In honor of World Quality Month 2012 A View from the Q asks, "Why does it take so long for what is known to be true to become common practice? Or, perhaps more importantly, what can we do to accelerate the rate of adoption of quality?"
The problem is that we have to ask these questions. The Quality arts and sciences began developing into mainstream business practices in the mid to late 20th century driven by the teachings of Drs Juran and Deming and supported by other Quality gurus including Crosby, Feigenbaum, Taguchi, and others. Now in the 21st century we expect Quality to be a top priority and cultural norm of all organizations. This is not so, as indicated by the two questions asked this month by Paul Borawski.
To add a little levity to this discussion, let's jump ahead to the 23rd century...there is no Quality department on the Starship Enterprise. Why, because by the 23rd century Quality is everyone's responsibility and all crew members know this.
So what needs to be done in the 21st century to jump-start the future...
We need to educate our workforce in a manner that will make the concepts stick, make every member of the team believe that Quality is part of their job. We've succeeded, to a point, in doing this with safety...nobody wants to go home missing body parts or having sustained an injury on the job so safety is imbedded. Okay, maybe we don't have the same goal in quality but if we can influency our workforce to adopt quality in a similar manner then we will succeed in waste reduction, improved performance, improved customer satisfaction and the list goes on. To do this our senior leaders must walk the talk, use performance metrics as fluidly as they use financial metrics. We as quality practitioners are regularly told that we must speak the language of senior management (money-speak), I say that Senior Management must speak the language of Quality!
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Monday, October 15, 2012
Beyond the traditional quality function
I always enjoy posting in response to Paul Borawski's post on A View from the Q and this month is no exception. The question of the month: 'How well understood and embraced are the contributions of the quality
professional beyond what is traditionally thought of as the quality function?'
Let me begin my answer by telling a story:
I've been working in my current position for about 2 1/2 years. As Senior Quality Assurance Manager my primary site (I have responsibility at 3 sites within our division) has the QC Supervisor as my direct report. He is an older gentleman who joined this company about 20 years ago after selling his own business and semi-retiring. His perspective on Quality is, in my opinion Old World. His primary concern is the inspection for acceptance / rejection of product...this is a necessary evil in this business. My primary concerns are (1) Customer Satisfaction (both internal and external) and (2) Continual Improvement. He continually comments to me that I don't know what I'm doing, I'm always getting into things that are not Quality's concern, I am trying to undermine him. For instance, I volunteered to be a member of the Safety committee. He questions this asking, what does that have to do with Quality. No matter how many times and different ways I explain to him that without a safe work environment we cannot produce a quality product he just disagrees with me and says I'm into things that I shouldn't be involved with.
Okay, enough he said / I said. This is not the first time I've been down a road like this and I can deal with it.
With 4 generations in the workplace old style and new style approaches to all aspects of business, including Quality, will clash.
Expanding the involvement of the Quality function beyond our traditional silos is paramount to our overarching goals of Customer Satisfaction and Continual Improvement.
Let me begin my answer by telling a story:
I've been working in my current position for about 2 1/2 years. As Senior Quality Assurance Manager my primary site (I have responsibility at 3 sites within our division) has the QC Supervisor as my direct report. He is an older gentleman who joined this company about 20 years ago after selling his own business and semi-retiring. His perspective on Quality is, in my opinion Old World. His primary concern is the inspection for acceptance / rejection of product...this is a necessary evil in this business. My primary concerns are (1) Customer Satisfaction (both internal and external) and (2) Continual Improvement. He continually comments to me that I don't know what I'm doing, I'm always getting into things that are not Quality's concern, I am trying to undermine him. For instance, I volunteered to be a member of the Safety committee. He questions this asking, what does that have to do with Quality. No matter how many times and different ways I explain to him that without a safe work environment we cannot produce a quality product he just disagrees with me and says I'm into things that I shouldn't be involved with.
Okay, enough he said / I said. This is not the first time I've been down a road like this and I can deal with it.
With 4 generations in the workplace old style and new style approaches to all aspects of business, including Quality, will clash.
Expanding the involvement of the Quality function beyond our traditional silos is paramount to our overarching goals of Customer Satisfaction and Continual Improvement.
Friday, August 31, 2012
Quality Culture and Feelings
Paul Borawski ASQ CEO touches upon the concepts of Quality Culture and its relation to Feeling in this months A View from the Q.
For a long time know I've heard many organizations discuss transitions to a Safety Culture, a Quality Culture and Customer-centric Culture, etc. Every discussion seems to be the same. We want to change the way we act, perform, think to _______ (fill in the blank). In my opinion, these cultural changes are only required because we've developed inherent weakness in the way we conduct business. A company, any company is in business for one purpose - to make money for it's stakeholders / shareholder. To do this we must provide a service or product that meets our customer's needs and expectations. To do this we must produce that product or develop and deliver that service. I be successful, the level of quality must satisfy the customer. We must also operate in a safe manner to protect our personnel.
So by definition and extention, to be in business we must deliver quality products or service and do what we do safely. So why do we need to 'develop a _____ (again, fill in the blank) culture when that should be inherent in what we do. Okay, to answer my own question, we need a culture transition because we've strayed from the original path and we must right ourselves.
So why does the transition to the right path have to be painful (make us feel uncomfortable). I believe it is because we reach a level of comfort that does not allow for achieving the overall goal...making money by satisfying our customers.
That said, let me now address one of Paul's questions:
When I am hiring into my team I look for people that meet the job criteria, with personalities that fit the personality (culture) of the organization, that I believe will stick around for an extended period of time and for people with whom I can work comfortably and succesfully. This applies regardless of the perceived culture of the organization. I most instances I am also considering succession planning when hiring. Is this person capable of moving up through the organization and, if hired into the right position, eventually becoming my replacement. I guess all of this means, does the person fit the culture of the organization now.
For a long time know I've heard many organizations discuss transitions to a Safety Culture, a Quality Culture and Customer-centric Culture, etc. Every discussion seems to be the same. We want to change the way we act, perform, think to _______ (fill in the blank). In my opinion, these cultural changes are only required because we've developed inherent weakness in the way we conduct business. A company, any company is in business for one purpose - to make money for it's stakeholders / shareholder. To do this we must provide a service or product that meets our customer's needs and expectations. To do this we must produce that product or develop and deliver that service. I be successful, the level of quality must satisfy the customer. We must also operate in a safe manner to protect our personnel.
So by definition and extention, to be in business we must deliver quality products or service and do what we do safely. So why do we need to 'develop a _____ (again, fill in the blank) culture when that should be inherent in what we do. Okay, to answer my own question, we need a culture transition because we've strayed from the original path and we must right ourselves.
So why does the transition to the right path have to be painful (make us feel uncomfortable). I believe it is because we reach a level of comfort that does not allow for achieving the overall goal...making money by satisfying our customers.
That said, let me now address one of Paul's questions:
"If you’re working on a culture of quality, or sustaining one, what do you look for in the people you
hire into the organization?"
When I am hiring into my team I look for people that meet the job criteria, with personalities that fit the personality (culture) of the organization, that I believe will stick around for an extended period of time and for people with whom I can work comfortably and succesfully. This applies regardless of the perceived culture of the organization. I most instances I am also considering succession planning when hiring. Is this person capable of moving up through the organization and, if hired into the right position, eventually becoming my replacement. I guess all of this means, does the person fit the culture of the organization now.
Monday, July 23, 2012
Business Speak
When blogging as a member of the ASQ Influential Voices team I begin by saying ASQ CEO Paul Borawski in his blog A View from the Q asked the question...so staying true to form...Paul asks: Do you speak the “language of business”? How important is it, in your experience?
Let's start with the language of business...
I've been hearing this discussion about the language of business since I started as a quality professional back in the days of enlightenment...the 1980's. I'm sure the discussion was not new then. So why are we still trying to encourage our quality professionals to speak this languauge...shouldn't this be motherhood and apple pie by now? The reason we need to keep selling the business speak is that our Engineering schools are still failing us. As an Engineering student I was required to take a course called Engineering Economics. It was a senior year requirement and basically taught about break-even points. No other required course in my Engineering program discussed Business, Money, Costs, Expenses, Income, Revenue, or any other language of business. I did take Accounting as an elective so I was a bit ahead of the curve. Still neither course mentioned touched on Business speak...Failure STEM!
How important is it in my experience?
Try to solicit funding in your organization for simple quality tools like QMS software, new test equipment, SPC software, or even new furniture without a cost justification, an ROI or details of all the expenses associated with training and installation and see how far you get. Even preparing a simple expense report for business travel requires a simple understanding of business speak. Again, without basic training in the language of business, we as Quality professionals will fail...yet another failure of STEM, in my opinion.
Sure, Engineering students have among the heaviest course loads in any college or university yet we fail to teach them what they really need to know for success...change the requirements for Engineering programs to include Business 101, Business Law and basic Accounting 101. Once this is done there will be no need for this discussion of speaking the language of business.
Let's start with the language of business...
I've been hearing this discussion about the language of business since I started as a quality professional back in the days of enlightenment...the 1980's. I'm sure the discussion was not new then. So why are we still trying to encourage our quality professionals to speak this languauge...shouldn't this be motherhood and apple pie by now? The reason we need to keep selling the business speak is that our Engineering schools are still failing us. As an Engineering student I was required to take a course called Engineering Economics. It was a senior year requirement and basically taught about break-even points. No other required course in my Engineering program discussed Business, Money, Costs, Expenses, Income, Revenue, or any other language of business. I did take Accounting as an elective so I was a bit ahead of the curve. Still neither course mentioned touched on Business speak...Failure STEM!
How important is it in my experience?
Try to solicit funding in your organization for simple quality tools like QMS software, new test equipment, SPC software, or even new furniture without a cost justification, an ROI or details of all the expenses associated with training and installation and see how far you get. Even preparing a simple expense report for business travel requires a simple understanding of business speak. Again, without basic training in the language of business, we as Quality professionals will fail...yet another failure of STEM, in my opinion.
Sure, Engineering students have among the heaviest course loads in any college or university yet we fail to teach them what they really need to know for success...change the requirements for Engineering programs to include Business 101, Business Law and basic Accounting 101. Once this is done there will be no need for this discussion of speaking the language of business.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)