TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT, VOL. 9, NOS 4&5, 1998, S6-S12 Quality and quality management at a crossroads ASBJ0RN AUNE Department of Production and Quality Engineering, Norwegian University for Science and Technology, N-7034 Trondheim, Norway Total quality management: Main elements ISO 8402 defines total quality management (TQM) as a "Management approach of an organization centered on quality, based on the participation of all its members and aiming at long term success through customer satisfaction and benefits to all members of the organization and to society". However, more importantly when one is looking into the future, TQM is "An evolving system of practices, tools, and training methods being developed primarily by industry, for creating higher quality products and services for increased customer satisfaction, in a rapidly changing world" (Center for Quality of Management). TQM can be said to be a sociological organizational experiment on the track to a new management paradigm. The TQM concept has three main elements, and three main tasks (see Fig. 1): (1) Four principles for leadership: customer focus; continuous improvement, basically process oriented; 'total' participation; societal learning. (2) A quality system and system thinking as a basis for quality management. J, Quality effect Figure 1. The TQM concept. 0954-4127/98/0400S6-07 S7.00 1998 Garfax Publishing Ltd
QUALITY AND QUALITY MANAGEMENT AT A CROSSROADS S7 [ ] Creative and analytic thinking I [Colleclion of facts f 00 Sense opportunities I. and problems Innovative improvement and proactive problem-solving Continous improvement & reactive probierrvsolving Figure 2. A model for problem-solving. (3) A toolbox for efficient and effective quality (process and product): control, assurance, improvement (continuous) and innovation (breakthrough) processes, products and systems. The tools in question are: a model (a process) for problem-solving (see Fig. 2); 'the seven tools for problem-solving', including statistical methods; 'the seven management tools'; 'idealizing'; benchmarking; process (ownership) analysis; work unit analysis; QFD; hoshin management; and others developed by people working on solving all kinds of problems in business and industry. What 'customer focus' means should be self-evident: companies and institutions have both external and internal customers. The external customers those bringing money into the system are, and will continue to be, most important. Jointly, continuous (process-oriented) improvement' and 'total participation (teamwork)' require improvement to be a natural part of daily (routine) work. Given a requirement of efficient use of resources, we can talk about 'the dual principle of work' (Fig. 3). 'Societal learning' is learning on several levels: the individual, because all learning has its origin in the individual; the team, because it is the joint efforts of a number of specialists which create extraordinary results; the company, because TQM is a social organizational experiment; and the branch and national levels. The infrastructure for learning is perhaps the most important structure for efficient use of the TQM concept. On the road to a learning organization. In The Fifth Discipline., Peter Senge described the requirements for 'the learning organization' as: personal mastery, mental models, share visions, team learning and system thinking. These requirements fit the TQM concept nicely. Both the theoretical and practical parts of learning have to be carefully coordinated with daily work tasks (Fig. 4). The business plan is the driver for daily work, and the organization's vision for improvement projects. We should also note that the 4V problem-solving method is
S8 A. AUNE of<of< of< i u fi-
QUALITY AND QUAUTT MANAGEMENT AT A CROSSROADS S9 3 - o o >.b a> E 0) f* h- \- CQ o 0) 'o* a h- m
SIO A. AUNE the model science is based on, i.e. reactive problem-solving (applied research): (1) someone describes a problem; (2) first collection of facts; (3) formulation of a hypothesis; (4) experiments/analysis; (5) possible solutions; (6) try one solution; (7) record results; (8) evaluate solution; (9) publish solution for test by others; (10) reflect on what is learned during the research process (when practising, there are a number of feedback loops and/or iterations). It is also based on proactive problem-solving (basic research): add steps 00, Kensing opportunities; and 0, collect information. Reactive problem-solving corresponds with continuous problem-solving (improvement), and proactive with innovative problemsolving or breakthrough. The model also covers process control. Both the seven tools for problem-solving and the seven management tools are scientific methods. The model also covers teaching. Process control: Test questions during and at the end of each class and monthly tests. Continuous improvement: Simple immediate feedback at the end of each class. What was good, what should be improved? (Such questions should also be asked of each researcher and administrator at the end of each meeting.) Input to continuous improvement might also come from other sources. Innovative improvement: Work done by faculties in connection with development of new courses, especially when introducing results from their own research work. Adopting the TQM toolbox and the TQM principles should not represent any problems for university teachers and researchers. They should instead promote the use of the same toolbox and the same principles in administrative functions. Such promotion will be to their advantage, because one of the principles of TQM is customer focus, and the main customer of the administrator is the faculty. Neither faculties nor administrators should have problems accepting the introduction of 'the dual principle of work' or teamwork in a period when budgets are under pressure. Continuous improvement has to be the responsibility of the line organization not of staff. Improvement of administrative processes most often needs cross-functional teams, or total participation. Breakthrough in science is based on continuous improvement in different fields, and happens most often through cross-disciplinary teamwork. The future of TQM Further development of the TQM concept for the benefit of business, industry and government agencies depends on the ability of the quality community to bring the subject to universities and business schools on a much broader scale than today. If the academic situation concerning TQM is not satisfactory, what could be the main causes? One cause might be that the TQM concept is much too diverse/cross-disciplinary to fit easily into the university structure and culture. A TQM specialist is difficult to place because he/she has interests in very many different topics/disciplines along the whole value chain and in all departments in a company. This cross-disciplinary interest is a challenge to the conventional division of disciplines. Some people experience the TQM concept as a threat, and consider a person entering discussions on organizational development from a position as 'quality expert' as not having an adequate background. The TQM concept has also been challenging conventional wisdom on how to manage, as it focuses on the customers, the employees and the team instead of the owners, the managers and the individual. In this situation, the quality community has two main options: insisting on TQM as a discipline (science) in its own right; giving up on introducing TQM as such on an academical level.
QUALITY AND QUALITY MANAGEMENT AT A CROSSROADS S11 A new discipline (science) The activities necessary to develop, produce and sell products and services can be grouped in six management areas, the sum of which I call general management, or total management: product/service management; personnel management; resource management; material management; logistics management; financial management. If quality management is roughly equal to product/service management, we can define the connected discipline (apphed science) as: "covering the relations between the product/service and the users with respect to value and how the desired relations should be secured through development, production and marketing". The new discipline should develop ideas and tools helping private business and governmental agencies to handle problems arising from the four main bodies interacting in questions concerning quality: customers/users; producers/service suppliers; government/society; the juridical system. Quality technology must therefore contain elements from technical, legal, economical, political, sociological and behavioral sciences. One possible way to organize the practical work developing the science is shown in Fig. 5, in which the numbers stand for: (1) product/service (quality planning); (2) quality control; (3) quality assurance; (4) quality Consumers Govemmenl Consultants Search for excjsting knowledge and need for new Universities Business schools Companies o Individual companies 1 Research and development Education and training Basic Specialist Contionous Phd Figure 5. A model for the development of quality technology as a science.
S12 A. AUNE management. The driving force in the development of quality technology as a discipline should be to help private business to ease the entrance to new markets and to improve its competitive power. For government agencies, the driving force should be the necessity to improve productivity and quality for better public services. Giving up the TQM concept If the quality community does not want to contribute to a 'new discipline/science', the result will be contributions to the development of other more established disciplines: leadership (not a science, but an art); system engineering and system thinking (quality management systems for product/services management); organizational development, including change management quality improvement and breakthrough through scientific problem-solving in teams (the importance of the 'TQM toolbox' is much underestimated as a driver for positive organizational development); the learning organization. Conclusions TQM will never be developed and made full use of as a powerful management concept before the subject has reached full academic status (industrial practitioners may like it or not). The quality community has for years talked about the importance of quality, but when people have asked "You say quality is so important, where do we find the professors?", the numbers have not been very impressive, especially at business schools. Today the number of publications covering quality and quality management is growing rapidly. Most are written by consultants and practitioners explaining their ways of doing things and how their companies meet the quality challenge. There is nothing wrong with that, as practitioners usually want descriptions of practical cases and not theory. But the quality community needs professors to develop a sound theoretic basis for efficient solutions to future practical problems. However, such development requires that people from business and industry, including the consulting business, put pressure on schools and demand teaching and research on quality, as has happened to some degree in the US. Business and industry get the candidates asked for. If you do not ask for quality people from schools, you will not get them. In many surveys of top managers, a huge percentage are of the opinion that quality is absolutely critical. Among the reasons given are; primary buying argument of ultimate customer, major means for reducing costs, major means for improving flexibility/responsiveness, major means for reducing throughput times, In view of this situation, the quality community should realize that the subject of quality and quality management should no longer be treated as secondary. In their own interest, quality practitioners must realize that the future of their profession depends on people sitting in ivory towers on campuses.