Management and the Technology Professional – B302

Case study answer 2

As the supervising engineer I would be facing two main options: recall the product from further down the production line and start step six again from the beginning (assuming that repeating the one test that was missed is not possible) or I could allow the process to continue without the test being completed.

A critical path analysis of the project shows that step six is on the critical path and that repeating the testing would have a significant effect on the timescale of the project. Not only would another four days be needed for the testing but time and money would also be spent in bringing the product back from step seven to step six, it is plausible that the testing and the configuration for market could be done in different geographical locations.
It is also highly likely that repeating the testing would not only delay the current project but could cause problems with other projects needing to use the test equipment. A delay of more than the four days required for the re-testing could be incurred if the testing facility and any other facilities or personnel needed for the remaining steps are unavailable at the postponed time.

The consequence of not bringing the product back to be re-tested is more of a gamble and once again depends on a few other factors. If, for example, the chips that are being manufactured are to be used in safety critical systems then the cost of a single failure would be much greater than the cost of repeating the testing. The idea of safety critical tasks being compromised also makes me feel morally obligated to repeat the testing. In these circumstances a failure would seriously tarnish the reputation of the company. If the product being manufactured is for use in a less important system then the consequences of a failure would be much less severe.
Another factor is how important the test was that was skipped. If the test was to check that the serial number printed on the chip was correct rather than checking a more crucial function of the product then it would not be too much of a worry if the test was not repeated.

Through my experience and academic study in the areas of chip design and testability I have learned that testing is not a step only performed after manufacturing is complete. It is likely that the product will have been thoroughly tested all the way through the design and manufacturing process, which means that although the final test is very important it is probably not as crucial as it first seems.

The financial and time costs that I mentioned above affect Intel as a company rather than directly affecting me, the supervising engineer. In addition to considering my employers I need to think about my own reputation and career. I think the best actions to take would be to approach my superiors with details of the missed test and the possible effects that it has. I can protect myself from liability by making the mistake clear to my superiors so that I cannot be accused of deceiving my employers if a product does fail at a later date. Providing that it was a relatively minor test that was overlooked and that the product was not going to be used in a safety critical system I would advise that the testing did not need to be repeated.