Building Quality Dykes

Human society has depended on quality since the dawn of civilization.  In primitive societies this dependence was on the quality of natural goods and services: food, air, water and temperature.  Humans adapted to the natural environment through “human sensing” - a form of incoming inspection - and experience.

Despite these responses, humans in primitive societies lived precariously.  Life spans were shortened by malnutrition, disease, natural disasters, etc.  To protect themselves against these risks, primitive societies created non-natural aids to their mental and physical capabilities such as: artificial shelter (houses) and processing of natural materials to produce non-natural goods (pottery, textiles, tools, weapons).  The subsequent growth of commerce, science and technology greatly expanded the extent and variety of these non-natural goods and services.

As a result people in many modern industrial societies live longer and more varied lives.  However, instead of being largely subject to the perils of natural forces, people are now exposed to risks resulting from their own ingenuity.  Sometimes these goods and services can fail, resulting in costly and annoying breaks in continuity.  Further, they could also contain threats to human safety, health and the environment.

All industrial countries have consciously chosen to live dangerously behind the dykes of quality.  National defence and prestige are today precariously balanced on the quality and reliability of complex hardware.  The daily safety and health of the common man now depend on the quality of manufactured products: drugs, food, aircrafts, automobiles, elevators, tunnels and bridges.

The ability of our industrial plants to produce goods and services is directly linked to the reliability of the automated process, which in turn is dependent on the quality and reliability of the systems of power, communication, transport and computers.

If the number of power outages are logged in the state of Bihar, it would not come as a surprise if the SEB’s generating power for the state ranks among the most inefficient power plants in the world.  Such are our quality dykes.  To the credit of Tata Steel, the company is one of the finest steel producers in the world despite the logistic handicap of being located in Bihar, a state prone to power breaks.  Of course, assured continuity of power would facilitate a better product mix.  But the fact still remains that what other major steel producing companies in the world take for granted (regular power supply) is in India a major constraint.

Since the smooth functioning of our daily lives depends on the vital services - power, transport, water, waste removal and communication, among others - their reliability is vital.  Breaks in the quality dykes have resulted in frequent inconveniences, costs and injuries to users, as well as in rare but terrifying disasters - Bhopal.  The response of industrial societies has been to apply pressure to the producers of goods and services to force them to build and maintain adequate quality dykes.  These pressures have taken various forms: product liability, regulatory legislation and so on.

The frightening proportions of the liability problem has resulted in extensive discussion as to what companies should do to minimize their risks.  Top management should establish corporate policies for product safety and liability which guide managerial conduct on matters such as mandated design reviews for product safety, identification dating and traceability.  Also, management should establish a product safety committee and establish a mandated audit to assure adherence to these policies.

The earliest government regulations on quality emphasized human safety and health.  These regulations stressed “after the fact” penalties.  In due course this limited form of government regulation was expanded to “before the fact” intervention and to non-safety matters as well.

If international competition were to continue to grow at the pace prevailing in the seventies and eighties the resulting deficiencies will become conspicuous nationally.  In that event there would be agitation for some national response to improve competitiveness.  An outstanding example of such a response was that made by Japan during the fifties: establishing of export controls on quality; the use of national institutions (principally the Japanese Union of Scientists and Engineers) to organize and conduct training programmes, publishing quality related literature, designating an annual quality month (November) during which there is a recommitment through conferences and related activities; sponsoring awards (the Deming prize for example) which have attained high national significance.

Both the US and Western Europe have taken up Japan’s challenge.  The US has responded with the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award that is given to companies which excel in total quality.  The value system gives high scores to customer focus, quality leadership, quantitative results and full use of human resources.

India has also reached a critical stage where a national effort to improve quality is required.  We can not afford to miss opportunities on this front.