In 1990, the State Bureau of Technical Supervision issued three national standards for the recommendation of the "Integrated Standardization Work Guidelines", and in 1991, two more were promulgated. Before and after the implementation of these five standards, there has been a comprehensive standardization fever, and some considerable results have been achieved. Up to now, the five national standards are still valid, but the comprehensive standardization has stopped and disappeared on the land of China. No one knows it and no one mentions it. In order to clarify the reasons and mystery of this, according to my own understanding and memory, the reader's ins and outs and the necessity of re-introduction are briefly introduced as follows.
I. The Origin of Comprehensive Standardization Comprehensive standardization is the creation of standardization workers in the former Soviet Union. It is a major change in the standardization of working methods and has methodological value.
Why do they want to create a working method of integrated standardization? This is to start from the past of Soviet standardization. Industrial standardization in Russia began in the 18th century. In 1837, interchangeability was applied in the arsenal. At the same time, standard gauges were used. At the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, tolerances were marked on the working drawings, and only 3 to 6 types were matched. Standardization of railway trains began in 1904, and standardization of tolerances began in 1919 (completed in 1929). The standardized heritage left by Tsarist Russia to the new Soviets is extremely meager. During the transition period from civil war to peace building, the Soviet national economy faced a series of difficulties, and the lack of industrial standards became a top priority. Therefore, in 1924, the Central Standardization Bureau was set up in the Workers and Peasants Supervision People's Committee. In the same year, the Industrial Standardization Bureau of the Economic Management Administration of the Supreme National Economic Council of the Soviet Union was created. This fully shows the importance attached to standardization and the urgent need for standards. From 1925 to the beginning of 1929, about 400 total Soviet standards (OCT) were approved, of which 257 were implemented in industry. However, the Labor and National Defense Commission, which is in charge of the Standardization Committee, believes that the scale and speed of standardization are greatly Behind the requirements of the national economy. Subsequently, the Soviet People's Committee passed a resolution on the development of the 1930~1931 standardization plan. Since then, the Soviet Union has entered a period of planned standardization.
Under the planned economic system, how can the planned standardization work be done? This is no experience to draw on, for which they pay a lot of tuition. First of all, most of the planned tasks in 1931 were not completed. National industrialization has brought the machine manufacturing industry to the top, but the machine standardization plan for machine manufacturing has only completed 24%, and the electrical industry's standardization plan has only completed 8%. During the next five-year plan period, although a large number of standards have been formulated to make certain contributions to national economic construction and national defense construction, potential problems have become an obstacle to standardization.
This potential problem is in the words of AkhoxTeB. "If we use standardization as a set of measures that work closely with each other to achieve a certain purpose, then it must have some principles and principles as the basis. For example, Standardized planning methods of work: Should standardization work be aggregated by the usual problem of fragmented topics, or by comprehensive issues that help solve major national economic tasks such as introducing new technologies and increasing labor productivity?" This is a theoretical issue and a methodological issue. Due to the lack of correct theoretical guidance and scientific working methods, standardization work has been passive for a long time. Especially in the planning work, the working method of “summary annual plan from scattered issues” is adopted, and its drawbacks are more and more revealed:
1. The standardization plan does not adequately reflect the needs of the country. The standards that the country urgently needs are not formulated or formulated very little; on the contrary, a large number of unimportant and even useless standards have been formulated. For example, the standardization workload in 1930 and 1931 was to develop 9 000 standards. Although the scale of the work was large, it did not achieve the intended purpose (to solve current production problems through standardization), and the combination of standardization and national economic plans. Can't see results. The reason is that the National Standardization Committee has not concentrated on developing definitive basic standards, but has developed a large number of secondary standards. There are few important issues in the standardization plan for many years, but some of the most important standards are often sloppy.
2. The working method of “summary annual plan from scattered issues” is not only easy to cause ill-conceived, primary and secondary confusion, and no main attack direction, but also contributes to the one-sided pursuit of quantity and the tendency to ignore the quality of the standard itself. In the summary of the standardization of the first five-year plan, Kuibyshev (Chairman of the Standardization Committee) said: Creative standards can change the face of production, and standardization is an important means of rationalizing and transforming the entire national economy. But standards and standards are different. When we say this, we don't mean these standards. They are not the beginning of rationalization. Some standards are simply affirmation of the status quo.
3. Since the goal of standardization is always unable to meet the requirements of the country's major technical and economic tasks, it has caused constant turbulence in standardization work, and has been concentrated and suddenly dispersed. Standardization agencies have been reorganized, and it has belonged to workers and peasants to supervise the people. The Commission, the Economic Management Directorate of the Supreme People's Economic Committee, the Labor and National Defense Commission, and the State Planning Commission (the Soviet People's Committee decided in February 1931 to classify the entire Soviet standardization and all its institutions under the jurisdiction of the National Planning Commission. In November of the same year, the Soviet People's Committee It also believes that it must be reclassified under the jurisdiction of the Labor and Defense Commission). The main reason for the turmoil in the standardization body in just eight years is the dissatisfaction with the actual role of standardization. The purpose of the adjustment is to try to solve the problem of tight integration between standardization and national economic construction by changing the competent authorities.
After countless setbacks and failures, the standardization engineers gradually realized a new way of thinking, that is, to develop standards to set standards for the set; the goals and priorities are not clear, the focus is clear, the goals are clear, and comprehensively Solve problems systematically. By summarizing past experience, experts realized that standardization must not only have certain sequential steps, but also have a certain set of solutions in solving problems. They finally realized clearly that “the size of standardization achievements is not the number of current standards in a certain production sector, or even how many products have established relative indicators of standards, but how to solve the problems of comprehensive problems. Standardization plan Work should also be based on solving this comprehensive problem. Therefore, the sign of performance should not be the number of standards issued, but what comprehensive problems have been resolved in a certain period of time."
In a certain period of time, the comprehensive comprehensive thinking is solved by specifying a set of standards to solve the comprehensive problem. Kochev called it the "set of principles". He believes that "establishing this principle is to find the shortest way to achieve the most complete standardization." Some other scholars also call this practice "set of typicalization." In short, the development of a set of standards is its characteristics, and solving the comprehensive problem is its purpose.
The preferred test subject for integrated standardization is the inland vessel. Because the inland rivers suffered heavy losses during the war, and the inland river ship manufacturing technology before the war was very backward. In order to rebuild the inland shipbuilding industry at a higher starting point, it is first necessary to determine the various types of sizes required by the river fleet. The reasonable composition of passenger ships, passenger and cargo ships, tugs and barges, and for each type, the appropriate parameters acceptable to both the user and the producer are specified. This is the basic task of serialization of basic types and basic parameters of inland vessels, and it is also the first problem to be solved in the standardization of inland ships and in the design and manufacture of ships.
The development of such standards is a solution to a comprehensive problem. The type of ship must first consider the type of fuel (whether oil or coal is used as fuel), so the standardization of the main engine will involve marine diesel engines or steam engines. In addition, the ship type is closely related to the name, parameters and characteristics of the cabin machinery, deck machinery, pipe fittings and various installations. However, this is only the link between the internal parameters of the ship. The second aspect that must be considered is: the condition of the inland waterway and the law of the change of the channel boundary, the prospect of development (the depth and width of the channel in different periods, the bending radius of the river and the canal, the boundary size of the water gate, and the limit size of the bridge hole) . In addition, the limits of the terminal berthing, lifting devices (ships, slipways, slides) and the economics of the operation (ship investment and daily expenses per ton-kilometer of freight, management and daily expenses per kilometer of waterway, etc., must also be considered, Investment and daily expenses per ton-km of the entire channel and all ships, reasonable investment per kilometer of waterway and freight costs calculated in kiloton-kilometers, etc.
The so-called comprehensive problem solving is to comprehensively coordinate these relevant parameters and select a best answer. When these interrelated parameters are determined, standardization of these related fields (objects) can be carried out simultaneously, ensuring that all relevant problems are resolved within a limited time, paving the way for product design, production and use. .
Due to the implementation of comprehensive standardization, the inland shipbuilding industry quickly changed from a very backward department to an advanced department of the Soviet shipbuilding industry. Since then, this set of standardized ideas has been recognized by more and more people and has attracted the attention of the government. In order to promote this work, a series of resolutions and instructions have been issued. The 1965 Soviet Ministerial Conference issued an "improvement." Resolution No. 16 of the Standardization first proposed the task of carrying out comprehensive standardization. In 1970, the Soviet Ministerial Conference issued Resolution 937, which required in-depth comprehensive standardization. Subsequently, 25 comprehensive product standardization topics were included in the Soviet National Standardization Five-Year Plan from 1971 to 1975. 160 comprehensive standardization topics were included in the National Standardization Plan from 1976 to 1980, from 1981 to 1985. 40 comprehensive standardization topics were included in the national standardization plan. Under the influence of the Soviet Union, comprehensive standardization began in the 1970s. It can be said that until the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe disintegrated, their national standardization (especially product standardization) embarked on the road of comprehensive standardization.
Second, comprehensive standardization is the innovation of standardized methods. In the country where the state contributes and standardizes the standardization, especially in the case of direct management standardization by the government, the national and even industry standardization plans are basically bottom-up summary. Then release it from top to bottom. Although some principles have been followed in the aggregation and release, and some aspects have been taken care of, in fact, they are always able to get rid of the "multiple and scattered" characteristics. The results of several annual standardization plan implementations, not to mention bystanders, even the planners themselves can not tell what the problem has been solved. How big is the role of standardization? It always makes people suspicious. Standardization work has been going on for decades, but it has been continually advertised to have a role to play.
Comprehensive standardization no longer sets a certain number of standards as work targets, but focuses on solving major problems and playing a specific role. This is innovation, both conceptual innovation and method innovation. Its innovations can be summarized as follows:
1. Comprehensiveness Comprehensiveness is a prominent feature of comprehensive standardization. The so-called comprehensive standardization is simply a method of formulating and implementing standards using system views and system methods.
Therefore, the system approach should be applied in standardization activities, because the objects of contemporary standardization have obvious system attributes. The realization of almost every standardization target needs to solve the problem systematically (integratedly) or from the whole. Because holism is the core principle of system science, and comprehensiveness is an important feature of it.
In the past standardization activities, it was also emphasized that “partial obedience to the whole and small bureaucratic obedience to the overall situation” is only a principled call. When formulating independent standards one by one, it is hard to tell who is the overall situation, who is the small game, and cannot find specific interconnections. Actual coordination is very difficult. It can be said that this is a decomposition without comprehensive standardization.
Comprehensive standardization is not the case, it regards integrity as its primary principle. In the process of standardization, the comprehensive standardization object and the target to be achieved are first determined; then, the object is analyzed, the elements directly related to the goal realization are determined and the target is decomposed; on this basis, the standard complex plan is formed and the composition of the complex is defined; According to the unified work plan, the system set standards are compiled and implemented in an organized manner; after the evaluation confirms that the predetermined goals have been achieved, the acceptance is accepted. Thus, not only the mutual constraint relationship between the elements (standards) is clarified, but also a series of organizational and program assurance measures are implemented to achieve effective coordination and form a set of standards to ensure the realization of the overall goal (a standard system with specific functions and system effects) ).
This is the overall optimization method that is both decomposed and integrated, and integrated. This is one aspect of the value of integrated standardization methodology.
2. Purpose (target)
The purpose of comprehensive standardization is very prominent. After the standardization object is determined, it is then necessary to clarify the purpose of standardization, that is, the purpose of the object standardization (what problem to solve? What requirements are met?), in order to make the purpose clearer and clearer, specific objectives must be specified (if standardization If the object is a product, it is represented by a parameter value.
Only the purpose and objectives of standardization are very specific and very clear, and related activities can be followed and based on the relevant standards. If there is no goal or if there is a goal but it is not clear, the relevant standard to ensure the achievement of the goal cannot be formulated (do not know how to specify and stipulate, such as the parameter value).
Comprehensive standardization not only establishes a clear goal as the main direction from the beginning, but also decomposes the overall goal. Based on the results of the decomposition, a standard complex plan is prepared, and each sub-goal is implemented in the formulation of relevant standards. Therefore, in this sense, comprehensive standardization is a useful tool for enterprises to implement target management.
The purpose (target) characteristic sounds very common and easy to understand, but it is not easy to do it completely. Careful observation and analysis reveals that many standardization activities and standards are developed with the goal of not being clear or at all with no clear purpose (goal). This blind standardization can be seen everywhere. The way to solve this problem is to ask a few more questions? For example: Why do you want to carry out this activity (what is the purpose)? Why does this activity include these factors (whether the factors are related to the purpose)? What are the roles of these factors (what is the goal of each factor)? In many cases, it is impossible to get through the bottom. We have set a lot of useless standards, do a lot of useless work, and often suffer from blindness.
3. Complete sets of comprehensive standardization is not to develop only one standard at a time, but to develop a set of standards at the same time (within a limited time), which is called a standard set.
How is this simultaneous set of standards developed in a way that is different from a single standard setting approach? Simply put, it can effectively and punctually guarantee the realization of the overall goal of standardization. For example, a set of standards required for a major project (such as an Olympic project) can be used to count the completion time of each standard by means of a countdown order; the sub-goals of each relevant standard can be specified according to the requirements of the project (overall goals); The relationship between the standards can be coordinated at the same time. On the basis of this, using parallel engineering, the full set of standards will be formulated in the shortest period, and the system effect will be immediately realized to achieve the overall goal of standardization.
The standardized method of standardization is not only very effective in specifying interrelated technical parameters for various production objects, buildings, major facilities, service projects and basic production units, but also enables large-scale standardization in a short time, for example:
* Complete series of machine equipment (type, type size, basic parameters);
* Interrelated parameter series (such as shipping conditions and shipping equipment);
*Involving products upstream and downstream of the supply chain (the relevant parameters are best determined at the same time);
*Involved in multi-sector product manufacturing (such as production aircraft).
After analyzing the two standardization methods, the Soviet standardization experts concluded that “the full attention of the national standardization work should not be placed on the formulation of individual product standards, but should be placed on the compilation of interconnected series.” It still has important guiding significance for standardization work at the national level.
4. Overall Coordination Standards are the product of coordination, and any standard must be coordinated before it is produced. The purpose of coordination is to minimize the contradictions and conflicts between the established standards and the current standards, and to maximize mutual compatibility, mutual cooperation and mutual adaptation. This allows seamless connectivity and system effects when applying these standards.
When a single standard is formulated, it is single-factor coordination (such as parameter coordination). When the specified standard has contradictions with the current standard and needs to be adjusted, in most cases it is difficult to adjust the existing standard, and only the new standard can be adjusted to make it The existing standards are compatible. Although this is not technically reasonable, it can only obey the former law, and the result of coordination is often not the best.
Comprehensive standardization is a multi-factor overall coordination. It considers the standards related to achieving the goals and coordinates them at the same time, which greatly reduces the phenomenon of the former law and the post-method. Since the overall goal has been established, partial compliance has become a consensus principle and it is easy to make the coordination result the best. In addition, since the comprehensive standardization projects are mostly related to the major economic interests of the country, the relationship between science and technology innovation and national defense construction, the government not only gives financial guarantees, but also implements the implementation with a mandatory plan, and supervises and inspects the implementation. Make full use of the special advantages of the government in charge of standardization work, effectively reducing the difficulty of coordination.
The Soviet Union mentioned above in the development of inland navigation after the war, the formulation of the type and basic parameters of the inland water transport ship and the coordination of related factors is a typical multi-factor coordination. The important technical parameters that it coordinates at the same time are:
The lower limit of the ship's water limit and the size of the channel limit (the depth and width of the channel, the bend radius of the river and the canal, and the boundary size of the gate).
The water upper bound dimension of the ship and the bounding dimension of the bridge hole.
The size of the ship's limit and the size of the dock mooring.
The bounding dimensions of the ship and the bounding dimensions of the lifting device (dock, slipway, slide).
Coordination of ship type with fuel, main engine, cabin machinery, deck machinery, pipe fittings, and various types of equipment.
Such multi-factor and cross-sectoral coordination is difficult to achieve without comprehensive standardization methods. Even if it is coordinated, it is difficult to achieve the best overall goal.
5. Closed-loop control Under the planned economic system, there are two common problems in state-led standardization: one is that the quality of the standard is not high or the level is not high, and the other is re-enactment, light implementation, and no feedback.
What is the standard quality? What is the standard level? What is used to measure this quality and level? There are still many different opinions on this most basic issue, and there is no basic consensus. Some people say that "the indicator is the level, and the improvement of the indicator can raise the level"; some people say that "to compare with international standards, than the international general level and the international advanced level." According to these theories, we have indeed developed a number of useless standards at the international level.
The only criterion for evaluating the quality or level of a standard is practice, the result or effect of the application. It is impossible to assess the quality without physical testing, because the standard is to be used, not for people to see.
When we develop a standard, if the information on the purpose of the standard, its role, its interaction with other standards, etc. is not mastered, or only a rough, qualitative understanding, lack of quantitative basis, Although I want to work hard to develop high-quality, high-level standards, I still don't know where the quality is, and where is the level? How much is higher and how much? All are unknown. Setting a high standard can only be a good wish.
The comprehensive standardization is different. It not only through the standard complex planning, but also specifies those standards, and through the target decomposition, the overall goal is refined to each specific standard. This gives the standard setting a clear and specific goal, which leads to a way to improve quality and level. The so-called high quality, high level, in most cases, is just right. If the indicator is low, the requirement may not be met, and if the indicator is high, the function will be wasted. Application is a good standard. In theory, comprehensive standardization should not create useless standards.
Integrated standardization is a closed-loop control process that combines the development of standards, the implementation of standards, the follow-up inspection of implementation processes, data collection, and information feedback until evaluation and acceptance, forming a complete workflow. The standard complex and each of its standards are subject to this process, and all standards that are of low quality, are not adequately sized, do not function effectively, and do not meet the overall objectives must be improved. In the course of operation, the standard complex will adjust its overall target as the situation changes, and the corresponding standards must be adjusted and improved in time. In this standardization process loop, no one standard is allowed to fall behind, and it is driven by the overall goal in an integrated and coordinated manner.
Comprehensive standardization is truly "chemicalized". It has made the countermeasures of “difficulties in implementation and no feedback” that have long plagued the standardization work. At the same time, it has also found a scientific and practical way for the improvement of corporate standards.
6. Programmatic and Directive Integrated standardization is an organized and planned activity. The key to the success of integrated standardization is the coordination and implementation of the two links. To this end, the relevant parties must form an authoritative coordination body, which will formulate plans, coordinate and organize implementation. This is an organizational guarantee for the success of comprehensive standardization.
Integrated standardization is a complex system engineering. A project often involves many related units; the standards to be developed and coordinated are as few as dozens and as many as hundreds; it is necessary to arrange the order and limit the completion time. Such complex, large-scale activities involving many units and many people must have a rigorous and detailed plan. Planning and planning are especially important. Comprehensive standardization uses the management tool of the plan to the fullest. It can be said that comprehensive standardization is a planned standardization.
In the comprehensive standardization of the Soviet Union and the Inter-Conference, all the comprehensive standardization projects included in the National Standardization Five-Year Plan are led by the National Standards Committee, jointly drafting the comprehensive standardization plan, and decomposing the identified targets. The National Standards Commission shall issue the relevant departments with the mandatory plan and supervise and inspect the implementation. The administrative functions of the centralized state are also used to the fullest. In this sense, it can also be said that comprehensive standardization is the standardization promoted by administrative forces.

3. Comprehensive Standardization In China, the relationship between China and the Soviet Union has been in a state of tension for a long time, especially during the 10 years of the Cultural Revolution. Any issues related to the Soviet Union are politically sensitive and will be put on counter-revolutionary revisionism at any time. hat. Therefore, the research and understanding of Soviet standardization has been interrupted for a long time.
Until the 80s of the last century, the Soviet Union’s practice and experience of comprehensive standardization was introduced to China. In order to explore the feasibility of carrying out comprehensive standardization in China and how to implement comprehensive standardization with Chinese characteristics according to China's national conditions, the former National Bureau of Standards organized a comprehensive standardization pilot in 1983. The pilot projects ended in 1986 and have seen results. Among them, there are more comprehensive standardization projects such as color TV sets and building doors and windows.
Just then, system theory, cybernetics, and information theory began to infiltrate into the field of standardization, which made many standardization workers realize that comprehensive standardization conforms to the system perspective, has many advantages, and has a strong desire to carry out comprehensive standardization, and urgently needs method guidance. In order to meet this objective need, the China Institute of Standardization and Research listed the theory and method of comprehensive standardization in 1985. In November 1987, it jointly held the first comprehensive standardization seminar in China with the China National Standardization Association. We have summarized our own experience on a larger scale. However, these experiences are fragmented and unsystematic, and only by incorporating them into the standard can they guide and promote the work of the whole country.
In 1987, the China Institute of Standardization and Information Classification and Coding undertook the research task of “Science and Technology Guiding Project – Comprehensive Standardization” issued by the State Science and Technology Commission, and tried to develop a set of national standards to guide comprehensive standardization based on summing up its own experience. The general experience of this work is:
1. Analysis and reference to comprehensive standardization of the former Soviet Union Although comprehensive standardization is a product of the former Soviet Union's planned economic system, it is a highly centralized, highly planned standardization method, but its basic principle is scientific, compared to the usual working methods. Obvious superiority, its reasonable kernel can be used for me.
In the process of conducting comprehensive standardization research, we have always followed such a basic principle: starting from the reality of China, taking the strengths of others, avoiding the shortcomings of others, and exploring a path that suits oneself. To this end, in connection with the reality of our country, how to use the following comprehensive analysis of the comprehensive standardization of the Soviet Union for my use:
1 On the comprehensive project of cross-industry and cross-sectoral major projects, the comprehensive standardization of the Soviet Union is a lessons learned from previous work models with unfocused and inconspicuous functions. From the outset, the comprehensive standardization project was targeted at the national economy and national defense. We will build important products and projects, and use the standardized resources controlled by the state and the institutional advantages of the government in charge of standardization work to carry out comprehensive coordination across industries and departments, and fully play the role of standards in a relatively short period of time. This is unmatched by capitalist countries. It should be said that the establishment of the heavy industry foundation of the former Soviet Union, the development of cutting-edge defense products, and the construction of major engineering projects have all contributed to the comprehensive standardization.
However, the scientific nature of any method is relative and conditional. As a national standardization body, if you can grasp important products or major issues that are related to the development of the national economy, you will get a few of them every year or every five years, and use the standardized resources in your hands. This will not only highlight the role and effect of standardization, but also lead to a lively and lively work situation in which departments, places and enterprises form interactions. If there are more such projects, you will not be able to do so. During the five-year plan of the Soviet Union from 1976 to 1980, there were 160 such projects, and there were thousands of standards to be coordinated. This work beyond human ability will inevitably fail. Therefore, it is important to grasp this "degree".
2 Questions on multiple methods. Although comprehensive standardization has its own unique advantages, it is impossible to solve all standardization problems with this method. It is more suitable for a standardized set of standardized projects, and may not be applicable to local characteristics such as basic standards, general method standards or product standards (such as customer requirements). Therefore, as far as the standardization method is concerned, there should be multiple methods. In the same year, the Soviet National Standards Committee, due to too many comprehensive standardization projects, the battle line is too long, the entire standardization activities are surrounded by comprehensive standardization. This situation may not be due to the voluntary of the National Standards Committee, the excessive administrative intervention of the central government, and the ministerial meeting's three-and-five applications to speed up comprehensive standardization. The pressure from the top, coupled with the high indicators that the planning economy is accustomed to, the comprehensive standardization can not last even if it does not go to the opposite side of it.
3 On the subject of comprehensive standardization The comprehensive standardization of the Soviet Union is the standardization of the country. Not only the relevant standards are formulated as national standards and departmental standards, but also by the state administrative forces, enterprises can only follow the state arrangements. According to our understanding, comprehensive standardization as a method can not only be used by the government, but also plays an important role in accelerating technological progress, improving product quality and participating in market competition. This method can be applied in enterprises. In order to confirm this point of view, various types of enterprises were arranged for experimentation during the research process, and all of them achieved satisfactory results.
2. Comprehensive standardized national standards produce comprehensive and standardized research in trial and error, taking such a technical route:
1 Using modern system theory, summarizing existing experiences and lessons at home and abroad, and combining China's national conditions, establish the theoretical basis and methodological principles of comprehensive standardization.
2 Under the guidance of the basic theory, draw on the scientific results of the Soviet national standards, combined with the existing pilot experience in the country, and compile a series of national standards (draft) for the "Integrated Standardization Work Guidelines".
3 Piloted on the basis of the “Guidelines”. Each pilot project provided first-hand information for the validation and revision of the draft standard. The revised draft standard was approved as a national standard in 1990 and 1991 respectively.
3. The guiding projects of the State Science and Technology Commission have been smothered in the five national standards for comprehensive standardization in the bud, and have not yet been approved; the science and technology-oriented projects of the State Science and Technology Commission have just been accepted, and have not yet had time to “guide”, China On the ground, a business upgrade was set in the wind.
The wind was so fast that it almost wiped out all the businesses and was involved in the vortex of the "upgraded" with great appeal. Enterprise standardization upgrade is one of the prerequisites for enterprise upgrade, so enterprise standardization has never been valued. In order to upgrade, it is necessary to equip all the standards according to the system table in a very short time. As long as it can be upgraded to the higher level, it can be used at all costs or even unscrupulously. It is too late to write a standard to copy the standard of another company. Because of the mistakes in the business, the names of other companies have been copied together. There will be creation when there is demand. Some people have published three typical standards. Whether it is the management standard of that department or the work standard of that position, you can find the ready-made answer, copy it with a copy machine, and then fill the factory name up. . The standardization work of enterprises has changed from a heavy mental work force to a simple manual labor, and it has become a job that even illiterate people can do.
The reason why the upgrade has such great appeal is not only related to the status and competitiveness of the company, but also the personal status, treatment and promotion of the enterprise leader. In addition, the contrast between the companies formed by this movement and the resulting strong chasing of the chasing, even the most sensible entrepreneurs must be involuntarily to fight for "upgrade." Imagine if there is a golden sign on the door of a brother company in the same trade, which is engraved with six dazzling characters such as “national first-class enterprise”, and your own business is nothing, you Can this business leader still do it? Therefore, even the most stupid leaders will want to understand, anyway, do not spend their own money, why not do it? This is a psychological war. The young buds of the science and technology-oriented project of the State Science and Technology Commission have just emerged from this challenge. It has neither honorable titles nor glittering brands for companies that implement comprehensive standardization. Can be hung, how can the company ignore it.
This upgrade movement has continued from 1986 to 1991, and the more it is getting warmer and more outrageous, not to mention comprehensive standardization, no advanced management ideas and management methods can have a foothold. If it is not for Comrade Zhu Rongji to stop it, I really don’t know what the outcome will be.
When the enterprise standardization is upgraded, it attaches great importance to standardization, and does not make a large number of standards at all costs. After the upgrade of the wind, a large number of standards are sent to the paper mill. (China’s standardization veteran Chen Wenxiang went to the northeast to investigate a factory in the Ministry of Machinery, in order to upgrade Only the copying standard cost 500,000 yuan, and then it was sent to the paper mill. He still remembers the scene of the winning bidder’s academic committee with a trembling hand. In fact, there is nothing wrong with this business, because these standards have no other use in addition to the upgrade assessment, and should be done in accordance with the 5S management principles. Sadly, the upgrade of the wind has stopped, and the standardization of enterprises has been immediately indifferent. The whole country has experienced a large-scale decline in the standardization of enterprises in the 1990s. Some enterprises have not recovered their vitality until today. This is probably the reason why the Chinese people often talk about "the extremes of things must be reversed."
Everyone knows that “standards are a summary of practical experience.” In our standardization practice, many things that pay a lot of tuition and no gains happen repeatedly. The root cause is that no one is responsible for the fault of the work, and no one is wrong with the fault. Reflections, researchers have never been able to summarize such experiences, I am afraid this is even more tragic.
四、综合标准化是企业标准化的发展方向 综合标准化作为一种方法，在一定的空间和时间内，综合地、成套地解决问题的方法，是具有普适价值的。它最初被用于国家层面和行业层面的标准化，它的理论和方法原则已被证明是可行的。综合标准化在苏联的企业里未能应用，那是由于体制上的原因。通过在我国许多企业的试点证明：综合标准化不仅适用于我国企业，而且为我国企业标准化的发展展示了新的方向。
1. 中国企业标准化当前的主要问题是脱离实际 中国企业的标准化从20世纪50年代算起，已经有了半个多世纪的历史。在许多大企业和老企业里已经积累了相当可观的标准化资源，企业标准的规模、企业标准化人员的水平均非昔日可比。尽管如此，在相当多的企业里较普遍地存在着标准化工作“没有地位”、“不被重视”、“可有可无”等现象。如果是个别现象，只须寻找个别原因；如果是较为普遍的现象，那就不可掉以轻心，就要从宏观层面寻找带有共性的原因。
现象的背后隐藏着事物的本质。许多人把这种“没地位、不重视、可有可无”的现象产生的原因归罪于企业领导，认为企业领导不懂得标准化的重要，所以他才不重视。假定这个说法是符合实际的，那么怎样才能使企业领导懂得标准化是有重要作用的呢？让他去参加那些没完没了的标准化培训班吗？其实，最解决问题的办法就是用事实来证明。如果企业领导最关心、最着急的问题，通过标准化得到了解决，那怕是标准化只是在其中起了一定的作用。这时，你不让他重视都是不可能的。这种较为普通存在的现象的本质是什么呢？简单地说，就是企业标准化脱离企业实际。为什么这样说呢？为什么从前不脱离，现在反而脱离了呢？道理其实很简单，企业标准化是企业这个大系统的一个子系统，它的功能必须符合大系统的要求并对大系统的运行提供有效地支持。当初建立的标准系统与企业大系统之间的关系基本是协调和顺畅的，不存在脱离的问题。到了今天，企业已经由往日的计划经济模式转变为市场竞争模式，企业里方方面面的工作（从产品开发到市场营销）都按照市场经济的规律和市场竞争的要求完成了脱胎换骨式的转变，从功能上实现了与企业大系统在新形势下的协同。但是，企业标准化怎样改革的？改革什么了？不少企业实际上仍然按照以往的惯常方法在工作，这就必然的会与企业的主旋律发生“脱离”。
这种“脱离”的具体表现尽管各个企业有所不同，但还是可以罗列出一些较为普遍的现象：
*企业在一定时期内突出重要的工作（如企业信息化建设），标准化未能参与或未能发挥出应有的作用。
*企业领导最关心、最着急的事（如生产安全、节能降耗、降低成本），标准化未能参与或未能发挥应有的作用。
*与企业命运攸关的产品创新开发、市场营销等重要领域的工作中，见不到标准化所起的重要作用。
*企业采用先进技术装备、先进制造工艺时，长期缺少必要的支持性标准，而标准化机构又迟迟拿不出标准。
*企业看准了市场方向，急于推出新产品，但因相关标准不能配套，或已有标准不适用，延误了抢占市场的时机。
*企业标准表面上看较为齐全，但真正管用的不多，能为市场竞争服务、能与竞争对手抗衡的标准尚未制定出来。
*企业标准化工作处于被动状态，不知道工作重点和发展方向在那里，不知如何发挥标准化的主导作用，甚至上边不布置就不知道该干什么和如何去干，等等。
罗列这些现象（甚至还可以罗列更多）的目的，不是要否定企业标准化的成就，只是要提醒企业标准化工作必须认真思考的这个前进中的问题。我们倘能正视这些现象和问题，并努力寻求解决的办法和途径，那它就将会成为推动企业标准化向更高层次发展的动力。
2. 企业标准化到了该发生跳跃的时候了 只要仔细分析上面列举的那些现象，就会发现，其中任何一项都不表明企业标准化没有用了，该退出历史舞台了。恰恰相反，所有的这些现象和问题都是在给企业标准化提出更高的要求和期望。中国的企业标准化发展到今天，可以说是到了客观形势将促使它发生一次跳跃的时候了。
跳跃不是原地拔高，而是从原有的轨道跃向一个新的运行轨道，是一场从观念到行为的一系列创新和变革：
*企业标准化由被动型变为主动型，充分发挥标准化的主导作用；
*创建面向市场的企业标准化，让标准化在企业市场竞争中充分地发挥出其特有的作用；
*把标准化的形式和功能运用到企业的方方面面，为企业做强做大、优化发展空间，打好坚实的基础：
*认清时代特点，跟踪技术发展方向，使企业标准化成为企业科技创新、产品创新、市场创新和管理创新的平台；
*改变传统的标准化思维，创造以人为本的标准化理念，使企业标准化融入企业文化，成为企业代代相传的资源；
*企业标准化工作不图虚名、不做虚功、不搞花架子、不制定无用标准，保证每一项标准和标准化活动都有增值作用。
这就是企业领导期盼的企业标准化，这就是时代呼唤的企业标准化，这也是每一个竞争对手都正在潜心研究的企业标准化竞争策略。
企业标准化的这次跳跃，既惊险又刺激，只有跳上这个能级轨道上的企业，才可以称得上他们的企业标准化是现代企业标准化，而不是计划经济时代的标准化。
3. 综合标准化是企业的优选模式 企业标准化的这次跳跃，是从计划经济时代的标准化向现代标准化的历史性转变。这样的大变革决非一日之功，很可能是一个漫长的过程。但是，现在可以断言，这个漫长的过程肯定是不平静的，企业间竞争的标准化策略即将展开或者说已经展开。客观现实不允许我们等待，每个企业都必须面对这场挑战、重视这场挑战，并及早采取行动争取最先完成这次跳跃。
为了完成这次跳跃，应该采取哪些行动和步骤，应该从哪里入手？这是每个企业都必须认真思考的问题。现在看来综合标准化是一个有普遍意义的优选模式，这是因为：
① 综合标准化使企业标准化充满活力 按照以往的常规做法，虽然也有很多工作要做，有可能很忙、很累，但是由于目标不明确或虽有目标却与企业的重大问题关联不密切，领导不重视、别人不认可、自己也缺少成就感。而综合标准化则是另一种打法，它选择特别有意义的事项作为标准化对象。这个主攻方向一经确立，随后的工作（建立协调机构、编制规划和计划、制定标准、组织实施直到评价验收）便一环扣一环地展开。到了这时，企业标准化工作已经不是从前的那种自我运作、孤军奋战了，而是把标准化融入到整个企业通力合作的技术攻坚过程中。有领导亲临指挥，有各部门派来的精兵强将，有协调会上的争吵，有标准实施前的总动员，有项目成功的喜悦，有看得见的为大家所公认的效益。这就是最好的标准化普及，这就是所谓的全员标准化。到了这时，你才会真正体会到标准化在企业里是可以大有作为的，因为企业也只有企业才是标准化取之不尽用之不竭的活力之源。标准化工作怎么做都是在做，何不做得生动活泼、理直气壮！
② 综合标准化使企业标准化迈向新阶段 我国的大中型企业，特别是老企业的标准化工作已经搞了几十年，几乎每个企业都已经制定了大量的企业标准，应该说常用的必要标准已基本齐备。这是企业标准化最艰难的打基础的阶段。因为在这个阶段里，工作的特点是工作量大、经费不足、人手不够、协调不易、不受重视、没有地位、默默无闻、为他人做嫁衣裳…
经过了这个阶段的企业可以说是打下了标准化基础的企业。虽然今后他们还会有新标准的制定和老标准的修订任务（这将成为标准化机构日常业务的一部分），但到了这时，即常用的、必要的标准已基本齐备的情况下，就应及时地把工作重心和着眼点转向标准的应用上，努力实现标准化效益。切不可整天守着这个标准的摊摊而不在应用上、特别是见成效上下功夫，因为这是企业开展标准化的终极目标。
综合标准化恰好就是实现这种转变的最佳选择。这样一来，企业标准化工作可以分为日常业务和综合标准化项目两条线。综合标准化项目就是标准应用项目、解决问题见效益的项目。每年搞多少？ Do your best.在具体运作时，两条业务线之间还可以互相渗透、互相支援。如在开展综合标准化时，把贯彻实施现行标准、采用国际标准、制定新标准、修订老标准等内容列入项目规划，不仅目的性明确而具有成功的保证。使企业标准化工作灵活机动、屈伸自如。
综合标准化不仅为企业标准化开创了新的生长点、新的业务，而且是把企业标准化工作推向了一个新的历史阶段，即由以标准数量的积累为主转向以标准的综合应用并为企业创效益为主的新的发展阶段。
③ 综合标准化使企业标准系统由静态向动态转变 按照传统的标准化方法形成的标准系统，无论是国家的还是企业的，都表现为明显的静态特性。在以往的年代里，经济发展和技术进步的速度缓慢，标准的静态性同客观环境变化的缓慢性之间并无太大的冲突。人类社会发展到今天，可以说客观环境发生了天翻地覆的变化，但是，标准的静态特性仍旧没有改变。到了这时，问题开始显现，矛盾开始暴露。所谓的标准水平太低、标准的适用性差、标准规定不合理之类的概念，都是站在今天的立场上观察以往的标准得出的结论。这种现象，从理论上讲就是标准的静态性与环境的动态性之间的对立。
为了缓解这个矛盾，人们想出了每5年或在更短时间内对标准进行复审之类的办法。这类办法不能从根本上解决问题，是没有办法的办法。可以说这个问题是现代社会向传统标准化的严重挑战。
解决问题的根本之道是提高标准系统的动态性或者开创动态标准化。这对企业尤为重要，因为企业面对的市场环境是千真万确的动态环境。怎样才能使企业标准系统具有动态性呢？这是个需要长期探索的问题。就当前来说综合标准化是可行的对策之一。因为综合标准化的目的性非常明确，通过建立标准综合体（其中大量的是从现有标准中选用的）和相关标准之间的协调，就能有效地从系统中剔除无用的标准、修订落后标准、制定必须的适用标准，这种办法比复审有效得多。企业里每建成一个标准综合体，就相当于有了一个标准模块，通过不断地积累，逐步把传统的（静态的）标准系统改造成为具有自我演进功能的模块化系统。这个系统中的每个模块，都是由处于实施状态的标准组成的，这些标准在实施过程中不断地同环境交换信息并不断地通过信息反馈而调整自己。这就使标准系统有了同环境适应的能力和动态发展的特性。
④ 综合标准化能提高企业标准化工作的技术水平 标准化本来就发源于企业并且是由于技术上的某种需要而被开发出来并被应用于技术活动中。因此，“标准”这个词汇经常以“技术标准”的面目出现，标准的突出特征是它的技术属性。
上个世纪80年代初从日本引进了管理标准和工作标准。从此以后标准化作为一种工具在管理领域被广泛应用，与此同时企业里也开始了大规模地制定管理标准和工作标准。应该说标准化应用领域的扩大是一件好事，但问题在于我们引进这两类标准的同时未能引进制定标准的科学方法。在日本企业里的工作标准是应用工业工程的方法研究和作业测定技术，对现行的工作流程、作业方法以及作业的环境条件进行分析、试验、研究，最后被经过优化的结果形成标准，这样的标准每制定一个都有改进效果，他们制定标准的目的是改进。我们制定标准时非常省事，基本上是描述现状，而那些照抄别人的标准描述的还不是本企业的现状，与此同时还把当时流行的记分、扣分的做法也搬进了标准变成了惩罚工具。
近年来，许多同志开始反思，他们可怕地发现企业标准化有一种简单化的倾向，标准化工作不仅越做越简单化、形式化，而且技术含量越来越低，同行政管理的区别越发不明显，每到机构改革首先拿你开刀。
开展综合标准化有利于扭转这种局面。因为在企业里无论选择了哪个领域的项目列入综合标准化计划，都会涉及到各种类型的标准，不论哪种标准都必须能满足总体目标的要求。在这种机制下，蒙混是过不了关、经不起实践检验的，可以说综合标准化过程的每一步都必须老老实实按科学规律办事，任何一项粗糙工作都会反馈回来。更由于综合标准化项目通常都是有较高的技术难度，常须通过技术攻关制定起关键作用的标准。企业标准化工程师只有经常投身于这样的活动才能迅速地成长起来，企业的标准化工作才能显示出它是一项有较高专业水平的技术活动。
综合标准化到现在还只能说它是一件有发展前景的新生事物，它极有可能成为我国企业实现这次历史性转变的一种科学方法，完成这次跳跃的平台。
我们虽然有前苏联计划经济体制下的经验以及我们自己的试验，但是，总的来说经验的累积还是较为欠缺，还需更广泛的积淀、更深刻的提炼，才能真正地孕育出属于中国的综合标准化。
寄希望于肩负着企业前途和命运的企业家们对标准化的重新定向。
寄希望于标准化工程师们改变企业标准化现状的强烈愿望。
寄希望于所有愿意为创建中国的综合标准化而勇于探索的学者。
寄希望于把实施综合标准化作为竞争对策的企业。
因此，重提综合标准化。

Nano Anti-Corrosion Insulation Board

Nano Anti-Corrosion Insulation Board is laminated by galvanized steel and Nano anti-aging aluminum foil through high-tech processes.

Sheet thickness: 0.15-1.2mm, width≤1300mm, coating thickness as per customers` requirements.

It has strong properties like heat-insulation, alkali resistance, noise reduction, anti-aging and fireproofing.

Application: hardware factory, chemical plant, ceramics factory, warehouse, wholesale market, farm produce fair, livestock breeding plant, casting factory,electroplate factory, chemical fertilizer plant, paper-making factory, bleaching and dyeing house, iron and steel plant, industrial factory building, steel structure factory building.

Nano Anti-Corrosion Insulation Board,Aluminum Insulation Coil,Nano Metal Insulation Plate,Anti-Corrosion Aluminum Insulation

Shandong Wofeng New Material Co., Ltd. , https://www.wofengcoil.com