Avoiding the Mistakes of the Past - A Casestudy

7/27/2019 Avoiding the Mistakes of the Past - A Casestudy

1/6

Successful ly implementing quali ty programsdepends more on people-related issuesthan the technical meri t of the selectedapproaches.

Avoiding the Mistakesof the PastLessons Learned on W hat M akes orBreaks Quality Initiatives

Janetjacobsen It's hard to disagree with thefundamental concepts oflarge-scale quality initiatives con-tinuous improvement, employeeinvolvement, customer focus, andteamwork so, why are someorganiza tions strugg ling to fulfillthe expectations for their chosenquality m ethodology? When provenquality method ologies such asTQM, ISO 9000, Six Sigma, orLean aren't successful, it's typicallynot for reasons inherent in theparticular methodology morelikely is due to unrealistic expecta-tions and failures in planning andexecuting the chosen methodology.

We can learn much from theexperiences of other organizationsthat have implemented broad-based quality initiatives. Accordingto a variety of case studies and

previously pu blished analyses,issues related to the followingfactors can lead to achieving less-than-hoped-for results: Leadership/managementsupport . Fear of change. Tools and training. Customer focus. Project selection. Focus on results and comm u-nicating successes.Leadersh ip /ManagementSupportTop management supportfrequently is cited as a majorrequirement for success with anybroad-based quality initiative, buttop-level sup port doesn 't in itselfensure success. Leadership must

T H E JOURNAL FOR QUALITY & PARTICIPATION Summer 2008


2/6

be proactive, not passive. Management cannot simplyendorse the initiative; managers must personallyapply the quality improvement tools and techniques.Management loses credibility and support when itsays one thing but does another. Top managementmust lead, motivate, and nurture the quality process(Hoover, 1995).It's clear that top executives in organizations thathave achieved success with Six Sigma have acted withdeterm ination and a dopted a highly visible profile indoing so. Whatever the chosen quality methodology,management support is key and has been throughouthistory. It is unlikely th at Six Sigma would have suc-ceeded at GE with out CFO Jack Welch's (and nowJeff Immelt's) unflinching leadership (Swayne andHarder, 2002).

There are three things to which senior managementmu st com mit to provide the necessary leadership fora successful quality program, as described below:(Dobbins, 1995). TimeLeaders must take the time to learn thequality tools a nd use th em . They personally followup on results and direct the process of integratingthe lessons learned. Enthusiasm Effective leaders use a "follow me"rather than a "go do" approach to leadership. Resources SucctssiuX leaders spend the necessarymoney to develop problem solvers.

Managem ent's com mitm ent also includes estab-lishing and supporting an infrastructure for thequality program. This commitment involves settingup the formal organization, defining key objectivesand responsibilities, developing a budgeting process,and specifying a solid process for measuring results(Swayne and Harder, 2002).Too Much of a Good Thing?

Of course, it is possible to overdo a good thing. Inthis case, problem s can arise when a leader assum estoo much ownership of the quality initiative, therebydepriving others of full participation in the process.Successful leaders will foster employees throughfacilitation, coaching, and mentoring. They providedirection and guidance but leave the driving of thequality vehicle up to others (Shearer, 1995).Other leadership failures can occur because man-agement, in its desire to avoid the appearance oftop-down control, passes along the responsibility for

determining quality improvement priorities to theorganization's improvem ent grou ps. This can resultin too much activity directed toward less important orless relevant issues, which ultimately can underminecommitment to the improvement process.Key Reasons for Leadership FailuresTwo key reasons for leadership failures involve alack of constancy of purpose and a lack of adequateleadership (Corrigan, 1995). If the failure is linked toa lack of constancy of purpose, senior executives maydisplay one or all of the following traits: Over-delegation of responsibility for the qualityprogram. Great initial enthu siasm , quickly followed by

impatience. An unwillingness to change his/her behavior. Lack of person al participa tion in the quality effort.

These traits are often the result of not understan dingthe quality methodology in use.Wh ether it's Lean Six Sigma, TQM , or Six Sigma, no testablishing the m ethodology as a living m anagem entphilosophy can result in a lack of adequate leadership.Because leadersh ip is a driver for success, a directiveman agem ent style can be effective when la unch ing anew quality initiative especially when coupled with

a few personal behavior changes. This type of leader: Seeks personal, hands-on responsibility andownership. Provides clear, concrete feedback. Manages by example. Sets clear goals and focuses on these goals.

The role of middle management in the improvementprocess is no t always clear. Some qua lity initiatives failbecause lower or middle management, rather than topmanagement, promotes them. On the other hand,many companies have trouble getting middle m anagers,who w ill be directly affected by measu res, to pa rtici-pate actively in the process itself. In the worst case,this problem can lead to vigorous resistance to changeat this level. Because middle management normallyis organized on a functional basis, it also may resultin suboptimization of the improvement process. Toachieve genuine success with Six Sigma or any q ualityinitiative, it is important for managers ac all levels tobecome involved and be recognized as the problemowners (Sandholm and Sorqvist, 2002).

www.asq.org


3/6

Linking Quality to the PaycheckSalary increments and possible bonus systems

should be closely linked to the company's continuousimprovement program. GE, for example, makes it clearthere will be no pro m otions with out active participa-tion in Six Sigma activities, and Volvo refers to itsSix Sigma Black Belts as future leaders. This servesas a powerful incentive to workers to give priority toand become involved in improvement programs.

Linking compensation to specific measurable qualitygoals, such as failure costs, cycle time reduction, etc.,provides top m anagemen t with a mechanism for com-mu nicating its total com m itmen t to quality. It alsoprovides a process for monitoring the success of qualityinitiatives by replacing slogans with quantifiablemeasures.Fear of ChangeWhen employees are asked to embrace quality ini-tiatives, they need to see evidence that the authorityfor the change goes beyond the current manager.W ithou t such evidence, employees may become sus-picious because they see continuous managementrotation, which is frequently accompanied by changesin policy. Imp lem enting any type of broad-basedcontinuous improvement program eventually involveschange. Typically, change is accomplished by workingwith and through the people already employed bythe organization.

It 's no secret that many people resist change, andthere are two primary reasons why this happens:psychological contracts and the law of effect. W hetherthere is a written employment contract or not, peopleform a psychological relationship to their jobs. Thisbecomes the set of beliefs regarding the terms ofexchange between the individual and the organization.One example is "a fair day's work for a fair day's pay."The full psychological contract incorporates all theexperiences, obligations, and rewards that bind aworker to his/her employment relationship. Thiscontract causes workers to intermingle their identitieswith that of the organization for which they work.

The contract is a two-way deal, but it is more pow-erful to the worker than to the organization becausethe organization has many, but the worker has onlyone. Proposed change is a threat to this contract and,therefore, causes alarm for workers. Change programsshould offer an opportunity to affirm mutually thebest part of the co ntract while negotiating a new onethat clarifies new expectations.

Perhaps the most compelling law of hu m an natureis Thorndike's Law of Effect, which states that peoplerepeat behaviors that have in the past produced pleas-ant outcomes. Conversely, people avoid behaviors thathave in the past been unpleasa nt in their ou tcom e.Workers' job tasks, roles, relationships, behaviors,and so on, have been established not just because theboss said so but because they have produced positiveoutcomes such as status, power, esteem, a sense ofaccom plishmen t, or a sense of security for the w orker.

Proposed changes such as those involved with con-tinuous quality improvement are threatening to aworker's personal law of effect for the following tworeasons: To propose a change is to say that the current way

is wrong. This is an unpleasant criticism to theworker. All change brings about the unk nown . The chances

of changed procedures bringing losses of somekind in the form of status, power, self-control, orwhatever is valued about the status quo will makethe proposed change seem negative.Managers proposing change related to a qualityinitiative must recognize that people first work forthemselves and then for the organization. If workersare to adopt and incorporate change behaviors, then

the changes must be viewed as good not just for theorganization but for the individual worker as well.It 's im portan t to remember that change is a processdriven by hum ans, who by nature are program medto attend to their needs first. When those needs arethreatened by proposed change, the natural responseis resistance. Identifying the roo t causes of problem smay open up old wounds, expose painful areas, andrequire change; therefore, improvements may focuson "safe" areas such as introdu cing new software orequipment. If organizations can find ways to makeemployees, not necessarily jobs, secure, inno vationand continuous improvement can result (Weyrnann,2001).

Tools and TrainingAccording to Hoover, once management commitsto a continuous improvement initiative, it is criticalto operationalize this commitment by developingemployees' skills through comprehensive training. Alack of training in group discussion and comm unica-tion techniques, quality improvem ent skills, problem-identification, and problem-solving techniques couldTHE JOU RNA L FOR QUALITY & PARTICIPATION Summer2008


4/6

be barriers to successful implementation. Problem-solving techniques and group dynamics skills arerequired for employees and teams to succeed in improv-ing processes, products, and services. Depending on thequality methodolog y selected, employees need tra iningin SPC, Pareto ch arts, the DMAIC process, the PDSAcycle, cause-and-effect diagram s, and so on.Customer Focus

For a quality initiative to succeed, an organ ization'scontinu ous im provement efforts m ust focus on meet-ing and exceeding customers' expectations. With anycontinuous improvement program there is serious riskof becoming to o inwardly focused. If programs areheavily geared toward internal variation, customers'needs and expectations often are given lower priority.Improvement initiatives may fail because of a lack offocus on customers, their needs, and their perceptions.Organizations may believe they have a clear under-stand ing of tbeir custom ers' views, bu t in fact theydo no t have adequate voice of the custom er (VOC)information.

Activities can become focused heavily on internalcost-cutting, and customers and the potential toincrease revenues may be ignored. If a Six Sigma oranother quality initiative is to have maximum effec-tiveness, impro vem ent activities need to include adistinct customer focus. The selection of improvementprojects should be designed with customer benefitin mind.

It is, therefore, key to develop the knowledge ofcustomer needs and behavior and evaluate com-pleted projects from the perspective ofthe customer(Sandbolm and Sorqvist, 2002). If customer satisfac-tion is to act as a driver for quality improvement,mechanisms are needed to truly understand customerneeds, to measure their perceptions, and to focusimprovement plans on this information.

It seems as if companies are nor focusing suffi-ciently on th e startin g p oint for Six Sigmacollecting,translating, and transforming VOC information intoactionable projects to achieve revenue growth andcost reductions. Swayne and Harder recomm endthat one way to put more customer focus into con-tinuous improvement activities is to involve salesand marketing people in the effort. Salespeople,relationship managers, and others more attunedto VOC are valuable assets. By involving only backoffice employees, such as those in accounting and

operations management, you may create a bias awayfrom customer service.Project Selection

Total management commitment, a plan ro overcomethe fear of change, the right training, and a customerfocus all set the stage for success and result in highexpectations. These expectations need to be metandmet rapidlyto maintain momentum; therefore, it iswise to focus on projects tbat simultaneously increasecustomer satisfaction and attain the organization'sgoals. Selecting projects tbat both managers and teammem bers agree are worth the effort increases the like-lihood th at they will be embraced by team m embersand implemented without debate from the sponsors(Hopen, 2007).Improvement projects should meet tbe followingcriteria: Tbeir importance is evident or can be demonstrated

readily. They are viable and achievable in a short time. Their success can be quantified. A successful start, built on accepted and highly

demonstrable successes, will expedir tbe pathforward.Focus on R esults an d C om mu nicating SuccessesIt's vital tbat continuous improvement activitiesprimarily focus on achieving results. The to ols a ndmethod ologies needed to achieve results are merelyaids for the improvem ent activities and can vary fromsituation ro situation.

Sandholm and Sorqvist note that a threat to SixSigma, TQM, or Lean initiatives comes from the fre-quently exaggerated focus on the tools included intraining courses. To arrive at sound solutions, tbisknowledge of tools is naturally important, but thetendency is often for them to become ends in them-selvesa common phenomenon witb many qualityinitiatives.A funda men tal aspect of focusing on results issetting challenging improvement goals. Tbis conceptempbasizes tbat goals should be based on systemati-cally gatbered facts. Challenging goals are needed fortbe overall improvement program and for individualimprovement projects. Be sure to explain and clarifytbese goals to the entire organization and provideregular refreshers.

www.asq.org


5/6

Another key success factor for any continuousimprovement initiative is communicating results andsuccesses. Follow-up should be from three perspec-tives: goals, methodologies, and return. For the projectgoals, this mean s verifying tha t the inten ded resultswere achieved. The most important follow-up by faris to determine the financial return generated by theimprovement activities because this information willbecome a critical driving factor for the future of acontinu ous improvement initiative.

In addition to financial follow-up, you also shouldcommunicate about implemented improvements fromthe perspective of employee and customer impact.These no nm one tary effects are also extremely valuablebecause they help emphasize the customer focus ofthe quality initiative and create important incentivesfor employees. The follow-up on methodology involvesacquiring valuable skills tha t can be applied to futureimprovement projects.Conclusion

The benefits of broad-based q uality initiatives aretoo important to ignore, so to maximize your contin-uous improvement efforts, keep in mind potentialobstacles that may stand in the way of success. Byengaging top management's full support, managingemployees' fear of change, providing the best toolsand training, keeping the focus on the customer,selecting the right projects, and communicating yoursuccesses you will greatly improve the likelihood ofmeeting and even exceeding the ex pectations for yourquality initiative.

References:H.W. Hoover Jr., "What Went Wrong in U.S. Business 's Attem ptto Rescue its Competitiveness?" Quality Progress, Vol. 28, No. 7pp. 83-86.B. Swayne and B. Harder, "Where Has All the Magic Gone,"Six Sigma Forum Magazine, Vol. 2, No. 3 , pp. 22-27.R. Dobb ins , "A Fai lure of M ethods , N ot Phi losophy," QualityProgress, Vol. 28, No.7, p p. 31-33.C. Shearer, "What To Do W hen TQ M Fai ls : Sym ptom s a ndRemedies," 49th Annual Quality Congress Proceedings, 1995.J. Corrigan, "The Art of TQM," Quality Progress, Vol. 28, No. 7,pp . 61-64.L. San dho lm a nd L. Sorqvist, "12 Req uirem ents for Six Sigm aSuccess," Six Sigma Forum Magazine, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 17-22.E. Weymann, "Why Change Programs Fail," 55th Annual QualityCongress Proceedings, 2001 .D. Hop en, "Lean Six Sigma Best Practices Foru m: Tales Fromthe Trenches ," American Stra tegic Management Ins t i tuteConference, November 2007.Note: The author would like to acknowledge the contributionsofASQ's Quality Information Center librarian, Alice Haley,for her assistance in researching the information that servedas a foundation for this article.

Janet Jacobsen is a freelance writer an d editor specializingin quality an d compliance topics. She is the formercommunications manager for the Registrar AccreditationBoard (now the ANAB). Jacobsen currently serves on thesto/fof The Journal for Quality and Participation.She can he reached at [email protected].

T H E JOURNAL FOR QUALITY & PARTICIPATION Summer 2008


6/6

Documents

Avoiding the Mistakes of the Past - A Casestudy