The first major change we need to make is this antiquated 1 technician, 1 name on the calibration certification and 1 tech number on the label quality system paradigm.
Instruments today are multi-functional, a tech should not have to move standards around to calibrate it.. We should move the UUTs to the station with the standards and let the technician who works that station do that part of the calibration. (and be able to track who did what and when)
**Imagine if Ford, had each employee build one car start to finish, rearranging the plant as needed.
contrary to popular belief, calibration is not a manufacturing process, the "paradigm" as you call one tech per sticker is called metrology. imagine if you went to get your kidney out and one station only opened you, you were carted away where another station removed your kidney, another tech installed your kidney, and yet another closed you. the other problem of a "station" tech is what happens when joe the power ref guy goes on vacation? Ford has multiple employees to fill that gap. what small lab can hire just for that reason? truth is the calibration worlds doing it to itself, you have labs that will bid any cost and basically just do the paper work because its the only way to break even. no one would take their cars to a repair place they knew weren't doing the work just so they could get the new 3000 mile sticker in the window, yet mfrs are willing to do just that for their calibrated items. can you blame the small lab for bidding less on every calibration, yes and no, but where does the underbidding eventually go? downhill as for the perfect world of setting up stations to do one function, who can afford that? who's 5500s are doing meters one minute, scopes the next, then temp. if i were a salesman, i would be pushing the same thing.