Response to case study scenario 1

In a situation of this nature I believe that action must be taken.

As my supervisor said, 3 in 200 tests (1.5%) is a small amount but if this 1.5% was consistent throughout all the orders processed the amount of devices that may fail is quite high. For example if a batch of 10,000 units made there is a high chance that 150 units have the potential to cause fire. If this many units were to fail a large number would probably just fail to work and not cause additional damage. The issue would be if a small number of units were to cause an extensive amount of damage. These damages could drastically affect the company, my department and possibly my employment.

The first action I would apply to take is to test another 100 or 200 units to see if the output is the same, results from this second set of testing means there will be two possible directions that my actions may take.
1. If the results are positive and there are no units that may cause a risk of fire my decision would side with my supervisor, therefore taking no further action as the risk is reduced or even halved.
2. Were the results to provide us with similar or a more negative output than the first test, further action is a necessity due to the risk of damage or injury regarding the consumer.

From experience when working with communication systems within businesses including care homes and hospitals, a director would have no disagreement when being confronted by an employee with concern for health and safety. Therefore I would present the results from the two separate tests to the Managing Director voicing my concern for the products that have been shipped. Further action that the company may undertake is to recall the products from the client by following The General Product Safety Regulations of 2005. Further to this, research into the product malfunction would be in the companies interests if this product will continue to be in production.