Approach Used for Total Quality Management Before the Implementation - Case Study Example

Total Quality Management: an analysis of Case Study – Case 38 by Alan Harrison Question1. At the start of the case quality improvement progress had “plateaued”. Using the information in the case, lecture notes and your own assessment describe the “most likely” approach used for quality management systems & processing at this time before the implementation of TQ started. Answer: Before answering the given question, it is crucial to acknowledge the aim of this case study analysis, which is to find the mistakes committed by Company A in implementing total quality management in the business and manufacturing processes of the company. The aim is to find the solutions to the problems that the Company A met in the implementation of TQ to suggest alternative paths by assimilating the practiced quality management systems with others such as lean manufacturing, as introduced at MIT for producing quality care efficiently, Six Sigma including FEMA for reducing defects to near-zero along with ISO standards. Coming back to the question above, the most likely approach used for quality management systems and processing at a time when progress regarding improvement had “plateaued” was to put on hold further development until issues on the priority list were sorted out. This was also the expert review of the investigative parent company of Company A. Earlier, the company A had taken certain one-off advances which have provided leverages but setting them aside, otherwise the approach of management had been irregular and doubtful. The management applied different parameters of saying something and doing differently such as quality was given the topmost priority in discussions but the actual preference was to reach production targets irrespective of quality considerations. Processes were never completed for initiating new product leaving the scope of improvement in new product at later stages of manufacturing, which affected the cost factor leading to reduced returns. In this regard, it is important to know the stage of the new product where corrections are made as a new product at definition phase costs 1$, which if rectified at production stage costs 1000$. Being a manufacturing unit, the emphasis remains on meeting quality requirements, reliability, and process-control besides cost reduction while attending to engineering and manufacturing aspects of the products. In the given context, the Company A committed such errors more often, thus, increasing the cost of meeting quality benchmarks. The approach for quality management systems included new tools and techniques such as Statistical Process Control but the Company A applied SPC without comprehending and making any need analysis on where to use this tool. There was a policy of doing ‘right the first time’ but regular improvements had to be made after checking the products. There were more than 30 issues demanding urgent attention. The prevalent quality standards at Company A were deficient when compared with Deming’s “14 points for quality improvement”. In Company A, there was no consistency in approach towards quality. In stead of depending on inspection, the Company A had to undergo mass quality inspections as things were not done right the first time. Philosophy was missing before implementing total quality management. Work practices were not disciplined and controlled such as recommended by Deming for finishing tasks. The human resource management was not there to provide help to the employees on the job requirements. There were barriers in different departments due to lack of leadership. It is evident from the suggestions made by the investigative group of the holding company of Company A. Staff at the supervisor level and shop-floor required role analysis, which was a problem of human resource management. Working environment was lacking in such work practices that were lacking in promoting discipline and control among the employees. According to one of the Deming’s 14 points, fear should be driven out but there were a lot of improvements needed to boost the morale of the employees. Deming had suggested continuous improvement in the system of production and services, which the Company A should have striven. For quality engineering management, lean production, a term introduced by researchers at MIT could have helped Company A to follow the footsteps of Toyota by making workers and work cells more agile and effective through such methods that cut waste. By following the lean manufacturing business model, the Company A would have prepared the ground by minimising waste and cost while keeping high quality standards. It would have helped the company in improving production and quality besides saving manufacturing time, reducing waste and stock, resulting in increased labour utility and safer functionality of operations. Working on the principles of lean manufacturing, the Company A could have tasked workers in cross-work domains to better handle in-built variability and instilled the quality of recurrent improvement capability. Normal wastes associated with a traditional manufacturing unit are related to wastes of space & time, materials, idle lying machines, labour, equipment and flow of goods from one location to another. Before implementing total quality the Company A should have identified and get rid of all types of waste by employing lean manufacturing techniques. The Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) Cycle – the basis of recurrent improvement is a way of TQM wherein daily improvement in management functions is accomplished by making the business processes efficient through data gathering. In PDCA, plan is verified on daily basis, results are measured and improvements are made by removing the errors. PDCA management cycle is the testing mechanism for TQ functions in a company. It helps in performing hypotheses logically in management activities. Processes are related to Deming PDCA cycle for the quality enhancement model in the TQ mechanism. By streamlining all functions, businesses can achieve outstanding results. Further analysis of the case study on Company A would entail how it used TQ into its operations. Question2. List and discuss the good and bad aspects of the way in which “Company A” had introduced Total Quality into its operations. Answer. Company A was advised by its study group to engage the services of Dr. Deming, the American quality guru. After holding a series of seminars on the issues, the Company A appointed consultants to chalk out a way towards total quality into the company operations. Initial bad aspect of the TQ implementation was taking short time of five months in implementation after getting recommendations of the internal study group report. The reaction of the managing director was full of over-confidence regarding implementation of the TQ, as he was convinced that certain TQ ideas offering leverage in the next five years could be realised by Company A in just two years. Responses from the other board members were not equally enthusiastic for resolving major issues through TQ. Thus, the very start of the implementation decision was varied. No attention was paid to the 30 quality related identified issues in the haste to implement TQ. Failure was bound to happen as things started moving in the wrong direction from the start itself. The new quality management system was introduced with the aim of making the change smooth for improving processes, a ‘special’ function being made a routine activity. For this purpose, different committees with specific teams were made to handle functions by the same group of employees. A theoretical structure was erected comprising TQM steering team, further divided into local steering committees for different functions and plants, culture change teams and statistical methods office, led by process improvement leaders, the statistical facilitators, helping all committee members and project teams towards realisation of TQ. Four different but inter-related change processes were initiated namely training & education, quality planning & focus, management culture & style and communication & recognition. For quality management system (QMS) and bringing improvement in these processes, training & education was provided to the company board by the statistical office and consultants by conducting ‘cascade’ exercise. Definitely, the cascading way of providing training to the board was a bad aspect of initiating total quality into the Company A’s functions although in structure it was a good aspect of providing education and training from the board itself to their direct reports who further transferred the gained knowledge to their juniors down the line. It failed because there was no system in place to transfer the new philosophy of working fearlessly because training in using tools and techniques was delayed for many months resulting in zero leverage in implementing the philosophy in the absence of tools and techniques. A successful TQM environment, only possible with the active involvement and commitment of the senior management in inculcating and practicing quality values relevant with the targets of the company, was found missing in the operations of Company A. Next in line, quality planning and focus required handling priority issues like SPC, appraisal and reward systems. Theoretically, it was the good aspect of initiating total quality but problems surfaced due to the absence of a management process that should have been in place to take the charge for making changes. The new appraisal systems were managed by initiating an insignificant ‘process improvement plan’, which could not be comprehended by managers. The way of doing appraisals and management by numbers was never recommended by Dr. Deming. In the matter of management culture and style, good aspects related to corporate aims, values and mission were adequately looked after but functional aspects, the responsibility of the board members, remained under-performed. These were related to the management perspective on Deming principles, which were never analysed. The culture change teams could not lead the cultural change to inculcate it in the philosophy of the company. As a result the company policies could not be revised as per the changing philosophical perspective. Thus, Company A failed in initiating total quality in its operations. For pursuing the goals introducing total quality in the business processes through communication and recognition, the company made good start by holding conferences, issuing management briefs, circulating newsletters and publishing material to promote company’s new philosophies. A realistic approach was made not to publicise too much and make sure that what was preached to the audiences was logical and comprehending but such pursuits of the company were not time bound to achieve total quality into its operations. So both good and bad aspects and tendencies could be observed in the implementation of TQM. Question3. In a recommendation to Senior Management; what quality management process would you reintroduce (Total Quality or other)? How would you do it & when? In your answer consider the following: a) Quality Strategy, b) Quality Systems & processes, c) Quality tools (what would be your core tools & why), d) Senior Management, stakeholder & employee involvement, e) Communication f) KPI’s & measuring success of the implementation & total quality improvements Reading the case study on Company A, the first reaction is that the Company A’s management was in a haste to implement the TQ and in that haste forgot to pay attention to 30 urgent issues. A quality management process needs to be reintroduced by following aspects of Six Sigma besides TQM. Although notions and perspectives of both Six Sigma and TQM are distinct yet their activity area is similar, supporting have different management concepts and philosophies, Six Sigma and TQM operates in the same field, advocating commitment to a total process and quality improvement approach (Gordon 2002). Starting the planning process once again, the Company A should first of all prepare a quality management thought leadership journey by inspecting the current processes to find errors and rectify them, as given below. For core strategic tools, it should employ statistical process control (SPC), reliability engineering, FEMA and VE by first performing a need analysis of using such tools and techniques. It should provide training to its staff for using DMAIC methodology. Actually, DMAIC is central to the Six Sigma strategy, and is nearly similar to Demings PDCA cycle for recurrent improvement (Voehl 2004). It is crucial to integrate different tools into a comprehensive approach of process improvement for using the tools at right time, place and logically, which would help workforce in novel idea generation on QM (Cheng 2008). It should follow the policy of doing ‘right the first time’ earnestly in practicality leaving no scope for errors. Later it should ensure that quality systems are being used before attempting total quality management, the outer layer of the thought leadership journey. The TQM should apply to all aspects including quality strategy, team work, and employee involvement. Regarding quality strategy, the Company A should follow a strategy of assimilating technical skills based on quality control circle (QCC) activity, quality improvement teams (QIT), quality assurance (QA) system and ISO 9000 series. It should employ DOE techniques and FEMA along with SPC for diagnosing the causes to apply cross-functional teams (CFTs) for trouble-shooting (Cheng 2008). In stead of depending totally on TQM processes, the Company A should use the Six Sigma management methodology as it can provide better results than TQM and lean enterprises. The shift from TQM processes towards Six Sigma programme could prove to be a testing ground for Company A to successfully implement a quality management system as it has not attempted Six Sigma before (Cheng 2008). In literature, there are two stages to accomplish quality management. They are plan, do, check, action (PDCA) management cycle relationship with TQM functions and define, measure, analyze, improve, control (DMAIC) way with Six Sigma programme. The senior management of Company A should integrate both ways for attaining total quality. In PDCA way of TQM, it is daily improvement in management functions by making the business processes efficient through data gathering. In PDCA, plan is verified on daily basis, results are measured and improvements are made by removing the errors. PDCA management cycle is the testing mechanism for TQM functions in a company. It helps in performing hypotheses logically in management activities. Senior management should relate processes to Deming PDCA cycle for the quality enhancement model in the TQM mechanism. By streamlining all functions, it can achieve outstanding results. Following the Plan function of PCDA cycle, the Company A should identify issues and chalk out plan for improvement, then following the Do function it should implement plan on a test basis. Next, it should evaluate the working of the plan. Finally, it should Act by making improvements and restart the cycle for removing errors. Taking a lesson from the past mistakes of ignoring quality at the cost of achieving production level by the management of Company A, the senior management should follows the process-driven approach. As the process of TQM is run by the top management, it should analyse the gathered data for improving the product quality. The employees need to participate in the best of team spirit feelings to attain a TQM culture and environment. In a process-oriented atmosphere, interaction and communication among team members is crucial to attain total quality. The top management has to play a key and crucial role in quality control systems. A successful TQM environment is only possible with the active involvement and commitment in inculcating and practicing quality values relevant with the targets of the company. Company management has to invest in those systems and methods to attain the goals. Management should reward and recognise the good work of its work force to stimulate its employees to be active partners in realising TQM standards who are equal stakeholders in the company like its management and other investors. The Company A should follow the system of process approach in logical steps to enhance the quality and performance of its products. It requires the improvement process to be a never-ending activity for achieving total quality in the international market of its products. It should manufacture products by following standardised procedures and specifications based on international standards; there should be no room for complacency; it has to conform and apply regulatory requirements for improved performance. It would become possible by applying the elements of quality assurance needed to maintain total quality management. It is recommended to the top management to use the DMAIC methodology for resolving quality related issues by guaranteeing right and efficient process implementation. Company A should be more recurrent in organising conferences, issuing management briefs and publishing interactive content on the company’s new philosophy through its newsletters for better communication with stakeholders. Through team effort and participation by all employees, Company A can help in controlling the cycle of processes by using self analysis traits to reach fruition in business aims, as decided in different phases to accomplish quality benchmark of Six Sigma. Here, the part played by top management is crucial to the success of processes run by different heads by backing and boosting their efforts. Bottom-line of the processes is equally crucial and, therefore, must be considered and given weight age by process managers to add to the profits of the company (Cheng 2008). By integrating both TQM and Six Sigma, although different notions philosophically but their area of functioning is the same, Company A can adhere to the business processes for increased quality results, as the Six Sigma follows the principles and lessons of Deming PDCA management cycle. Actually, Six Sigma is an extended branch of improved PDCA management cycle that can offer a winning formula to the company. Important element is the perfect changing of the system from TQM to Six Sigma. The index of both, the TQM and Six Sigma for quality performance and issue resolution is measured differently. By integrating the TQM functions with Six Sigma methodology, a strategic process, the Company A can get competitive advantage and achieve increased profits. In this context, it would be relevant to quote the example of Taiwanese company Kinpo Electronics, which got success by implementing Six Sigma through TQM (Cheng 2008). Chang (2008) has performed an empirical analysis of Kinpo Electronics (KE) Company in Taiwan for implementing Six Sigma through TQM improvement. Comparing the approach of KE with that of Company A, it needs to introduce micro changes in adjustment for system wide coordination for extending TQM functions into Six Sigma system. The transfer approach would be shifting from PDCA management cycle to DMAIC methodology and from internal functions to cross function teams. Company A should adjust elements of TQM quality index for reducing system’s error-rate towards the profit generation through the Six Sigma System. KE has got competitive edge from the integration of TQM functions with the Six Sigma approach. It has made TQM a major part of Six Sigma. Such an assimilation of the TQM with Six Sigma approach offered almost all the features of TQM and KE is one such example of strategically leveraging the formula of process integration. Further, for initiating total quality improvement and measuring the success of implementation both TQM and Six Sigma exhibit almost similar indexes like ppm, yield Cp (USL-LSL/6σ), Cpk (μ-nearer specification/3σ), C/D (customer delivery) and C/S (customer satisfaction). In Six Sigma, bottom line is crucial for financial execution, which incidentally is attained also through TQM implementation. What is needed is the changed focus of TQM towards Six Sigma (Cheng 2008). Reference Cheng, Jung-Lang., 2008. Implementing Six Sigma via TQM improvement: an empirical study in Taiwan. The TQM Journal, 20 (3), p. 182-95. Emerald Group Publishing Ltd. Gordon, D.K., 2002. Quality management system vs. quality improvement. Quality Progress, 35 (11), p.86. Emerald Group Publishing Ltd. Voehl, F., 2004. Six Sigma community improvement project. Quality Congress, ASQs Annual Quality Congress Proceedings, 58, pp.351-64. Available from: http://asq.org/qic/display-item/index.html?item=20600 [Accessed 19 January 2011]. Read More