Another important insight arising from the case studies concerns
the risk of being too reductionist when applying the
framework. The PD is frequently a small component of a broader
workstation. Therefore, sometimes it is not straightforward to
define the boundaries of the poka-yoke (i.e. where the poka-yoke
ends and where the rest of the workstation begins). This difficulty
was encountered, for example, during the assessment of PQ1.
The lack of calibration of the screwdriver, while being a problem,
was not considered to be a failure of the poka-yoke, since the
screwdriver, by itself, had not any inspection role concerning the
abnormality investigated. Nevertheless, a holistic view during the
application process made it possible to identify this shortcoming,
even though it did not alter the score of the poka-yoke. By contrast,
in the assessment of PQ2, the whole workstation was considered
to be the poka-yoke. On the one hand, this eliminated doubts on
the border between the poka-yoke and the workstation. On the
other hand, this was intrinsically bad, since, if the workstation was
the poka-yoke, this meant that it was fully dedicated to reactive
inspection.