Operations Management - Research Paper Example

Operations Management Table of Contents Table of Contents Introduction 2 Software development models 3 The Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle 3 Evaluation and Implementation of the Deming cycle 4 Planning 4 DO 6 Study 7 Act 8 Conclusion 9 List of References 11 Introduction Quality is the standard of products or services whose importance is a cognizable aspect in all fields of business. Superior quality is characterized by low failure rates and time wastage, increased productivity and efficiency. The foremost goal of ensuring quality in production and offering services is to ensure that the clients’ expectations’ are met and hence satisfied. In addition, the rate of customer satisfaction is always high. On a similar note, the aspect of quality has been embraced in the software market and the industry at large as a critical element of developing competitive advantage. This essay seeks to dissect the utility of and relevance of PDCA cycle relative to the quality assurance continuous improvement in software development. Various stages such as Planning, Do and Act will be explored through illustration of examples. There is difficulty in measuring and comparing the quality in software development, when comparing it with the manufacturing industries. This is immensely attributed to the diversity and complexity of software products. However, it is easier to measure or improve the quality of the attributed process based unification for multi-model software process improvement (ZADOR, 2008). There are numerous definitions, which define software quality assurance (SQA), however some are product oriented, others on service and others on resource. In essence, SQA can be defined as a repetitive process incorporated with the project management and lifecycles attributed to the software development (KIDD, 2009). These are intended for review of the internal control systems, which ensure that all the software standards and procedures are adhered. The diverse goals and backgrounds of diverse organizations guide the processes attributed to software development (Peterson, 2004). For instance, a model attributed to the PDCA cycle can be used differently to achieve different objectives. Software development models Development of models attributed to numerous development cycle models exists and are developed to attain a range of goals. The process of choosing these models is immensely attributed to the eventual impact on the testing, which is done. In addition, it will define the techniques to be applied. Some of the software development models include RAD, Agile, Iterative and V models among others. In the case of regulation of the quality of assurance approaches, the software development cycle (SDLC) has distinctive features such as corrective measures, which defines the manner in which quality assurance should be implemented. The Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle The Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle is attributed to the repeated and continuous improvement of the quality assurance. This cycle is also called the Deming circle. It is imperative to note that, the application of the PDCA has proved to be more convenient and effective when compared to the adoption and use of “the right first time” approach. It is justifiable that, the use of the PDCA cycle implies a continuous search for better approaches of improvement. The cycle is effectual in performing any kind of work and in managing programmes. This cycle offers both permanent and temporary corrective actions (ALAN, 2013). For instance, the temporary action practically tackles and fixes the problem with the aim of attaining results (IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, ERSHI, JIANG, AND RUNLIANG, 2013). On the other hand, the permanent action performs investigation, and helps in eliminating the fundamental causes of a problem. This helps in attaining the sustainability of the improved process. This focus on the PDCA will help in understanding the internal quality-assurance procedures and any other changes requisite for perfect performance of the systems. Consider the following illustration of the PDCA cycle. This figure will act as guideline in following up the process of assessing quality assurance in a system. Evaluation and Implementation of the Deming cycle This entails close monitoring of the sub stages of the Deming cycle relative to the resources available to ensure the ultimate goals are achieved. In addition, the implementation sub-process as discussed in the Do stage form part of the Deming cycle. Planning Most organizations face challenges in implementing the SQA, particularly when begging with the type of models to assemble. This is because the type of models chosen help in defining the ultimate results to be achieved. However, the Deming cycle’s adoption should always begin from the planning and setting the definite objectives. This implies that, the both he type of the present problem and the manner in which the previous process failed to meet the requisite desires of the client. When these two conditions are well defined, it becomes easy to choose the best approach in which the preferred model should follow. For instance, the objectives of the SQA adoption should be presented in a form of wastes evaluation. There are seven types of waste. The wastes of software can be reformulated as follows Overproduction (surplus features) Partially work done Waiting Task Switching Defects found by user Relearning Transportation (handoffs) It is imperative to note that, the market or industry for software development is risky and its success is averaged at 40%. For instance, the CHAOS report (30) of the Standish Group has attempted to quantify the cost of the software failures. The following chart indicates the perceived IT project success rates by paradigm. As indicated in the chart, Agile and Lean processes are superior for the SQA. On the other, some authors argue that the Deming’s continuous improvement process could be effectively applied to the waterfall development cycle from two points of view, which include the software testing and the quality control. It is imperative to note that, the process of implementing the SQA should offer a glimpse on the rate of quantity of improvements requisite for any identified problem in the system to be corrected. In addition, the process should identify the nature of change that should be implemented to ensure that the system is corrected to proper functionality. Similarly, the anticipated effects to the change need to be highlighted. This will form a superior and effective planning stage, which will go a long way to attainment of good results. DO Majority of the companies that deal with software development are agile in nature since they work in a fast moving milieu. Due to the far-reaching changes, the implementation of a new SQA becomes a bit difficult, particularly due to the variation relative to the company’s environment. The process of SQA implementation will face difficulties if the existing mindset concerning the operations does not change and confirms to the current model. The essence of the Deming cycle at this point is to help in identifying the individuals that are affected by the change. On a similar note, the individuals should be notified on the reason for the changes. However, it should be noted that the Deming cycle does not consider the people factor, which is a major disadvantage in following up the process of SQA (PALMES, 2005). The fundamental point in the “Do” phase is to ensure proper monitoring is embraced on the implemented changes. In this stage, the management performs much of the work in ensuring that the implementation process is fully supported. This will help in avoiding the nominal nature of the changes. It is required to embrace customer involvement in the change process to ensure that they are aware of the attributes of change in the software development. This makes it easy for the users to learn quickly and easily the new systems after the changes have been implemented. Essentially, for the SQA to implement change, it is often required to change the customer’s processes and mindset. According to CHAOS report, the key success factors for IT projects are User Involvement, Executive Management Support and Clear Statement of Requirements. The problem of involving customer into process of change stays out of the Deming model but in software development, it is crucial Study The data collected relative to the process of software development should be analyzed at this stage. Some of the consideration that need to be embraced include whether the process has improved and by what extent. In addition, the data analysis should establish whether the objectives of the system improvements were met and if the new methods embraced were difficult to use (Palmes, 2005). It is not specified directly in Deming framework, but at this stage initial data should be also re-examined as they may change i.e. environment, marketing orientation, and regulations. Often this point is forgotten during implementation and company is implementing SQA that already does not solve the problem. However, it is rather wrong interpretation of the Deming model. In addition, the KPIs according to which process is examined should be re-examined. According to CHAOS report, for example it is seen that in the industry there is lack of analysis stage. Act This is the most critical stage of the Deming cycle since it represents a point where a project completes a cycle and begins again for further enhancement. The results obtained from the sub-analysis in the study stage help in defining various tasks in this stage. For instance, the level of improvement and the attainment of the objectives define what to be done in this stage. In essence, the Act stage helps in ensuring that what did not happen to perfection is corrected in a bid to have a superior outcome (HOERL, WESLEY, AND RONALD, 2002). For instance, if the new methods embraced did not work as anticipated, then at this stage, all the attributes are checked to correct any element of the process. According to the Deming cycle, at this stage a n action should be taken if the SQA model did not confirm to the requirements of the system. In essence, if the previous model did not work as anticipated, then action on the desired changes should be taken to ensure that the system works properly. It is imperative to note that, with the ability of guiding these processes to completion and correction when needed, the PDCA is not an instrument but a concept if well integrated in an organization’s culture, and then any process of SQA will be able to attain the set goals. On a similar note, this stage ensures that the improvements done are standard and reasonable to avoid system failure or inconsistencies. This implies that appropriate experience, investment and sponsorship on the intended SQA should be assured. This will increase the possibilities of having a high quality system change and appropriate usability of the system after implementation. Further, in this stage, various aspects such as the organization’s strategy, culture, and goals should be aligned to have a common approach in a bid to increase effectiveness of the overall system. It is notable that, the process of implementing the SQA in the organization, the Deming cycle should trigger various changes in other activities in the organization’s structure. Essentially, the models in any organization help in to perform a selected process, evaluate the overall performance and take appropriate actions to improve the system. Some of the challenges that face implementers of SQA include inadequacy of focus on people change management, inadequacy of skill in process improvement, inadequacy of a multidisciplinary audit (ALAN, 2013). In the whole process of software quality assurance, organizations need to embrace the 80-20 criteria, which imply that it takes 20% of the commitment to develop 80% of the process, and the 80% left to develop the process (PETERSON &JULIUS, 2004). This implies that effort is spent to fine tune a process to eventual benefits. In essence, Improvement should be reasonable. Standards implementation can be an arduous and often disruptive activity with a high risk of failure without appropriate sponsorship, investment, experience, and other enablers. Keith M. Heston1 and William Phifer2 The multiple quality models paradox: how much ‘best practice’ is just enough?‡ argued that there should a balance in SQA implementation. The quality model should align with company strategy and goals. SQA models themselves are repetitive processes. Proper combination of them with iterative PCDA cycle will increase their effectiveness as it creates iteration in iteration. Conclusion The Deming cycle of implementing continuous quality improvement varies from one organization to another; however a proper combination and selection of quality goods, approaches and techniques need to be sued in the implementation. This is to ensure that the requisite standards are achieved. This study has given insights on the techniques of the process implementation, which need to be selected according to the needed desires and demands. In addition, these techniques need to be applied correctly in line with an organization’s strategy, culture and internal control systems. This is to ensure that there is smooth transition from a previous system to the current one. The aspect of involving employees is critical because they learn and get acquainted with the complex processes. In addition, the involvement offers a chance for the employees to unleash their creativity. In essence, the process of implementing a SQA is complex and need high level management and competence to ensure that and the ultimate results is accurate and free from any flaw, which might lead to the failure of the whole system. The limitation of this study is that, the Deming cycle does not offer the exact measurement of the goals to achieve at the end of the process. It is until the process is implemented that the goals can be measured. List of References CALDER, ALAN. 2013. ISO27001 a Pocket Guide. Ely: IT Governance Publishing. http://www.books24x7.com/marc.asp?bookid=58240. HOERL, ROGER WESLEY, AND RONALD D. SNEE. 2002. Statistical thinking: improving business performance. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury-Thomson Learning. IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, ERSHI QI, JIANG SHEN, AND RUNLIANG DOU. 2013. The 19th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=593069. PETERSON, ALAN JULIUS. 2004. Making a case for challenging the current and future efficacy of the Plan, Do, Check, Act (PDCA) Quality Cycle - the foundation of quality management systems. PALMES, PAUL C. 2005. Process driven comprehensive auditing: a new way to conduct ISO 9001:2000 internal audits. Milwaukee, Wis: ASQ Quality Press. KIDD, T. T. (2009). Handbook of research on technology project management, planning, and operations. Hershey, PA, Information Science Reference. KLIEM, RALPH L. 2003. The project manager's emergency kit. Boca Raton: St. Lucie Press. SLACK, NIGEL, AND MICHAEL LEWIS. 2005. The Blackwell encyclopedia of management. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Pub. http://find.galegroup.com/openurl/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&req_dat=info:sid/gale:ugnid:nysl_me_manhat&res_id=info:sid/gale:GVRL&ctx_enc=info:ofi:enc:UTF-8&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft_id=info:sid/gale:bmcode:recid/3VGA. ZADOR DANILE KELEMEN, 2008. Process based unification for multi-model software process improvement Read More