/
HKQFD Symposium - http://www.hksq.org/029P_HK_QFD_Symposium_2012_Flyer.docx

通識及公共事務證書課程 2011 單元二：兩岸國際 (Part 2)

2011-12-18T06:46:00.001-08:00

I attended the General Education and Public Affairs Certificate Course from 10 Sep 2011 to 17 Dec 2011. I would like to summarize the interesting things of this course for sharing. Since some topics were localized, some discussions were recorded in Chinese.

為了進一步豐富大眾對公共事務的認識、提升公民意識及社會參與，「新力量網絡」與香港教育學院合辦「通識及公共事務課程」，以推動實現「將學術知識普及到社會各界」的目標。

單元二:兩岸國際

第八課 (5 November 2011)
前瞻中共十八大：中國政局的未來走向
劉銳紹先生主講（中國事務問題專家）
http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2011/11/lecture-8.html

第九課 (12 November 2011)
十二五規劃：中國的國民經濟及社會發展藍圖
陳文鴻博士主講（香港理工大學中國商業中心主任）
http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2011/11/lecture-9.html

第十課 (19 November 2011)
中國城鄉衝突：城市化與農民抗爭
葉健民博士主講（香港城市大學公共及社會行政學系副教授／新力量網絡研究總監）
http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2011/11/lecture-10.html

第十一課 (26 November 2011)
大中華的社會發展：社會政策及管治挑戰
莫家豪教授主講 (香港教育學院協理副校長、文理學院院長)
http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2011/11/lecture-11.html

第十二課 (3 December 2011)
中美關係：從G2時代到國際政治新秩序
余嘉明博士 (香港教育學院文理學院助理教授)
http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2011/12/g2-lecture-12.html

第十三課 (10 December 2011)
足球世界：全球化的足球運動
呂大樂教授主講（香港大學社會學系教授／新力量網絡主席）
http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2011/12/lecture-13.html

第十四課 (17 December 2011)
能源政治：國際安全的新熱點
袁彌昌博士主講（英國雷丁大學戰略研究系博士／新力量網絡主席）
http://qualityalchemist.blogspot.com/2011/12/lec-14.html

Reference:
新力量網絡SynergyNet - 通識及公共事務證書課程
http://www.synergynet.org.hk/b5_m9_detail.php?id=1035
新力量網絡SynergyNet 的網誌 (Facebook): http://zh-hk.facebook.com/notes.php?id=250164765864