Traditionally, quality experts and managers have tended to focus on the widely publicized story of how the Japanese had learned from US quality specialists in the 1950s. Specialists, such as, Prof W Edwards Deming and Dr J M Juran. Also, that US business people had, at that time, ignored the quality experts’ teachings. And that the Japanese, with superior quality, overwhelmed them in the 1970s.
A natural reaction ensued - Deming, Juran, and their followers were suddenly prophets with great honour in the US. Every Fortune 500 company wanted to hear their wisdom. Slowly, in the 1980s, US quality began to improve.
But much had happened in Japan between the 1950s and the 1980s. The Japanese had not only listened to Deming (a statistician) and Juran (a manufacturing expert with degrees in engineering and law); the Japanese had also learned to listen to customers. And they had learned to give customers what they wanted.
It was not exactly that Deming and Juran did not recognize the importance of listening to customers. They were forced by American management’s lack of interest in their teachings to spend three decades earning their livings as manufacturing specialists. Hence, their techniques and measures were demonstrated as factory tools. Consequently, in the 1980’s, when some Americans called themselves quality experts, they were Deming and Juran disciples..... manufacturing focused.
Thus it is not surprising that, when the US congress authorized the Baldrige award, the National Bureau of Standards turned primarily to such experts for help. Dr Blanton Godfrey of the Juran Institute, statistics professor George Box, James Bakken of Ford, and Mary Anne Rasmussen of American Express. Their advice was basically excellent. They talked about ensuring that top executives take the lead in a quality effort, that companies measure their costs of poor quality, that companies provide statistical evidence of quality success, and that companies train the entire workforce in separating the "vital few" quality problems from the "trivial many".
But something was missing. When the word "customer" came up, most of the quality experts were curiously inarticulate. They were eager to advocate that the award committee require mathematical tests to measure whether manufacturing processes were "in control". But as for measuring customer satisfaction relative to competitors, they were either uninformed or downright skeptical of the idea that anyone could provide statistical evidence to identify which companies were truly creating happy customers.
The Baldrige criteria are not perfect. Consistent with principles of continuous improvement, the award’s criteria have been revised and improved every year. The eight essentials that really ought to be in place for a company to qualify as truly quality-minded are:
- A plan to keep improving all operations continuously
- A system for measuring these improvements accurately
- A strategic plan based on benchmarks that compare the company’s performance with the world’s best
- A close partnership with suppliers and customers that feeds improvement back into the operation
- A deep understanding of the customers so that their wants can be translated into products
- A long-lasting relationship with customers, going beyond the delivery of the product to include sales, service, and ease of maintenance
- A focus on preventing mistakes rather than merely correcting them
- A commitment to improving quality that runs from the top of the organization to the bottom.
If you intuitively understand continuous improvement, negotiating the Baldrige process is not difficult. Usually, we tend to solve problems, and then walk away. To continuously improve means to repeat the improvement process over and over again. Simple improvements address discrete problems; continuous improvements address and manage ongoing processes.
The reason continuous improvement has become important is simple. Customer needs and therefore quality goals are moving targets. There is no single thing you can do to change your company from zero quality to all quality. Quality is incremental and competitive. Improvement must be continuous or it quickly becomes obsolete and irrelevant, in the context of competition.
The concept of process is a major stumbling block for many managers, who think of business in terms of things - products, services - and not the processes underlying the creation of things. This focus on process is the heart and soul to prevention based quality. Under this approach, the target is not defects in the products or services themselves, but rather in the process that created them.
Process improvement is ultimately defined, not by cycle time or standard deviations, but by the requirements of customers, both external and internal. Meeting customer requirements and expectations requires a close fit between product or service features and customer needs. Customer-focused organizations also pay close attention to customer satisfaction trends, knowing that what won customer applause and loyalty last year will probably seem inadequate this year or next year. Hence, the need to benchmark.
Benchmarking is the process of studying the practices of well run world-class companies in order to establish operating targets for one’s own company. Benchmarking managers do not apologize for adopting or adapting whole processes and practices from other companies. Their credo is cheerfully plagiaristic. " Steal shamelessly". By doing this, they are able to accelerate the rate of improvement in their organizations and provide the rationale for both continuous improvement and strategic quality planning.
Now, several years later, almost everybody agrees in principle that quality must be defined by the customer. Executives preach about "100 per cent customer satisfaction", "customer delight", and "providing value to customers". Yet, to this day, most companies have not yet installed or become proficient in any metrics or other tools enabling them to dependably defeat their competitors in providing value to the customer.
Here lies the opportunity for Indian companies. To leapfrog in their quest for quality. The strategy: continuous quality improvement, driven by the customer. Using metrics.
We also need to learn from Baldrige winners. They know better than anyone how central customer satisfaction is to their winning. They are on record, company after company, as establishing customer satisfaction as the cornerstone of their quality strategies. Federal Express’s Customer Satisfaction Policy states:
"The most fundamental service objective of Federal Express is to have a satisfied customer at the conclusion of each transaction".
Similarly, Cadillac’s mission statement concludes:
"... Cadillac will continuously improve the quality of its products and services to meet or exceed customer expectations..."
Most other Baldrige winners also take customer satisfaction as their personal mantra.
Issue: Will our National Quality Awards be catalysts for leap frogging into the global arena?
CREDITS: Suresh Lulla, Founder & Mentor, Qimpro Consultants Pvt. Ltd.