본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

quality-management

Builds quality into operations — defining standards, catching defects at the right point, root cause analysis, and continuous improvement. Use this to reduce a defect or error rate, design quality controls into a process, run a root cause analysis, respond to a customer quality complaint, or set up quality metrics that drive behavior.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(2)

  • SKILL.md4.0 KB
  • references/sources.md1.7 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Quality management

Inspection at the end sorts good from bad. It never makes anything good. Quality is decided by the process that produced the work, so that is where the effort belongs.

Define quality as the customer experiences it

A standard nobody outside the team recognizes is a preference. State quality in terms a customer would agree with: correct, on time, complete, usable — with a threshold, so conformance is a fact rather than an opinion.

Then distinguish:

  • Specification quality — does it match what was specified?
  • Fitness for purpose — does the specification serve the actual need?

A process can hit specification perfectly while producing something nobody wants. Only the second question protects against that.

Catch defects where they are cheap

Cost of correction rises steeply with distance from the point of creation. Order of preference:

  1. Prevent — make the defect impossible. Constraints, defaults, required fields, fixtures.
  2. Detect at source — the person doing the work sees the error immediately.
  3. Detect downstream — the next step catches it. Slower, and adds rework.
  4. Detect at the customer — the most expensive possible option, and it costs trust as well.

Every control pushed one step earlier is worth more than an additional control at the end.

Root cause, not first cause

"Human error" is where analysis stops, not where it should. Ask what made the error easy to make and hard to notice: an ambiguous form, an unenforced sequence, a target that rewarded speed.

Work backwards through the causal chain until you reach something you can change structurally. A corrective action that depends on people being more careful is not a corrective action — the same conditions will produce the same result with different people.

Verify the fix by watching the defect rate, not by confirming the action was completed.

Metrics that do not corrupt

Any quality metric attached to individual performance will be gamed, usually by reclassifying defects rather than preventing them. Measure at the process level, review trends rather than points, and pair any rate metric with a volume metric so improvement by doing less is visible.

Escaped defects — those the customer found — are the honest measure. Everything else is a proxy.

Sources

references/sources.md in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.

Tooling

A quality management system is a regulatory purchase before it is an operational one. Greenlight Guru, Qualio, MasterControl, ETQ and similar exist because regulated industries need document control, training records and corrective actions in an auditable system. Outside those industries a well-run issue tracker and a document repository cover the same ground.

Corrective and preventive action tracking is the part worth having in one place regardless of tool, because the recurring finding is always an action from last time that was never closed.

Statistical process control needs measurement more than software. A control chart in a spreadsheet built on real measurements beats a platform fed by nobody.

Never

  • Attribute a defect to carelessness and stop there.
  • Add an inspection step in place of fixing the process that produced the defect.
  • Set a quality target for an individual that they can meet by reclassifying.
  • Close a corrective action without evidence the rate moved.

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Designs and audits who can reach what — authentication, authorization models, privileged access, service credentials, and joiner-mover-leaver process. Use this to design a permissions model, run an access review, reduce standing privilege, handle offboarding, set up SSO or MFA, manage service and machine credentials, or diagnose why permissions have sprawled.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

cbrock84/headcount2.1천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Concentrates marketing and sales effort on a named set of accounts rather than on volume — qualifying whether the model fits your economics at all, building the account list and the buying group inside each, tiering effort against account value, coordinating so the account experiences one campaign rather than several, and measuring account progression instead of leads. Use this to decide whether to run an account-based program, build one, or work out why an existing one produces activity and no pipeline.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

cbrock84/headcount2.1천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Gets new users from signup to first real value — signup flow, onboarding, time-to-value, and the early experience that determines whether someone becomes a user or a lapsed account. Use this to design or fix signup and onboarding, diagnose why signups do not convert to active use, reduce time-to-value, or decide what a new user must accomplish first.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

cbrock84/headcount2.1천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Designs orchestrator-and-subagent hierarchies for a repository — splitting agents by exclusive write surface, pairing every producer with an independent auditor, and enforcing the split with a script that runs in CI. Use this whenever the user wants to set up, expand, audit, or fix a multi-agent or subagent structure for a codebase; asks how to divide work between agents; wants agent charters, roles, or a surface map written; or is hitting agents that collide on the same files, review their own work, or drift from their remit. Also use when sizing a roster or deciding whether a new agent is justified.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

cbrock84/headcount2.1천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Governs models and AI systems in production — intended use, evaluation, monitoring, human oversight, documentation, and the decision to deploy or retire. Use this before deploying a model or AI feature, when defining evaluation criteria, when a model's behavior has drifted, when assessing AI risk or regulatory exposure, or when deciding whether an AI system is fit for a consequential decision.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

cbrock84/headcount2.1천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Produces executive-level research — market sizing, competitor mapping, trend analysis, and strategic intelligence — grounded in cited sources with the confidence in each claim made explicit. Use this to analyze a market or industry, map competitors, evaluate a market-entry or build-versus-buy decision, produce a research brief, or assemble evidence for a decision. Also use when comparing options that need a structured, evidence-based verdict rather than an opinion.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

cbrock84/headcount2.1천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

cbrock84의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고