Quality Matters

The Cost of Non-Quality: COPQ and Social Responsibility

2012-01-23T11:48:00.001-06:00

In his latest blog post, ASQ CEO Paul Borawski asks whether economists have the tools to make a compelling argument for the cost of poor quality at a societal level? For me, the COPQ Iceberg came immediately to mind. In an article written by Joseph A. DeFeo and published in the May 2011 issue of Quality Progress, quality costs were represented as "Visible" and "Hidden" costs. Visible costs of poor quality include scrap, waste, rework, inspection, disposition, disposal, customer complaints and warranty costs, etc. Hidden costs of poor quality are more difficult to measure and quantify - but often yield the greatest opportunity to positively impact organizational performance - such as lost customers, employee turnover, pricing and billing errors, inventory costs, costs to expedite orders, premium freight, overtime, and many other forms of waste (muda). According to a report published in 2005 by the Juran Institute, the Cost of Quality is estimated at 10-40% of sales, depending on the quality level (i.e. "Sigma") of the process.

But COPQ alone is not an adequate measure of Quality and its impact to organizational success. It has been my experience that most measures of COPQ are inward facing (i.e. internally-focused) and often solely process focused. Every organization should also deploy measures of business process speed, employee engagement and customer satisfaction; measures such as value stream cycle time and lead time, factory escapes (defective parts per million), customer complaint resolution time and effectiveness, customer satisfaction, employee engagement pulse surveys, etc. Organizational speed, agility, flexibility and responsiveness provide critical competitive advantage in today's global economy. For example, a story recently published in the New York Times reveals Apple's decision to manufacture the iPhone outside the United States was based primarily on the need the need for a low cost yet capable, flexible workforce, as well as an agile and responsive manufacturing and supply chain.

On the flip side, a story appearing in a Yahoo finance blog sheds some light on the appalling labor conditions inside Foxconn, Apple's largest overseas contract manufacturer. Indeed, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Sustainability are two significant - and growing - opportunities for the Quality discipline to help show organizations the way towards profitable organizational performance improvement with minimal loss to society. If, as attributed to Peter Drucker, Tom Peters, Edwards Deming, Lord Kelvin and others, What gets measured, gets done (improved), then how do we measure CSR and Sustainability? I believe the Baldrige Program, with its Criteria, site visits and role model best practices provides an excellent framework for improving the net economic and social value of organizational performance.

Book Review - Journey to Emerald City

2012-01-15T14:46:00.005-06:00

I've been asked to write a series of reviews for the ASQ MN Section on books I have read and recommend with respect to leadership and continuous improvement. One of the books I recommend for every Quality Manager's library is Journey to Emerald City.

Journey to Emerald City is not a new book – it was copyrighted in 1999 – but it is one of my “Top 15” for every Quality Manager’s library. Journey to Emerald City is a follow-up book to The Oz Principle in which the authors illustrate the importance of self-accountability towards achieving team and organizational goals. In The Oz Principle the authors present a “Steps to Accountability”^SM roadmap, which explains “Above the Line” and “Below the Line” thoughts and actions. “Below the Line” habits result in the blame game; “Above the Line” habits result in accountability. In Journey to Emerald City, Connors and Smith explore the relationship between a company's culture and its ability or inability to effectively implement its strategic plan to achieve the desired results, and describe how to “Create a Culture of Accountability”^SM.

Both books use the characters in L. Frank Baum’s The Wizard of Oz to illustrate the key points. For example, an organization’s strategic plan is depicted as the yellow brick road; reaching the Emerald City is the goal. Each Oz character has their own failings and needs – and brings their own set of unique skills. Through personal accountability, teamwork and a shared common vision they are able to overcome tremendous obstacles to achieve personal and team goals.

I first became exposed to Journey to Emerald City while serving as Chair of the ASQ Statistics Division. During our 2000 Long Range Planning session, the Division leadership team was seeking to fundamentally change the direction of the Division from being perceived as a statistical tool pharmacy to an organization purposed to promote and advance statistical thinking everywhere. ("Statistical Thinking Everywhere" was the Statistics Division's vision statement first verbalized back in 1996. New division products and services were developed and distributed in alignment with this vision). The division leadership team recognized that a culture change was required to sustain our mission and vision as division leaders rotated on and off the Council. Then Chair-elect, Davis Balestracci, a degreed statistician and management consultant, had been focused on helping his clients’ leaders drive organizational change. Davis brought the "Results Pyramid"^SM (see below) to the Division planning process. The ASQ Statistics Division leadership team bought into Connors and Smith’s prescribed culture change model and we successfully implemented our strategic, annual and tactical plans that resulted in 11 consecutive years of ASQ “Top Achiever” status in division operations and member satisfaction.

I especially like Journey to Emerald City because it clearly communicates the important role of management as change agents to create the experiences and model the desired behaviors to achieve the expected results. The main points of Connors and Smith’ message is simple:

• An organization’s leaders must create its culture

• The organization’s culture will create its results

• A Culture of Accountability is the most effective culture to achieve results

• Accelerating the transition to a Culture of Accountability creates competitive and organizational advantage.

In Journey to Emerald City, the authors present the “Results Pyramid”^SM that clearly explains how experiences, beliefs and actions create culture; and, discuss how management must create experiences and model behaviors to foster beliefs that will drive the actions necessary to achieve desired results.

As I explained in the first paragraph, Journey to Emerald City was written back in 1999. More recently, the authors have launched a new website, Partners in Leadership, offering free web seminars on workplace accountability.

2011: Quality in Review

2011-12-18T14:11:00.003-06:00

In his year-end post, Paul Borawski offers his perspectives of some positive and negative events in the field of Quality and asks for your examples of successes and disappointments in Quality.

Like Paul, I am disappointed that the federal government chose to discontinue its funding of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Program. As a Baldrige Evaluator for the State of Minnesota, I have seen first hand how the Criteria have helped many diverse organizations - including manufacturing, healthcare, education, retail, banking and services improve their overall business performance results. Fortunately, the Baldrige Foundation and many state and regional programs will be able to transition the program to the private sector. In my view, the National Award is less important than continuing the application - review - visit process such as that which exists in the Minnesota state program where every applicant gets a site visit.

Other positive news on the Quality front is the movement to sustainability, corporate social responsibility and Total Customer Experience. These foci, along with Hoshin kanri planning, are successfully elevating Quality into the C-suites of businesses and organizations for truly impactful and differentiating performance improvement. Demonstrating the important role of repeatable processes for innovation and growth is another exciting opportunity for the Quality professional. I am extremely proud to see that my employer, 3M, long highly regarded for its unparallelled product quality, is once again recognized as one of the world's most innovative companies - ranked #3 in Forbes (April 2011) based on survey responses of more than 450 innovation executives at more than 400 different companies around the globe.

As the Chair-elect for ASQ Section 1203 I am also extremely pleased with changes the Executive Board and our committees are making in the MN Section. A significant outcome of our 2008 Long Range Planning process was a redesign of our Board, strengthening our focus on member recruitment and development. And, the MNASQ website was recently redesigned to improve communications with our members. In July 2011 the MNASQ Board completed another round of Long Range Planning (LRP) where we incorporated several tools and approach that I brought from my many years of service to the ASQ Statistics Division (Chair 1999-2000 and 2002-2003). We also incorporated the Hoshin X-matrix, A3s and Bowler scorecard. The MNASQ LRP participants identified seven key strategies for the next 3-5 years, prioritized our annual strategies for the current fiscal year, and assigned project owners to our key tactics. The Section's Mission and Vision statements were revised to emphasize "community" and "total customer experience". I am very excited by the Program Committee's plans for the annual MN Quality Conference that has been re-designed and re-purposed as the Professional Development Summit. The MN ASQ Section is also sponsoring an invitation-only Executive Roundtable where local executives and senior quality leaders will discuss, in a non-competing peer-to-peer format, common challenges and solutions as per the ASQ 2011 Future of Quality study. The MN Council for Quality and Manufacturers' Alliance are co-sponsoring this unique event with MNASQ.

2010-2011 has been a challenging year for the US and global economies, but I am confident that the global Quality community's influence will only continue to grow in breadth, depth, and impact. I look forward to exciting opportunities in 2011-2012 and the years ahead.

Raising the Voice of Quality - World Quality Month

2011-11-14T22:38:00.003-06:00

In his November 2011 blog post, ASQ CEO Paul Borawski states, "The biggest barrier quality faces is making people understand that excellence doesn’t just happen. Excellence isn’t good intent. Through quality, excellence is available to everyone." Paul asks every Quality professional and evangelist to raise the voice of quality during World Quality Month.

I have the distinct pleasure of working for a company with a solid reputation for innovation, quality and social responsibility. 3M and many of its brands like Post-it®, Scotch™, etc., are recognized the world over for quality products that help our customers succeed. Our corporate Quality Policy is "Deliver the Promise". We are well aware that today's sophisticated, savvy customer expects and demands quality; that is, quality is a given. Customer loyalty today is earned through an engaged customer - a customer that advocates and recommends your products and service.

3M's quality culture has been nurtured for over 109 years, born out of William L. McKnight's principles. More recently, James McNerney became 3M's CEO in late 2000 - the first 3M CEO from outside the organization. Mr McNerney is credited with bringing Six Sigma to 3M based on his positive experiences in GE, to enhance our already strong quality improvement approach and as a methodology to develop our future leaders. After leading 3M for a short while, and having met with many of our biggest customers, McNerney revealed a key learning of his own... that our customers genuinely like us! Jim reinforced to 3M employees just how precious and unusual this level of customer advocacy is... and that it must be preserved and continuously improved for competitive advantage and performance excellence. 3M's current CEO, George Buckley is leading the resurgence of customer-inspired innovation, and 3M growth through customer success.

In recognition of World Quality Month, let's re-dedicate our commitment to customer-focused quality to deliver Total Customer Experience. Experience Quality is the new frontier of excellence. A frontier ripe for the new generations of quality leaders to exploit for the benefit of humanity.

Celebrating World Quality Month

2011-10-27T19:04:00.000-05:00

In his October 2011 blog post ASQ CEO Paul Borawski asks, “How is it that you came to be passionate about quality?” and “How will you help in your country to observe and celebrate the importance of quality?”.

I thought I would share my story in a home video created on my Flip Video™ Camcorder and edited using Camtasia Studio software.

ASQ recently announced the new World Quality Month website: http://asq.org/world-quality-month/index.html. November is designated as a worldwide celebration of quality – a time to showcase the advancements and valuable quality contributions in businesses, communities and institutions. Visit this site often to learn about quality tools and techniques, heroes and the stories of quality in practice everyday, and World Quality Month events.

Quality and Business Performance Achieved Through Constancy of Purpose

2011-10-09T13:24:00.001-05:00

In the September 2011 posting to A View from the Q, ASQ's Managing Director Laurel Nelson-Rowe asks, "Do you think companies must sometimes (often? regularly?) undergo radical organizational change or substantial economic shifts to get back to the rigorous quality systems?" I recently completed my annual Baldrige Evaluator refresher training for the MN State Quality Award. I believe that the Baldrige Criteria contain all the elements necessary and sufficient for sustainable organizational success. The Criteria are based on key learnings adopted and synthesized from role model organizations in the following 7 categories:

Leadership (120 pts)
Strategic Planning (85 pts)
Customer Focus (85 pts)
Measurement, Analysis, and Knowledge Management (90 pts)
Workforce Focus (85 pts)
Operations Focus (85 pts)
Results (450 pts).

Rightfully, Results and Leadership are the two most important categories in the Baldrige Criteria. Results are the ultimate benchmark of organizational performance; Leadership is critical for sustained results. Simply stated, leaders must lead. The successful leader is able to create and communicate a compelling vision that unifies and aligns the organization to common goals. Authors Roger Conners and Tom Smith (Oz Principle and Journey to the Emerald City) state that leaders must create a culture and create the experiences (i.e. model the behaviors) that foster beliefs and drive actions to produce the desired results for competitive advantage.

During Laurel Nelson-Rowe's interview with Terry Woychowski, GM's VP of Global Quality & Launch, Terry shared the 3 P's of GM's emerging culture: Promise, Personal, and Performance. I agree that quality is personal. Personal accountability is enabled through an engaged workforce. Effective leaders understand the need to monitor and improve employee satisfaction and build employee engagement. Delivering the Promise is achieved through personal accountability, teamwork and aligned processes. One can often accurately assess process performance, product quality and organizational health by a site visit. For example, evidence of poor housekeeping or unsafe practices are often symptomatic of uncontrolled processes, lack of personal accountability and ineffective leadership. If an organization lacks respect for its employees, (or individuals for their peers and colleagues) then what am I to infer about its/their commitment to quality processes, products, or service?

Though I am an unabashed Ford man, I sincerely wish GM a successful comeback and sustained performance. The automotive industry is a bell-weather of the US economy.

Baldrige Blues

2011-09-25T16:35:00.003-05:00

The U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science recently voted not to fund the Baldrige Program for fiscal year 2012. Everyone agrees that the U.S. Government must drastically cut its spending to reduce our national debt. However, not all spending is the same; not all dollar-for-dollar cuts are equal. The Baldrige Program costs just $10M per year; its return on investment is estimated at $25B in benefits to the U.S. economy. I agree with Paul Borawski that model programs such as Baldrige ought to be "showcased not eliminated."

The Baldrige Program is a proven systemic management framework helping organizations achieve performance excellence. Senior leaders use the Baldrige Criteria to build and sustain an organization focused on continual performance improvement, accomplishment of strategic objectives, innovation, and organizational agility. In today's world of a recessionary global economy, low growth and a highly erratic stock market many organizations lack the confidence to hire for growth. Spending is again significantly curtailed in order to preserve cash, similar to what we experienced in 2009 when Cash was King.

What is needed now is a roadmap to growth and profitability; a framework that is the Baldrige Program. Given today's economic environment, businesses need to remember the key teachings of the Deming Chain Cycle: do not pursue cost reduction for cost savings sake; rather, focus on delivering customer value through quality and productivity improvement. Institutionalize constancy of purpose and view quality as a competitive strategy. Customer-focused quality improvement will result in less waste and scrap, improved productivity, lower costs, increased customer satisfaction, more market share, more growth... and more jobs.

I encourage everyone to contact your elected government officials to save - and expand - the Baldrige Program.

Quality - Past and Present

2011-09-05T20:18:00.000-05:00

In his latest blog post Paul Borawski asks two questions pertaining to the past and future of quality and ASQ.

Does the quality community bear some responsibility for making sure its philosophic foundations are not lost to history?
As a Certified Manager of Quality / Organizational Excellence (CQM/OE) and a Certified Quality Engineer (CQE), I always felt that ASQ over-emphasized the importance of being able to match the Quality guru with his contributions to quality philosophy in its certification exams. Quality philosophy, principles, tools and methods are bedrock. In this age of the internet, powerful search engines exist that provide almost instantaneous global access to man's acquired, accumulated knowledge. Social and professional networking tools such as wiki's, websites, webinars, Facebook, LinkedIn, blogs, microblogs, etc., offer unlimited access to case studies, best practices, benchmarking, discussion boards, tools, templates, and global collaboration with knowledge experts. In addition, there are numerous, prestigious awards that honor and perpetuate the memory and philosophy of the quality gurus. More important, I believe, is ASQ's role and value proposition to couple and disseminate quality theory, philosophy, and principles with continuous improvement methods and tools, organizational and project management skills, team dynamics and interpersonal communication skills, change management, leadership principles, and organizational design to empower individuals and organizations to achieve excellence. Knowledge of what to do, and how to do it are only part of any solution. A good plan poorly executed is no better than no plan at all. Flawless execution is what separates the winners from the losers; and, execution requires more than just an understanding of how to use a tool.

What do professionals under the age of 35 see as the future of quality?
I am not a member of this demographic, but my role in 3M has me teaching, coaching and consulting many younger professionals as well as seasoned experts. In more recent classroom discussions of "Quality" many of the younger professionals cite customer focus, defect-free features, entitlement thinking, reliability, speed, and end-to-end value stream performance. Definitions of Quality range from the traditional "Conformance to Requirements" (Crosby), "Fitness for Use" (Juran), "Delight the Customer", "Loss to Society"(Taguchi), etc. but on a more personal level I hear phrases like service, community, social responsibility and sustainability.

Creating a Culture of Accountability to Drive Statistical Thinking

2011-08-31T12:38:00.001-05:00

Peter Drucker, famed management consultant, is credited to have been the first to say, "Culture eats strategy for breakfast". I frequently recommend the book Journey to Emerald City by Roger Conners in organizations I am involved with, to help the leadership team understand their role in driving change. This book was written in 1999 and is just as relevant today as it was 12 years ago. (http://www.amazon.com/Journey-Emerald-City-Roger-Connors/dp/073520358X)

Albert Einstein stated that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. If we want to create a customer focused, statistical thinking, run-to-target culture, our leaders and key influencers ("key hubs" - the hidden organization - http://www.keyhubs.com/) must not just give casual lip service to run-to-target expectations in presentations and reviews, but must model the desired behaiors. They must create the experiences that will change beliefs and actions (accountability) to deliver the expected results. For example, managers and leaders must end the practice of reacting to two data points; instead, look for patterns, trends and shifts in the data, then investigate for deeper root causes. Management, leaders and key hubs must model this practice in their day to day activities.

Roger Conners writes, "Getting people to take the right action is not accomplished by command and control, rather by engaging their hearts and minds in fulfiling the purpose of the organization... Ernest Hemingway said never to mistake motion for action. Motion produces activity. Action produces results... The distinction between motion and action underscores the need to have people assume accountability for producing results." Roger Conners further explains the four steps to accountability as: See It, Own It, Solve It, and Do It, and in his book Journey to the Emerald City, Roger Conners illustrates how the main characters in The Wizard of Oz apply the Steps to Accountability representing Above the Line actions and thinking versus Below the Line habits of thought and behavior.

Personal Accountability is the central message in John G. Miller's book QBQ! Question Behind the Question. (http://qbq.com/). Personal Accountability means avoiding the blame game and not playing the victim.

Miller offers three simple guidelines for asking better questions. He says that QBQ's:

begin with "What" or "How" (not "Why," "When," or "Who");
contain an "I" (not "they," "them," "we," or "you");
focus on action.

Where have you seen good examples of managers and leaders modeling the behavior of statstical thinking?

Do You Have "Good" Inventory, or "Bad" Inventory?

2011-08-07T16:30:00.003-05:00

Imagine Glinda the Good Witch of the North (Wizard of Oz movie) observing your current value stream when she encounters piles of inventory. To each inventory bucket she would ask, "Are you good inventory or bad inventory?" Not all inventory is equally bad; some inventory is necessary given the current lack of flow and synchronization in your end-to-end value stream. Lean principles and industrial engineering tell us that inventory is an outcome of a lack of speed; and, eliminating inventory frees up cash that can otherwise be used more effectively elsewhere in your organization to generate growth. Unfortunately, many process improvement teams erroneously treat inventory as a critical 'x' in their Lean Six Sigma projects to improve value stream performance. As a result many improvement teams focus on reducing the piles of incoming materials and/or finished goods inventory - by working with their supplier base to adopt vendor managed inventory, and/or working with their customers to try to improve forecast accuracy and/or extend the acceptable lead time. Unfortunately, the financial benefits are often short-lived because these improvements did not address the lack of stability and flow in the organization's value stream. Nor did the earlier changes address the culture of the organization that fundamentally accepts inventory as a necessary cost of business.

Instead, treat inventory is an outcome ('Y'). Speed - the lack of it - is a critical 'x'. A focus on speed will transform the value stream. To become faster the value stream capability and stability must be improved. Flow cannot be sustained in an unstable, unpredictable environment. Increased speed results in increased productivity, yield, quality and reliability, improved product availability, predictable service levels, additional capacity for growth, and improved cash flow.

Speed can be improved through the removal of non-value-add work, fewer touches, elimination of waste, smaller batch sizes and shorter production run lengths, quicker changeovers. Inventory, when needed (e.g. due to lack of synchronization), now can be moved upstream where it is less expensive and more flexible. So, if your value stream has excess inventory, Speed is the yellow brick road to your Emerald City.

Putting Quality in its Rightful Place

2011-07-24T21:43:00.001-05:00

ASQ's Paul Borawski recently had the privilege of interviewing Tata Group's Dr. J.J. Irani about its quality journey to excellence. Tata Group's quality journey began in the late 1980's with the adoption of Joseph Juran's quality improvement methodology, then embraced the Malcolm Baldrige criteria in the 1990's. Dr. Irani states that every organization must have a Quality System - and it must be institutionalized throughout its operations. "A quality management system is the DNA of an organization; Quality is in everything we do.. it is our culture" states Dr. Irani.

Paul Borawski asks, "I find hope in the wisdom of Dr. Irani , and ask myself—and you—how can we, you and I, and ASQ, raise the voice of Dr. Irani and other enlightened leaders to put quality in its rightful place in every organization and in our communities?

I attended the Pittsburgh WCQI and heard Dr. Irani's keynote address. To be honest, I was underwhelmed by his presentation. While Dr. Irani brings solid credentials, and exhibited sincerity and genuine authenticity, his laid back style lacked that certain pizzazz - or what marketers call "Pop". However, upon returning to my office and browsing the internet, I became very impressed by Tata Group. Tata's tagline is, "Leadership with Trust." Tata Group's website states their principle purpose is "To improve the quality of life of the communities it serves". Dr. Irani stated that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is not a cost, it is an investment, built on trust, transparency, governance and ethics. Tata Group's quality philosophy is a model for every enterprise.

Which brings me back to Paul Borawski's question / challenge: How can we raise the voice of Dr. Irani and other enlightened leaders to put quality in its rightful place in every organization? Tata Group's quality journey is on its 4th decade of continuous improvement. How many other organizations or communities have that type of staying power, that level of constancy of purpose? My initial reaction to Dr. Irani's WCQI presentation was rather subdued because I was expecting something more flamboyant, more polished, more entertaining. Yet Tata Group's quality story is very compelling indeed. I posit that this need to be entertained, given our rather short attention spans are an indictment of our fast paced society, where change is accelerating exponentially. So, how do we capture the hearts and minds of the C-Suite to elevate quality?

First, we must always remember to speak the language of management... money.

Second, we must demonstrate the direct relationship between quality and Social Responsibility - by focusing on the elimination of waste.

Third, executives learn best by collaborating with their peers and their bosses. The ASQ Executive Roundtable is an excellent forum that brings Enterprise member organizations together to discuss common challenges and share best practices. The local MN ASQ Section recently completed its 3 year Long Range Planning session. One of its outcomes is to develop an Executive Roundtable of Quality Directors and leaders from all sectors of the local economy to collect VOC and match organizational needs with products and services - whether provided by ASQ or our partners. In addition, we (quality professionals) must forge new alliances and partnerships with organizations that cater to the C-Suite; organizations like The Conference Board. The Conference Board is a global, independent business membership and research association working in the public interest to help its member companies understand and deal with the most critical issues of our time.

Fourth, knowledge is increasing exponentially. C-suite executives do not have time to peruse all of the journals and other sources of knowledge sharing on their own. The Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award showcases "role model" organizations in every sector of the economy. However, recent budget discussions in the US Congress puts government funding support the Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award at severe risk. We must find new, innovative ways to keep the Baldrige Criteria alive, and increase its relevance to the executive. Perhaps incorporate it into the MBA body of knowledge?

The Improving Quality at Ford Motor Company

2011-06-13T10:09:00.003-05:00

I wholeheartedly echo the observations of ASQ CEO Paul Borawski and Bennie Fowler, group vice president of quality at Ford, that quality must focus on more than product - it must focus on the entire customer experience Like many Americans, I have experienced the cycle of quality doldrums and resurgence in the automotive industry; and in my case, particularly at Ford. My wife and I have been Ford owners ever since we first learned to drive – over 30 years ago. My first car was a 1970 Ford Torino; my wife’s first car was a Ford Maverick. We have owned Mustangs, Mustang II, Bronco IIs, Explorers, Ranger, Festiva, Aspire, Windstars, SportTrac, etc. We each, independently, made the mistake once of trying another brand, and we vowed never to repeat that mistake. My wife had purchased a brand new Jeep CJ7, and while it was fun to ride, a piston blew out at just 30,000 miles – and Jeep refused to cover the repair. I once owned a Toyota small pick-up, which I really enjoyed but had to give up as my family grew in size; and a 1/2 ton Dodge pick-up – that I absolutely hated. Today we own a factory-ordered windviel blue 2005 Mustang GT convertible and a 2008 Edge Limited (our second). We love them. Excellent design, styling, comfort, features, finish, and reliability.

Our lone complaint with Ford - all automotive companies really - is the lack of service competency and overall consistency among their dealer network. The service department at our local Ford dealer is deplorable. Very unpredictable. Rarely have they diagnosed and resolved a problem upon the first visit. They are just not customer focused. We have driven out of our way, to a different Ford dealer in another town, just to receive the level of service and customer focus we deserve.

I have the great fortune of having a neighbor who is the general manager of a car dealership for a competitive brand. His dealership is actually part of a network that owns car dealerships of just about every automobile manufacturer. Although I am not a fan of the brands at his dealership, my neighbor provides exceptional customer service – to everyone in our neighborhood. He cheerfully exchanges vehicles for a day, regardless of the brand, to take a neighbor’s car in for an oil change, warranty work (he drives the neighbor’s car to the authorized dealer), routine service, and even major repairs. Furthermore, all of his employees offer the same level of service for their family, friends, customers and neighbors.

We put our 2005 Mustang GT convertible in storage for the Minnesota winters. “Sally” (based on a 1966 song by Wilson Pickett) has never seen a snowflake. Every year for the last 6 years this same neighbor has provided me with a lease vehicle for the winter; sometimes new, sometimes gently used. Customer perceptions of quality are reality. While I am forever grateful to my neighbor for his creativity and resourcefulness to put me into these special lease vehicles, my experiences with the product quality of these other brands only further solidifies my brand loyalty to Ford Motor Company vehicles.

Now, please work on your dealer network performance to improve the Total Customer Experience!

Reflections on the 2011 WCQI

2011-06-03T10:16:00.005-05:00

Though I was in Pittsburgh for the 2011 WCQI from Saturday, May 14 through Wednesday, May 18, I unfortunately was not able to attend as many presentations this year as I would have liked - but for a good reason - due to my involvement in a large number of other ASQ related activities and events. I have been a member of ASQ since 1985, and actively involved ever since that fateful night in the Statistics Division's hospitality suite during the 1989 AQC where I volunteered to serve as the division's Membership Chair. Since those early years I have gone on to serve two separate terms as Statistics Division Chair, ASQ Group Facilitator, MN Section Director, and for 2011-2012 the role of MN Section Chair-elect. My participation as a member leader in ASQ continues to be a very enriching and rewarding experience for my continued professional development, but also the opportunity to build my network of friends, peers, colleagues and global subject matter experts. My participation in ASQ and other professional societies has helped build my personal brand, "QualityBob".

I was able to catch several of the keynote addresses, and I offer here the nuggets that I took away from each of their presentations (Let me apologize in advance for any unintentional misrepresentations of the speakers' presentations):

Adm. Thad Allen, USCG (Ret.) -
Admiral Thad Allen served as the National Incident Commander for the unified response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill (2010), was designated the principal federal official for Hurricane Katrina (2005), and coordinated the USCG assistance following Haiti's catastrophic earthquake and tsunami.

Allen employed many of the Baldrige Criteria in formulating his National Incident Response, and offered his perspectives of three recent catastrophic events. Below are my notes from his presentation.

Katrina -

Post-Katrina we got the problem wrong - all solutions were addressing the wrong problem... we were no longer battling a hurricane; rather, its after-affects. We needed to treat Katrina's aftermath equivalent to a weapon of mass destruction having been inflicted on an innocent population unable to respond. Similar to a terrorist action - but with no criminality.
"No plan survives first contact with the enemy" - Eisenhower. Lesson: Don't get stuck on stupid.
A major challenge was the temporary loss of government and lack of continuity. Everyone, every agency, was working independently. Lesson: We need teamwork, coordination and clear objectives.

Haiti -

Again, affects of the earthquake and tsunami were similar to having a weapon of mass destruction inflicted on an unsuspecting population without the means to respond.
Lack of processes to align all of the international support coming in.
Ports were damaged; needed to coordinate all traffic in/out of the lone airstrip, while respecting Haiti's sovereignty. Coordination increased in-bound flights from 16/day to 160/day.

Gulf Oil Spill -

The oil slicks were omni-directional and indeterminant
Highest priority was to cap the well to stop the flow of oil
Money was not the issue; rather, the allocation of supply-chain resources (e.g. booms, dispersants, volunteers, etc.)
Volunteers had passion, energy, vessels - but lacked an overall concerted plan.
Created processes to focus and coordinate the volunteers to go after the 10,000 oil patches.

In summary, Adm, Thad Allen reinforced that repeatable processes build competencies, capacity and organizational learning. With that said, Allen also pointed out that process and project improvement thinking alone will not solve all problems... consider "Black Swans" and "Wicked" problems. Black Swans - a theory introduced by Nassim Nicholas Taleb- are high-impact, rare events that cannot be predicted by past data. "Wicked problems" are complex problems for which solutions have not yet been developed, and are not susceptible to the normal software solutions. To tackle such problems Allen suggests that organizations must develop clear objectives, develop emotionally-intelligent leaders and engage every team member.

J.J. Irani (Tata Steel) -
My main takeways were Mr. Irani's message concerning rewards and recognition to build a quality culture in Tata:

Financial rewards are given the the employee's spouse; and, recognition of the employee is public. (I did not hear any mention of how rewards are distributed to single individuals or non-married couples).
'QUALITY ' = Quality Unites and Leverages Individual Talents,Year-upon-year.

Barbara Corcoran (Corcoran Group) -
A very high energy, enthusiastic speaker sharing her experiences while building a real estate empire.

Perceptions are reality
All the good ideas are on the outside [of the organization]
Don't under-estimate the power of recognition
"Shoot the dogs" early, but always value and respect the individual. Try to make the individual feel good about being let go.
Fun is good for business
Two kinds of people - "Expanders" and "Containers". Healthy organizations need both.
You have the right to be there.

Rob Bryant (Computer Sciences Corp.) -
Master Black Belt and motivational speaker relating his personal triumph of overcoming paralysis after a 55-foot fall in 1982 to quality, safety and employee engagement.

Hard times do not dictate the outcome - you do.
Encourage people and replicate best practices, rather than punish
Don't cover-up mistakes; take ownership. Apologize.
Build partnerships.
20% of employees are discouraged at work; the longer the employee service, the more/larger is the number of disengaged.
Build engagement through actions and deeds. Communicate, communicate, communicate.
Engagement = winning the hearts and minds of employee.
Build employee esteem; best companies treat their employees like family.
Apply Lean first, then Six Sigma. Lean gets rid of the junk. Six Sigma improves what's left.

The 2011 WCQI was another great event. I attended the Leadership Institute; tweeted about the WCQI for ASQ, participated in the Statistics Division's Tactical Planning session; delivered a paper at the ICQI conference-in-a-conference (on 3M's Process & Product Understanding - an example of statistical engineering); attended a few sessions, helped staff the Statistics Division booth, visited the STAT hospitality suite, and cheered on the 3M team in the International Team Excellence competition.

The city of Pittsburgh represented itself well.

I am looking forward to the 2012 WCQI - Anaheim, CA.

2011 Future Forces Affecting Quality

2011-05-22T16:36:00.005-05:00

In his May 2011 blog ASQ CEO Paul Borawski introduces the 2011 Future Forces study, and asks how these 8 forces might already be playing out where you work or live, and what the most pressing questions might be regarding these forces of change. ASQ conducts this research every three years, employing the Delphi forecasting method to arrive at approximations of the most likely by successive rounds of interviews with over 150 panelists across 40 countries.

I work for 3M - a large multinational diverse manufacturing company. Abraham Lincoln is attributed to have said, "The best way to predict your future is to create it." Like many successful enterprises we too conduct our own study of "mega trends". Additionally, I point the reader to The Conference Board's CEO Challenge. Perhaps not surprisingly all three independent studies uncovered many of the same forces of change. However, awareness and knowledge of these trends alone does not necessarily guarantee future success; rather it is how we choose to respond to the possible combination of these forces that creates competitive advantage. The next step then, is to strategically plan against possible scenarios - some favorable, some not.

We had the distinct pleasure of inviting Mr. Paul Borawski to 3M's Global Quality Conference in April where the company's Quality Leaders discussed the impact of these forces of change on the quality community, and more importantly, to the enterprise. So, what are some of the trends I see emerging along the lines of these 8 forces of change?

Global Responsibility
Lean Six Sigma is a project-by-project process improvement methodology deployed to reduce waste and minimize defects by eliminating non value-added activities and building process capability and stability for improved flow and quality. Design for Six Sigma tools and methods are incorporated into New Product Realization processes as well as existing product change management processes to design and produce products that deliver optimized customer value while reducing environmental impact across the entire supply chain throughout the product's lifecycle. 3M's "Pollution Prevention Pays" program, launched in 1975, has prevented over 2.96 Billion lbs of pollution in 8,100 projects during their first year, generating over $1.37 Billion in savings. 3M executives, managers and supervisors constantly reinforce 3M's values and principles: every employee communication includes a discussion of our values; on-line legal compliance, ethics and business conduct training is required of every employee - and participation is monitored and tracked. 3M's world-class integrity and brand reputation are definite competitive advantages in a global market. The challenge is to adhere, promote and live our values amid cultures and societies where graft and corruption is accepted. Transparency in operations and decision making has a direct influence on shareholder value, employee engagement, community relations, and ultimately, economic growth. The World Bank estimates that over 10^9 US dollars annually are lost due to corruption, representing 5% of the world GDP. A 2008 report issued in the European Physical Journal reported a direct correlation between the influence of corruption and the economic growth rate of over 120 countries.

Consumer Awareness
The advent of the internet, the emergence of social media such as facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, etc. and the growth of on-line consumer rating systems (e.g. Amazon, Trip Advisor, etc.) have given tremendous voice to consumers. It is increasingly more important that businesses develop new listening posts (e.g. CLO - Chief Listening Officer) to gather and respond to customer issues. The power is in the hands of the customer; they have become more savvy, sophisticated and resourceful. Today's customer defines the level of interaction and type of resolution he/she expects. Timely, effective resolution can turn a dissatisfied customer into a loyal advocate. In today's inter-connected world, news of any quality/reliability misstep can spread faster than wild-fire on the internet, and cost businesses millions of dollars in lost revenue and - if not resolved promptly and effectively - untold damage to its reputation.

Globalization
The search for new suppliers, cheap labor, and new markets is not new. The famed travels of Marco Polo and other explorers were commissioned specifically to find new trade routes and expand the influence of western civilizations. In today's environment of global markets, off-shore outsourcing, and regional self-supply it is critical that Quality take up the banner of enterprise risk management and business continuity. Seek simplicity where ever possible; pursue the harmonization of quality management and industry-specific standards.

Increasing Rate of Change
As the internet has shrunk the world in terms of communication and increased the export of knowledge, and in response to global competition that has necessitated compressed product development cycles and shortened product life cycles, Quality needs to ensure the reliability, integrity, and security of data. Cloud computing is one recent example of the omnipresence of the internet and the need to better protect organizational intellectual property.

Workforce of the Future and Aging Population
While I cannot fathom zero unemployment as suggested in the ASQ Future Forces study, we are definitely facing the prospect of "brain drain" in the US. In the 2008 Karl Fisch video "Did You Know 3.0" the growing economies of India and China are said to produce more honor students every year than the US has students. Whereas many of these students used to come to the US to study and seek employment to design and build innovative processes and products, many of them today return to their homeland where opportunities are bountiful. The US apparently has a shortage of skilled labor as well. In a recent presentation to the MN Council for Quality, a representative from the Manpower, Inc., staffing organization half- jokingly stated that they would bolt the door and hog-tie an individual with a welding certification walking into their offices looking for employment. As the Baby Boomer generation nears retirement age, given the shortage of skilled trades and knowledge workers, many businesses are adopting adjustable work arrangements in an attempt to retain existing employees and attract the younger generation. The US K-12 educational system needs a dramatic re-design; not minor tweaks and incremental improvement. It is said that the children of the Baby Boomers will not enjoy the same standard of living as their parents. Couples employed in the retail and service economies require two wage earners just to support their family. Manufacturing creates wealth. We need to encourage individual expression and experimentation towards renewing America's entrepreneurial spirit.

21st Century Quality
Conformance to Requirements is no longer adequate to ensure competitiveness and success. (Has it ever been adequate?) In today's savvy consumer market, Quality is being re-defined as "Total Customer Experience". More than ever, quality is indeed everyone's responsibility. Of course, if quality is everyone's responsibility then no One is responsible. The primary role of the Quality Leader in today's enterprise is to manage the white spaces in the organization (Rummler-Brache) to improve employee engagement and collaboration. The ASQ Statistics Division has long promoted Statistical Thinking. It is now on its continuing mission to educate and promote statistical engineering, which recognizes the importance of blending IT, HR, Finance, and other organizational functions in any continuous improvement journey.

Innovation
As stated earlier, customers are more savvy and resourceful. Innovation is about finding new ways to combine existing technologies, products, processes, services. Example: wheels and telescoping handles on suitcases. The successful enterprise of the future will find new (better, faster, cheaper, novel) ways of capturing and translating the Voice of the Customer towards delivering a differentiated competitive advantage.

In conclusion, I choose to be optimistic about the growing role and relevance of Quality in any endeavor - business, healthcare, education, retail services, government, banking, etc. The challenge is ours. I choose not to play the victim, feeling sorry for myself and my trade, or to place blame. In the words of John G. Miller (author of QBQ!) I choose to accept and own personal accountability. Join me in the journey won't you?

Quality Tools and Education

2011-04-23T22:40:00.000-05:00

In his April 5, 2011 blog post Quality Tools and Education, ASQ Executive Director Paul Borawski asks "How do we raise the voice of quality to capture the imagination of education leaders and support them in getting started? How can we encourage educators to join us in raising the global voice of quality?"

As I reflect on my 30 years of manufacturing quality, my training as an ISO-9001 Lead Auditor and more recently as a Baldrige Examiner, I keep coming back to Dr. W. Edward Deming's System of Profound Knowledge, ISO’s eight Quality Management principles, and the statistical thinking philosophy.

As a review:

Deming’s System of Profound Knowledge consists of four parts:

Appreciation of a system: understanding the overall processes involving suppliers, producers, and customers (or recipients) of goods and services;
Knowledge of variation: the range and causes of variation in quality, and use of statistical sampling in measurements;
Theory of knowledge: the concepts explaining knowledge and the limits of what can be known;
Knowledge of psychology: concepts of human nature.

Statistical Thinking is a philosophy of learning and action based on the following fundamental principles:

All work occurs in a system of interconnected processes,
Variation exists in all processes, and
Understanding and reducing variation are keys to success.

The ISO 9000 series of standards align with eight key principles of quality management. These principles facilitate the achievement of quality objectives and form the foundation for effective quality management. Per ISO-9001, "A quality management principle is a comprehensive and fundamental rule / belief, for leading and operating an organization, aimed at continually improving performance over the long term by focusing on customers while addressing the needs of all other stake holders". The 8 Quality Management principles of ISO are:

Customer-Focused Organization
Leadership
Involvement of People
Process Approach
System Approach to Management
Continual Improvement
Factual Approach to Decision Making and
Mutually Beneficial Supplier Relationships.

Any discussion of improving America’s educational system has to take a systems approach, beginning with an understanding of customer requirements. Customers’ desired outcomes are then translated into a new educational model involving students, parents and all other stakeholders leading to a more robust system that delivers optimum value. So who are the customers of the educational system? Let us not confuse customers with suppliers, partners, gatekeepers, regulatory and government agencies, and other stakeholders. Students, and parents of the students, are not customers – though the family unit plays a decidedly critical role in the education of the child. Managing systemic variables such as nutrition, sleep, health, shelter and other human basic needs are all important elements to improving the educational system. Society at large benefits from a well-educated populace, yes, but employers and post-graduate Universities are the ultimate customer. Conversion of raw materials and other inputs into products and services that customers want and buy create wealth. Innovation and creativity are the engines of economic growth. The USA is an aging population; as more and more Baby Boomers near retirement age there is a dire shortage of highly educated, skilled workers to fill the void. Furthermore, the US is experiencing a brain drain of new postgraduates as students from China, India and other developing nations - who typically remained in this country to apply their learning - are now choosing instead to return to their home countries where greater growth opportunities abound.

Business process redesign is required to save and revitalize the American educational system, starting with the K-12 system to better prepare our children for college or trade schools. We need to encourage experimentation and discovery in the classroom to motivate curiosity and inspire lifelong learning. Evidence-based outcomes should be shared and replicated across school districts. How do we raise the voice of quality to capture the imagination of education leaders and support them in getting started? I would begin by asking our brethren in the quality community to volunteer on their local school board committees and PTA organizations to share your continuous improvement expertise in solving some chronic pain points. Start small and build on your successes. It should be noted that Baldrige Award recipients in the education sector use the Criteria to achieve superior results in the areas of:

student learning outcomes
student- and stakeholder-focused outcomes
budgetary, financial, and market outcomes
faculty and staff outcomes
organizational effectiveness outcomes
leadership and social responsibility outcomes

America’s future lies in our children’s capability and capacity to learn, adapt and thrive. Best wishes in your continuous improvement journey.

The Impact of Quality on Social Responsibility

2011-02-27T20:37:00.004-06:00

The guidance standard ISO-26000:2010 Social Responsibility was published in November 2010. In applying ISO 26000:2010, organizations are advised to take into consideration societal, environmental, legal, cultural, political and organizational diversity, as well as differences in economic conditions, while being consistent with international norms of behavior. As Social Responsibility becomes increasingly important in corporate boardrooms, many organizations will turn to the Quality professional for assistance linking sustainability efforts to the strategic quality planning process to deliver business results. It is said what gets measured gets improved. In his latest blog post, ASQ Executive Director Paul Borawski asks, "how do we measure return on investment in SR to assess business value?".

On a macro scale, rather than measure a country's economic output as Gross Domestic Product (GDP) or as GDP per capita, a SR look at the relative output might prorate GDP by each country's area (sq miles). Such a measurement recognizes a culture of sustainability where resources are used more efficiently. For example:

Country          GDP     Area         GDP/sq mile
USA        $14.6 Trillion    3,717,792     $ 3.9M/sq mile
Japan      $ 4.3 Trillion       145,883     $29M/sq mile

On a micro-economic scale, a SR measure of Return on Investment for organizations might be a mathematical equation describing Loss to Society, incorporating terms for materials efficiency, energy use, greenhouse gas and VOC emissions, water conservation, biodiversity, etc.throughout a product's life cycle.

As one example, my employer, 3M, has had a "Pollution Prevention Pays" program since 1975. Engineering, manufacturing, laboratory, quality and EHS personnel have participated in over 8,100 PPP projects that have prevented over 2.96 Billion lbs of pollution in their first year, generating over $1.37 Billion in savings. Nearly every 3M manufacturing facility, globally, is ISO-14001 registered. 3M leadership constantly reinforces its values, principles, code of ethics and business conduct in all of our operations worldwide.

Implementation of SR is best managed using traditional quality improvement and project management tools and techniques. Development of new SR metrics for the balanced scorecard will help organizations focus on the long-term objectives.

Flawless Execution - It's All About Leadership

2011-02-12T12:07:00.009-06:00

In his latest "A View from the Q" blog, Paul Borawksi (ASQ Exec Dir) reflects on the goal-setting process and challenges leaders everywhere to not simply act, but to execute.

Why do so many well-formulated strategic plans fail to deliver on their promises? It's all about execution - or the lack thereof. Counter to a quote attributed to Edgar Whitney, "A good design poorly executed is much to be preferred over a poor design well executed", it is my experience that a great plan poorly executed is no better than no plan at all. Mark Fields (Ford) once said, "Culture eats strategy for breakfast." So true. Flawless execution requires diligence, accountability and a change acceptance strategy to assure organizational alignment. Human capital is our most important asset. Constant, consistent leadership communications, thorough policy deployment, an effective change agent, and a set of meaningful measures are required before any organizational change can be effectively implemented and internalized.

Having a clearly defined mission, compelling vision, shared purpose and an articulated code of conduct are a great start, but adopting an improvement framework such as the Baldrige Criteria brings a much-needed systems approach to achieve organizational performance excellence. Paul Grizzell (Core Values Partners, Inc.) - Baldrige consultant, Senior Alumni Baldrige Examiner, and previous Board member and judge with the MN Council for Quality - created this simple graphic demonstrating the improved organizational alignment achieved via the Baldrige model:

Finally, to drive effective execution we must stop the practice of 2-point comparisons and begin applying statistical thinking in the corner office and board rooms across America. Sustainable flawless execution requires real change with demonstrable new levels of performance with minimal variation. We must train ourselves to look for deeper root causes and not be satisfied with the quick fix, or be tempted to react to every undesirable data point as though it were due to a special cause. All processes have variation; effective leadership appreciates the differences between special cause, common cause; can distinguish trends and patterns; and, understands that management of variation requires systems thinking along with proper use of tools, methods and approaches. Flawless execution depends on it.

Business Conduct and Statistical Thinking in Commercialization

2011-02-08T15:16:00.009-06:00

I had an interesting question posed to me the other day: Have I ever observed or perceived an instance of suspect integrity or questionable business conduct? And if so, what did I do about it? I thought this would make for an interesting discussion with respect to practicing more (better) statistical thinking and statistical engineering in one's new product introduction system and commercialization (NPI), and product management of change (MOC) processes . I offer two different hypothetical situations...

Scenario #1:
In an effort to be "first to market", a new-to-the-world product is fast-tracked through the organization's formal new product commercialization process. Early reviews from customers are favorable. Prototypes have been shown and customer orders taken early in the product development phase. Proper risk assessments have not been completed. Equipment, process and product validation studies have not been completed. Limited product has been made - maybe on the intended production line, but more than likely only on a pilot line. Just one "Qualification" run - a short-term "machine capability" study - has been evaluated... with acceptable results. The organization's operating plan has aggressive Top Line sales growth and Operating Income targets. The NPI Gatekeepers are deciding whether to go ahead with an accelerated "soft" launch in order to meet customer demand and generate revenue.

Sound familiar? What would you do?
Some questions for thought:

How might the industry you are in, or the markets you serve, play a role in your decision-making?
How much risk is the organization willing to accept? Have they even quantified the risk?
What do you know about the customer's needs? (Basic, Stated, Unarticulated)
How certain are you that tribal knowledge and presumed understanding of VOC have been adequately validated?
Are the test methods relevant to the customer... do they predict fitness for use?
Are the TMs adequate (Gage R&R, resolution, stability, etc.)?
Has acceptable process capability been demonstrated: Short-term? Long-term?
How were the product specifications established?
How / where will product be sampled for testing?
What do we know about the suppliers' process capabilities?
How rugged is the product design?

What other questions should be asked?

Scenario #2:
The manufacturing plant manager is facing factory cost challenges due to the triple threat of high waste, rising raw material prices, and lower than forecasted sales volume. A second source of supply for a key RM is being evaluated for reduced cost and improved availability. The customer contract (perhaps the blanket purchase order) has a boilerplate template stating that it must be notified by the vendor of any planned process or product changes. The producer's product maintenance engineer resolutely believes, based on analytical assessments and bench testing, that this RM substitution will be transparent to the customer. The business has a formalized product management of change process, but it is not consistently deployed nor executed.

Should the customer be notified?

What questions would you have of the RM substitution project?
Some thoughts:

Is this an approved supplier?
Is this supplier ISO registered?
Or, has a site evaluation been performed? Or, has a self-assessment been performed?
Have you assessed the supplier's process capability?
Have raw material - process interactions been modeled with this new supplier?
How many distinct lots of raw material / components have been evaluated?
What types of product testing have been completed:
Standard battery of manufacturing tests only?
Plus, product development tests (e.g. Consumer-use tests)?
Plus, any stress testing or accelerated life testing?
When did we last we validate our customers' requirements?

Other thoughts?

What does it mean to apply statistical thinking and engineering? I don't think it has a lot to do with tools. We have the tools; and there are consultants who can teach us to use new tools. It comes down to leadership. Leadership and execution that integrates strategic quality plan deployment with effective and efficient systems and processes. So, how are you helping your organization to become more customer focused, apply statistical thinking for better decision making, and drive the right behaviors for sustainable operational excellence, growth, and customer satisfaction?

Raising the Global Awareness of Quality

2011-01-16T13:46:00.008-06:00

In his January 2011 'A view from the Q' blog post, Paul Borawski, ASQ Executive Director, asks how we can raise the global awareness that Quality works. In my opinion, the best way to "engage" the C-Suite (i.e. win the hearts and minds of executives) is to move the dialogue from little q to Big Q - from quality control to strategic quality planning; from process improvement to business performance excellence.

How often have we heard the tired phrase, "Quality is a given"? What does that mean? More importantly, what does Top Management think the phrase means? Has Top Management truly embraced quality as a competitive weapon - a value differentiator - and a means to build sustainable organizational results? Or, does Top Management behave as though their organization's quality processes are working fine (e.g. on par with current competition) and therefore shift resources to the next big thing?

A common and all too frequently heard definition of quality is "Conformance to Requirements". I emphatically dislike this definition. It sets the bar at mediocrity and drives goal post mentality (in-spec is "good enough"). Where is the passion and vision for excellence? Then there is the argument that customer requirements are constantly changing; when was the last time we validated our customers' requirements? Are we just meeting requirements or are we delivering exciting quality? Meeting requirements may result in short-term customer satisfaction but does not address those value propositions leading to loyalty. Conformance to requirements evokes images of a statistical tool pharmacy - providing training to the masses and doling out tools and techniques of the month with little connection to what drives sustainable organizational success.

Success in an ever-increasingly competitive world requires enterprise-level strategic quality planning, structured quality management systems, and flawless execution. Top Management must champion investments and deploy visionary strategy that connect quality improvement to sustainable growth, meaningful results and customer satisfaction & loyalty.

Good food service is not a dish best served cold

2011-01-08T20:32:00.000-06:00

It happens all too often...

I really dislike restaurants that use a server to bring you your food instead of the waiter/waitress who took your order. More often than not, the server takes your meal on a tour of the entire restaurant before finally finding your table, but not until after several other people have breathed on it and it is no longer at the desired serving temperature. The manager obligingly apologizes, offers a new meal - to be similarly delivered - or maybe even comp the meal, but the manager completely misses the point.

If the restaurant wants my repeat business, I am not interested in a quick fix or do-over. I do not want a 3rd party delivering my meal. I have established no rapport with that individual; whereas, the wait person who took my order knows where I am seated, and more importantly, has a sense of personal ownership to get my order right.

I assume the intent of the server position is to rush the meal to the guest's table. So when that does not happen I do not want to hear excuses or insincere, almost mechanical, apologies. I want to see evidence of customer focus and continuous improvement. Where is the root cause investigation? Why didn't the server take the few seconds to know my table number before leaving the kitchen?

The Baldrige Program is Safe for Now

2010-12-08T19:36:00.006-06:00

It has been reported that the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (NCFRR) has suggested the elimination of the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program as a cost-cutting move to reduce the US national debt. An illustrative example from NCFRR states that the Baldrige Award Program - along with support of the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership costs the US taxpayer approximately $120 Million. Compare this figure to the $16 Billion spent on ear marks or the $20 Billion wasted to purchase military hardware that the US military does not even want.

The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Program was established in 1987 as a means to recognize performance excellence of public and private U.S. organizations, thereby promoting U.S. competitiveness. A network of state, regional, and local Baldrige-based award programs provide potential award applicants and examiners, promotes the use of the Criteria, and disseminates information regarding the Award process. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce, manages the Baldrige National Quality Program; and the American Society for Quality (ASQ) assists in administering the Award Program Many enterprises around the globe now follow the Baldrige Criteria.

I am a 29 year Quality veteran, an ISO 9001 Lead Auditor, and a Baldrige Examiner for the State of Minnesota. I consider myself socially liberal but fiscally conservative, generally favoring a smaller central government. Without getting into a deep philosophical discussion of my personal political views, I believe a critical role of the U.S. Government is to protect the Republic, uphold the Constitution and Bill of Rights, support human rights and protect civil liberties. Consider the federal Depts of Transportation and Commerce: just as a modern, efficient transportation system is critical to the flow of goods and services for economic growth and national security, the Baldrige Criteria are critical to assure the long-term viability of organizations, thereby protecting the competitiveness of the country in an increasingly global economy.

How ironic then, that the NCFRR has identified the Baldrige National Quality Program as wasteful, when it is the Baldrige Criteria that offer a long-term solution to waste reduction and performance improvement. Rather than cutting costs by freezing wages, eliminating jobs and reducing services, we need government to focus on eliminating waste and non value-added activities to improve its productivity, cost effectiveness and operational excellence. It's all about leadership, strategic planning, taxpayer and constituent focus, measurement and analysis, employee engagement, process management, and results. Sound familiar?

Quality is not an expense, it is an investment.

Raising the Voice of Quality

2010-11-05T22:59:00.010-05:00

In his October 26, 2010 post to ASQ’s new blog “A View from the Q”, Executive Director Paul Borawski announced that ASQ was embarking on ASQ 2015 - an initiative to evolve ASQ’s role in the world to “Raise the Voice of Quality.” Paul notes that in November 2010 ASQ joins the world’s quality organizations in observing World Quality Month, stating, “We join the world in its efforts to bring attention to the impact quality is having in every corner of the globe. Better quality in products and services, better healthcare, better education, better government, better nonprofit organizations, better communities–individually and collectively making the world a better place”.

Paul Borawski asks what it would take to get the world’s attention to focus on quality; to have the world realize the full potential of quality?

I can’t describe it but I’ll know it when I see/feel it...
The first challenge is to have a common language around Quality. Joseph M. Juran’s Quality Control Handbook is the standard reference work on quality control and established Juran as an authority on quality. In his book Juran defines quality as fitness for use described by:
• features that meet customer needs, and
• freedom from deficiencies (errors, waste, defects, etc.).
Juran is widely credited for adding the human dimension to quality management. He pushed for the education and training of managers. He also developed the "Juran's trilogy," an approach composed of three managerial processes: quality planning, quality control and quality improvement

W. Edward Deming's conceptualization of quality suggests that quality must meet both explicit and latent needs. Deming believed that quality should be the underlying philosophy of a business rather than simply a component of its strategic plan.

Philip Crosby , in his 1979 book titled Quality is Free, defined quality in terms of Conformance to Requirements. My difficulty with this limited definition is in the following key areas:
1. It reinforces a goal-post mentality and behavior where everything inside the specification limits is treated as equally good
2. It assumes that specifications were soundly established in the first place, and continuously validated over time to keep pace with changing customer needs
3. It assumes the test methods for which the specifications were originally developed are relevant to customer use. Furthermore, are the test methods robust to uncontrollable noise and other effects? Are they stable and capable?
4. It assumes the sample being tested is representative of the lot. Has the product presented for inspection been sampled properly?

David A. Garvin ("Competing on the Eight Dimensions of Quality", Harvard Business Review, November-December 1987) proposes eight critical dimensions or categories of [product] quality that serve as a framework for strategic analysis: Performance, features, reliability, conformance, durability, serviceability, aesthetics, and perceived quality.

Genichi Taguchi defines the lack of quality as a loss to society. The societal-loss perspective suggests that “quality is the loss a product causes to society after being shipped, other than losses causes by its intrinsic functions". Losses to society result from either off-target performance, variability in performance or harmful side effects. Losses due to harmful side effects are referred to by economists as "negative externalities" or external diseconomies of production or consumption. Diseconomies of production occur when a producer's actions result in an uncompensated loss to others. This societal loss perspective of quality is the foundation of today’s “Green” and “Sustainability” initiatives.

Have a strong customer focus to improve key value streams
Regardless of how the producer/provider might define quality, the customer is the ultimate judge of quality. A “quality” product, service or transaction must deliver value to the customer – as perceived by the customer. It has been my experience that the single most impactful driver of quality is a strong customer focus (followed closely by process and system improvement, and total involvement). Customer focus is the greatest enabler of employee engagement – and employee engagement is critical to the long-term success of an enterprise. The notion of “Loss to Society” is a powerful driver to the continuous improvement of systems, processes, products and services because each of us wants to leave a positive legacy for our children and grandchildren.

Paul Borawski has said that “vision represents the end state, strategy represents the starting point...” (Quality Progress, June 2007). I further suggest that the organization’s values and principles establish the boundaries of acceptable norms and behaviors among its people as they deploy and execute the strategic, operational and tactical plans towards accomplishing its mission.

Customer focus must be internalized and structured as a key organizational and personal value. Per the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence, Leaders must
• identify and innovate product offerings to meet the requirements and exceed the expectations of customer groups and market segments, and
• create an organizational culture that ensures a consistently positive customer experience and contributes to customer engagement and workforce performance.

“Quality at the Source”- the practice of shifting responsibility and ownership for quality to the production operator – recognizes that quality cannot be inspected into the product; rather, quality is designed and built into the product at each step of the value stream. Quality by Design and Quality at the Source are good first starts but customer focus requires more. All of the various customer touchpoints in an organization – marketing, field sales, customer service, technical service, quality engineering, complaint analysis, etc., must be aligned and coordinated into a cohesive organizational strategy.

Leaders must talk the talk to clearly and consistently communicate their expectations, and walk the walk to personally model the desired behaviors. Every individual must take personal accountability to “own” a customer issue when it presents itself, and personally see the issue to its successful resolution. Voice of Customer (VOC) should not only be an integral component to new product development, but customer feedback and VOC validation must be integrated into the Management of Change process. Customer requirements are constantly changing. That what was once an exciting feature eventually becomes an expected or even basic need (see Kano Model).

Apply statistical thinking everywhere...
Quality performance beyond conformance to requirements is often seen as a cost rather than an investment. A focus on the customer (and an eye on the competition) will help assure the organization will not be satisfied with the status quo, but will promote organizational learning and continuous improvement. The ASQ Statistics Division has been promoting statistical thinking for 30 years as a philosophy of learning and action to understand and manage variation for performance excellence. Statistical thinking can be applied to improve strategic, managerial and operational processes everywhere.

Are Your Capability Indices Too Low for Your Process?

2010-07-02T20:47:00.003-05:00

My prior blog post was about the incorrect calculation of Cp, Cpk, Pp, Ppk that results in unusually high capability indices given the customer perceptions of your product quality (e.g. the capability indices are > 1.0 but customer complaints for the same or equivalent property or failure mode are frequent).

This post is about the opposite problem - estimates of process capability that are too low. The most common cause (pun intended) of artificially low (small) capability indices is the selection of incorrect limits as the specification limits.

Recall: Cp = (USL-LSL)/6sigma.

"How can that be - how could we choose the wrong limits?" you ask. Simply put, your release limits for purposes of dispositioning product may not be the true customer tolerance limits. Given that nearly all of our product testing is performed on a small sample of a production lot, judgement about the quality of that lot is based on the decision limit for the sample. However, the Decision Limit (DL) of a sample is NOT the Individual Specification Limit (ISL).

Let's take an example from in-process QC testing: Say we typically perform a QC test on three "individual" samples on every 3rd output of production. We apply the "Spec Limits" of 18 - 36 units to each individual. Each individual (sample) must pass this specification (i.e. n=1, c=0 sampling plan); otherwise, the "Lot" of 3 outputs produced since the last known good test result are placed on Quality Hold.

Question: Are these the specification limits (18-36) you are using to calculate your adhesion process capability? If so, you may be under-estimating your Cp, Cpk, Pp and Ppk. Why? Because Decision Limits are not Specification Limits. The true specification limits may be wider, resulting in a larger Cp, Cpk. Fortunately, the ISL (Indivdual Specification Limit) can be calculated from knowledge of the process variation, decision limit, and 'k' factor.

Are Your Capability Indices Too Good for Your Process

2010-04-16T11:24:00.006-05:00

A "six sigma quality" process is said to exhibit process capability ratios Cp of 2.0 or greater and a Ppk of 1.50 or greater. As I travel around the world delivering Lean Six Sigma and Quality training and consulting, I have observed several instances where an organization proudly reports Cpk and Ppk levels greater than 2.0 - only to learn that is still experiencing frequent customer complaints and elevated DPPM (defective parts per million) counts. My initial reaction is that of suspicion of how the capability index was calculated, followed closely by the question of what the organization plans to do about it.

If your process capability is truly approaching 2.0 or greater, and you are not experiencing customer complaints it tells me that you are quite possibly leaving money on the table with respect to optimizing your operational efficiency. Certainly, there are industries, products and services, that require 6 Sigma quality performance or greater, but they are the exception rather than the rule. The goal of Lean Six Sigma should never be about chasing higher and higher capability indices, rather to optimize customer value and secure competitive advantage. Capability indices are a contrived metric to give management a snapshot view of our overall process performance. A myopic focus on driving process capability improvement for the sake of increasing the process' Ppk value does not necessarily optimize value for the customer. Often, such a practice leads to over-engineered products - needlessly adding cost without achieving higher sales or greater market share. If you are already better than the competition, and the customer cannot perceive greater value - and is not willing to pay more or buy more - allocate your resources to other more important improvement opportunities. Improving quality for quality's sake is a major reason why TQM (Total Quality Management) efforts failed so miserably in the 1980s.

My general rule of thumb recommendation is to target for Ppk = 1.33. I also remind organizations that in practice there are often conflicting and competing customer requirements. It may not be possible or desirable to drive every customer CTQ (critical to quality) characteristic to Ppk >= 1.33 due to trade-offs in product design. The criticality of the defect should also be considered when setting an improvement goal. For example, processes with defects potentially causing serious injury - or worse - should demonstrate much greater short-term and long-term capability than less critical defects.

Far too often; however, reported Ppk values of 2.0 or greater are not representative of the true process performance. Organizations continue to experience elevated complaint levels and/or high DPPM values, raising serious questions as to how the capability indices are calculated. How might this happen? I have summarized several scenarios below:

Cpk, Ppk values are calculated only on sorted, shipped product -
This incorrect calculation of Ppk is often justified because "it represents the quality level of product going to the customer". WRONG. Inspection and sorting is never 100% accurate. One is led into false security believing they have sorted out all bad product - especially where the process is not stable, you cannot 100% inspect, and in the case where test methods are destructive in nature. (True test error cannot be determined). Capability indices must be calculated on all output of the process - good and bad, scrapped and shipped.

Cpk, Ppk values are estimated on subgroup averages -
Capability indices should almost always be calculated from individuals data. Your customer experiences variation between individual units, not averages. Variability of subgroup averages will always be smaller than the variation among individuals, resulting in a smaller standard deviation, thereby inflating your process capability metric. For more information refer to the statistical concept of the Central Limit Theorem.

Cpk, Ppk are estimated on an improperly selected sample -
Related to the first two points is the issue of proper sample selection. How assured are you that your testing frequency and sample selection is truly representative of the product reaching the customer? When was the last time you verified that current sampling plans represent all of the variation in the "lot"? Is your test sampling plan based on tribal knowledge (this is the way we have always done it) or is your sampling based on statistically-validated Components of Variance studies? Have such studies been performed following process or product modifications (Management of Change)?

Your specifications are very wide -
An unusually large spread between your specification limits can also result in a large Ppk, Cpk value. The issue here is whether your customers can accept this amount of potential variability in your product performance. Unless your organizational culture is committed to a "Run to Target" mindset and you have honest to goodness working (i.e. effective) process controls, wide specification limits only provide temptation to release product that deviates from the norm as long as it is in spec. Capability Indices are point-estimates; they vary over time depending on the sample collected, and they do not drive daily production decisions. If the customer desperately needs the product it is only human nature to find a way to ship "suspect" product - retest, slit and salvage, etc. How often have you heard the phrase or something similar: "When in doubt ship it out"? Generally the outcome is if the customer wants it bad, they will get it... bad.

Your test methods do not predict fitness for use -
If your capability indices are large but you continue to receive frequent complaints and experience high DPPM, it might also be the result of inadequate test methods. Customer requirements are constantly changing. When was the last time you validated your customer requirements? This issue of validating and re-validating Voice of Customer influences how specification limits are set (see point above), but also helps confirm whether your manufacturing-friendly tests are adequate and relevant. Test Methods MSA studies (e.g. Gage R&R) to evaluate and improve test method capability are definitely important towards reducing overall process variability, but very repeatable and reproducible tests are meaningless if the test method itself does not predict fitness for use. Large Cpk, Ppk of a process as measured by an irrelevant test method cannot assure customer satisfaction.

Your process is not stable; a trend exists -
In cases where short-term variation is much smaller than long-term variation, the Cp metric can be unusually large in comparison to the Ppk. For example, the variability between successive measurements (individuals) is relatively small, but the overall process is trending upward or downward.

These six examples highlight the more common reasons for disconnects between internal measures of quality and customer perceptions of quality. These distinctions should be monitored and tracked over time in a balanced scorecard.

Cash is King, Lean Six Sigma sit at the Roundtable

2009-03-01T13:58:00.004-06:00

In today's tough economic conditions, many businesses are focused on generating and keeping cash to minimize borrowing. Three obvious areas of focus, as evidenced by your local, national and even international news, are reducing spending, eliminating inventory and cutting headcount; but the challenge is to maintain clients and provide excellent customer service despite fewer resources. In today's uncertain economy, businesses are looking to simplify their supply chains, including minimizing their supplier base. Only those suppliers with superior product quality, a proven track record of on-time, in-full service performance, and unparalleled customer service and responsiveness will survive.

So how does one eliminate wasteful inventory in order to save cash yet continue to deliver exceptional service? Now, more than ever, is the time to align your business improvement methodologies to drive a customer-focused mindset. Meet with your best customers and "Lead Users" to truly understand how your product or service helps them achieve their "desired outcomes"; meet with lost customers and non-cutomers to understand your competitors' strengths and weaknesses. Networking, not retrenchment, is vital in today's troubled economy for survival - - and growth.

Once you understand your customers' wants and needs (and potential customers' unmet, unarticulated needs) you must work to lean out your value streams to eliminate non value-added activities, reduce waste, and improve speed while improving the capability of your key business processes and products to eliminate defects and improve reliability. Understand that inventory is the outcome, planned or unplanned, of unstable and/or mis-aligned processes. Not all inventory is bad. Some inventory may be unavoidable depending on fluctuations in customer demand, your ability to forecast, and your own internal constraints that prevent quick reaction and response. You must work to understand all the forms of inventory in your supply chain (for example, raw materials, components, packaging, work-in-progress, semi-finished goods, sub-assemblies, finished goods, quality hold, rework, scrap, etc.), and the root causes of each inventory type (e.g., unknown requirements, inadequate specifications, unstable inputs, incapable process, lack of robust design, etc.).

Together Lean, Six Sigma, Total Quality and an engaged workforce all play important inter-connected roles in improving operational effectiveness and customer satisfaction, for short-term survival and longer-term growth.

Revalidating the Value of ISO in Tough Economy

2009-02-09T18:36:00.004-06:00

Is your management team questioning the costs and value of ISO registration? In these tough economic times many organizations are turning every stone looking for areas to cut costs, including the direct and indirect costs, real and perceived, associated with ISO registration. Certainly, if your customers demand ISO registration as a requirement to do business the value of existing business and the opportunity to bid on new contracts is much easier to quantify. But what if your customers do not require ISO registration?

Does your organization use ISO to manage and continually improve its operations?
Is ISO registration used as a competitive advantage?

Here are some additional areas of opportunity one might consider when re-validating your QMS registration:

Protect the corporation
- Prevent defects due to workmanship errors resulting from a lack of documented procedures and ineffective training.
- Prevent manufacturing escapes due to ineffective traceability & identification, and control of nonconforming product.
- Prevent design flaws and defects due to inadequate controls in the development and management of change processes.
- Assure claims substantiation in product design, and verification of statements, expressed and implied, on all product packaging and promotional literature.
Deliver the brand promise
- Ensure that your systems and processes are stable and capable to produce and deliver products and services that consistently meet customer requirements.
- Build strong customer relationships through trusted, reliable, predictable performance.
- Assure competitive advantage by offering value-add products and services.
Legitimize your QMS effectiveness through accredited 3rd party assessments
- Ensure the effectiveness of the your organizations' key business processes as well as the six required documented procedures of ISO (document control, record control, management review, internal auditing, control of nonconforming, and corrective & preventive action).
Minimize and eliminate the need for customer on-site audits, the distractions they bring; and protect your trade secrets.
- Similarly, minimize the costs associated with supplier audits by requiring that your suppliers and outsource (contract) manufacturers be ISO registered.

Opportunities for cost reduction associated with ISO registration may be realized by working with your registrar to move to an annual surveillance audit, and/or possible reduction of audit days as the result of any organizational downsizing. Too, perhaps you can share internal auditors with a sister operation.

Quality is about People

2008-11-22T12:43:00.000-06:00

My passion is Quality. I started my 3M career 27 years ago as a Quality Assurance engineer. Early in my career I understood the need for data-based decision making, and the power of Statistical Thinking to ask the right questions to gain insight about the context by which the data were collected. The fundamental concepts of Statistical Thinking, as defined by the ASQ Statistics Division, are:
· All work occurs in a series of interconnected processes
· All processes have variation
· Knowledge and proper management of variation are keys to success

Early in my career Quality was all about the tools – the technical side of change; whether the program of the year was TQM, COPQ, SPC, ISO, MBQNA, Six Sigma, Lean, etc. However, through the years I have come to appreciate that while stable processes are indeed important to predictable, repeatable results, Quality is fundamentally about People. Employee engagement and customer focus are the real drivers to continual improvement, innovation and growth for sustained business success. People must commit to and be involved in the change process; an organization must mobilize their employee’s hearts and minds in order to embrace change and become adaptive and nimble.

COPs, MOPs and SOPs

2008-03-23T18:58:00.004-05:00

In my previous blog I introduced the topic of a Quality Management System. A "system" is comprised of a series of interconnected processes. A process is an activity that converts inputs into outputs. Processes have suppliers and customers - they may be internal or external to your organization. This week's blog introduces the concept of "key" business processes that comprise an effective Quality Management System.

Generally, we classify our business processes into three major categories: "Core" processes (also known as Customer-Oriented Processes - 'COPs') are the major processes that represent the core work of the organization and have a direct impact on the customer. Examples of core processes include:

Design & Development
Order Management (order entry and fulfillment, forecasting, Demand Planning)
Production (manufacturing, outsourcing, assembly, testing, etc.)
Invoicing
After the sale Service

The Lean philosophy introduces the concept of a Value Stream. Value Streams can be thought of as the key business process of a product/service; that is, a map of all the required processes to manufacture and deliver a product to the customer.

"Management" processes ('MOPs') are management areas of responsibility that enable core processes to be performed and have an indirect impact on the customer. Examples of management processes include:

Quality policy and objectives
Planning (Strategic, Operational, Tactical)
Resource management
Customer focus
Management reviews

"Support" processes ('SOPs') are all other processes that enable core processes and have an indirect impact on the customer. Some support functions, and examples of their processes include:

Purchasing

Supplier management processes
Requisitions
Request for Quote

Finance

Accounting; cost estimates
P&L analysis

Others:

Quality
HR
IT
Legal
Engineering

In its most basic definition, a "Key" business process is one that influences customer perception of our business. A "key" business process or Value Stream assures your business its competitive advantage. To be most impactful towards our strategic plan, Entitlement Quality and Lean Six Sigma must work synergistically to continually improve our key business processes and value streams.

The Role of Quality

2008-03-23T18:19:00.003-05:00

Frequently heard questions these days of Six Sigma and Lean are, "What is the role of Quality? We already have a very active Six Sigma process - why do we need a Quality function? What is the role of a Quality Manager?"

These observations have very good merit, and evoke strong emotions. I have 27 years experience in product and business process Quality in a large, multinational US corporation, including 7 years manufacturing experience, manager of the Statistical Consulting center of excellence, Staff Quality Manager in Corporate Quality Services, Division Quality Manager for two different business units, and Senior Manager of Lean Six Sigma Operations. At it's most basic implementation Six Sigma is a problem solving methodology for breakthrough levels of improvement. Six Sigma is a project management system, a quality metric and a goal. In some applications, Six Sigma is also used to develop leadership - teaching future leaders how to use statistical-thinking when making data-based decisions. It is the way we get things done.

Whereas Six Sigma DMAIC and DFSS (DMADV) require the use of statistically-trained project managers / specialists (e.g. black belts, master black belts, etc.) to deliver breakthrough levels of improvement, these specialists typically account for less than 1% of the enterprise's total employees. DMAIC projects tend to focus on eliminating defects in a process; DFSS is a methodology to create new products and services. It is said that DMAIC can achieve up to a 5-Sigma level of quality for existing processes; Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) is used to create new products and services that deliver 6-Sigma, or better, levels of performance.

Lean is a philosophy of eliminating waste; it delivers incremental improvement by engaging every employee to continually improve his/her process. Eliminating waste and non-value add activity reduces cycle time, improves quality, eliminates inventory and improves business results.

Quality is the business process of managing variation around the expectations of our customers. Quality is often measured by business process excellence and product (service) performance as measured against tolerances and specifications. The producer may define Quality, but Quality is ultimately judged by the customer.

The role of a Quality Manager is to promote the process approach in facilitating the design and implementation of an effective Quality Management System to enhance customer loyalty and deliver expected business results. Key business processes and Value Streams need to be documented, understood, measured, and tracked for purposes of identifying strengths and weaknesses; gaps and opportunities. These opportunities should then feed the business improvement project hopper. Increasingly, the role of Quality is to protect the enterprise by assuring compliance to regulatory and statutory requirements, including industry-specific standards, Sarbanes-Oxley, safety, health and environmental. Quality works horizontally across an organization serving as the customer advocate, to protect the brand, and build customer satisfaction.

A critical success factor in any change initiative is frequent and open communication. Adoption of a Quality Management System is a strategic business decision by the Leadership Team. Constant communication to the employees about the status and progress towards the fusion of QMS with Six Sigma and Lean is important to setting goals and deploying objectives within the new business model.

Entitlement Quality

2008-02-17T19:55:00.005-06:00

I define Entitlement Quality as the integration and fusion of several business and process improvement methodologies: ISO, DMAIC, DFSS and BPR (business process redesign). The goal of Entitlement Quality is to consistently deliver value as perceived by the customer, with zero waste or loss to the producer.