When should methods of inspection and process monitoring be corrected?

The correct answer is based on the principle that inspection methods and process monitoring should only be adjusted when their unsuitability is demonstrated. This means that there should be clear evidence indicating that the methods currently in use are not effective or are producing unsatisfactory results. By waiting for tangible proof of inadequacy, organizations can ensure that changes made to processes are justified and based on actual performance data rather than assumptions or requests that may not stem from a clear need for improvement.

The emphasis on demonstrated unsuitability helps maintain consistency and reliability in operational processes, avoiding unnecessary adjustments that could disrupt workflow or create additional issues without solving the underlying problem. It reinforces the idea that decisions in production should be data-driven, promoting a more effective and efficient manufacturing environment.

In contrast, changing methods upon a supervisor's request may not be based on actual evidence of a problem, leading to potential inefficiencies. Similarly, altering processes after failures are documented without assessing the root cause can result in recurring issues rather than sustainable solutions. Making changes after every production cycle does not take into account the inherent variability and normal fluctuations in production, which could lead to unnecessary adjustments that disrupt the production flow.