Is Quality Always About Conforming to Requirements - Essay Example

? QUALITY MANAGEMENT by 30 June Quality Management Introduction Quality management is an indispensable component of railway operations. Quality control is of paramount importance for passengers and their safety. Complex quality management, quality assurance, and quality control systems enhance the organization and efficiency of network rail operations and functions. The continuity of quality management and control in railway operations is justified by the need to guarantee cost-efficiency and safety of all railway activities. The Crosby Philosophy remains the fundamental element of quality management for all types of businesses. The four absolutes of Crosby’s quality management system enhance operability and functioning of complex rail networks. Professionals in railway operations must remember that quality always comes at a cost; and it is always cheaper and better to promote superior quality from the very beginning. Quality is always about conforming to requirements Conformance to requirements is the first absolute of Crosby quality management philosophy. As a result, it is imperative that such requirements are clearly defined (Evans & Lindsay 2007). That Crosby defines quality in customer terms makes quality management an extremely challenging task, since every customer has his(her) own vision of quality. A business executive traveling from Leeds to London for a full day’s work is looking for superior quality of network rail operations, which should manifest through the no-delay-approaches. Simply stated, a business executive whose schedule is overfilled with meetings and tasks will hardly wish his train to be late. Business executives traveling for workplace and business purposes usually have their days planned minute by minute. A train is just an instrument of meeting their business objectives. Any delay may become a serious impediment to the development of effective relations between business executives, their suppliers and customers. Therefore, quality is judged by whether or not network rails operate in accordance with their schedules and deadlines. By contrast, grandparents traveling from Sheffield to spend the weekend with their grandchildren in Brighton will always search for the best cost. Affordability will become the main criterion of quality judgments. Older people experience budget constraints and are extremely economical in their financial decisions. However, they do not want the cost of traveling to be low by all possible means; rather, they will look for an option that is equally cheap and safe. A company that manages to offer a safe and affordable traveling alternative will become the object of grandparents’ choice. Eventually, four friends from Sunderland wanting to take a 4 day break in Paris want to have a nice and pleasant journey. Most probably, they will look for an affordable network rail option that offers smooth travel, includes a good restaurant to spend time in, and makes possible to observe wonderful landscapes and sights on their way to Paris. Such people want everything to be perfect. They do not want their holidays to be spoiled by minor disturbances. However, again, safety will become the main quality requirement for them. Whatever the purpose of traveling, all passengers will expect railway professionals to secure them from the risks of accidents and delays. Quality management: Prevention rather than detection Superior quality management systems rely on the premise that prevention is always better than detection. This is particularly the case of railway networks, which are characterized by relatively high risks of accidents and technical failures. Like any other complex technical mechanism, railways operate in the atmosphere of uncertainty, and prevention is the best way to protect passengers and technical assets from unnecessary failures and risks. Three possible ways to prevent undesirable occurrences from happening in Network Rail may include (1) road safety audit; (2) the use of GIS and GPS systems; and (3) regular training and checks of train drivers. First, road safety audit “identifies potential road safety problems and suggests ways in which these identified problems can be minimized” (Proctor 2001, p.9). The process of road safety audit varies across railway companies, but it is imperative that Network Rail has its road safety audit carried out by at least two (or more) professionals who have substantial experience in road safety engineering (Proctor 2001). Road safety audit must incorporate and consider all user perspectives and be held regularly (at least twice a year) to guarantee safety and protection against unnecessary occurrences. Second, the use of GIS and GPS systems has proved to be a viable element of quality assurance in railway operations. GPS systems are used to track the movement of rail cars, locomotives, and maintenance vehicles in real time (GPS 2011). The technology helps to prevent delays and accidents (GPS 2011). Third, Network Rail must pay particular attention to the quality and professionalism of its train drivers: their skills and competence must be regularly updated and checked. It is no secret that human factor plays a big role in causing dangerous railway occurrences. Recent advances in technologies and machinery increase cognitive loads on train drivers, who must be able to analyze information and take right decisions in extremely complex environments (Gillis 2007). Testing and training will create a balance of human and technical forces for the benefit of customer safety in Network Rail. Performance and zero defects Zero defects is one of the most challenging aspects of quality management in organizations. “The concept of zero defects as explained and initiated by Philip Crosby is a business system that aims at reducing the defects in a process, and doing the process correctly the first time itself” (Six Sigma Portal, n.d.). The zero defects concept challenges the principle of no delays in the delivery of superior customer service. How to keep customers satisfied and whether zero defects are more important than on-time delivery are among the fundamental questions to answer in railway operations. According to Crosby philosophy, a product is acceptable and relevant when it conforms to customer requirements. Many customers value on-time delivery above all. This, however, is not the case of Network Rail, where safety remains the main criterion of superior quality and success. Achieving zero defects may not be possible, and the main task of Network Railway is to ensure that the risks of unnecessary occurrences have been minimized and guarantee that relevant quality improvement systems are in place. Increased allotments of time usually reflect an overemphasis on perfection, which is never possible to achieve. The perfect service process is more a myth rather than a reality, but if additional time is needed to reduce the risks of accidents and failures in railway projects, it is better to have it and deliver superior product or service from the first attempt. Otherwise, overemphasizing no defects by all possible means may increase the costs of the project, reduce customer satisfaction and demoralize employees who fail to achieve the desired level of perfection. Quality: getting it right first time Crosby is convinced that there can be no economics of quality, as it is always cheaper to do the job right the first time (Anonymous 2007). In railway operations, the costs of not delivering quality project the first time may be particularly high. The recent example of Network Rail’s being fined for not delivering line work on time suggests that financial losses caused by failure to provide superior quality right the first time can be unprecedented. Weaver (2008) writes that Network Rail was fined ?14m for failing the project and not being able to finish west coast line work on time. The argument on whether or not penalties can help to enhance the quality and efficiency of railway operations is hardly relevant, since any disruption in trains can become the source of multiple concerns and huge financial and human losses for millions of passengers. Apparently, the costs of late-finishing line work are not limited to the discussed ?14m in fines: weekend closures of the line, including those on Easter, and 315 hours behind the schedule must be also taken into consideration (Weaver 2008). Four extra days taken to make quality corrections and complete the project forced thousands of passengers “on to coaches between Northampton and Birmingham” (Weaver 2008). Train disruptions during New Year holidays were associated with customer dissatisfaction and considerable delays in freight operations (Weaver 2008). As a result, businesses using Network Rail’s freight services also carried a bunch of financial and non-financial costs because of delays. It goes without saying that the real costs of not making the job right the first time can hardly be estimated. Railway transport facilitates movement of people and goods, and disruptions in trains can cause heavy impacts on individual and business customers. A fine can motivate Network Railway to enhance the quality of its operations and project decisions, but it is clear that the company needs sophisticated quality management procedures, to reduce the risks of further disruptions, failures, and fines. Conclusion Quality management is a complex system comprising numerous procedures and processes. Quality management is of particular importance for companies and businesses that run complex technical systems, like railways. Quality management is particularly important for companies and businesses that assume a responsibility for health and lives of thousands of consumers/ passengers. Superior quality is essentially about conforming to requirements, which must be clear and comprehensible. Different customers hold different perceptions of quality, but it is imperative that Network Railway has knowledge of customer preferences and meets their needs and expectations. Road safety audit, the use of GIS and GPS systems and professional training can reduce the risks of unnecessary occurrences in Network Rail. Achieving no defects is virtually impossible, but Network Railway must guarantee that the risks of accidents are minimized and quality improvement systems are run to improve the quality of railway decisions and functions. Finally, delivering projects right the first time is always cheaper: train disruptions are associated with major transport and human costs. Customers are dissatisfied. Freight operations are delayed. Quality management procedures must help Network Railway to balance scarce resources with time constraints and deliver superior quality projects within predetermined time limits. References Evans, RE & Lindsay, WM 2007, Management and control of quality, Boston: Cengage Learning. Gillis, I 2007, ‘Cognitive workload of train drivers’, in JP Wilson, B Norris & T Clarke, People and rail systems: Human factors at the heart of the railway, Ashgate Publishing. GPS 2011, ‘Rail’, GPS.gov, [online], accessed from http://www.gps.gov/applications/rail/ Proctor, S 2001, Practical road safety auditing, Thomas Telford. Six Sigma Portal n.d., ‘The concept of zero defects in Six Sigma’, Six Sigma Portal, [online], accessed from http://train.sixsigmaportal.com/the-concept-of-zero-defects-in-six-sigma.html Weaver, M 2008, ‘Network Rail fined ?14m for new year delays’, The Guardian, [online], accessed from http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2008/feb/28/network.rail Read More