Quality Assurance Program for Moose Winooskis Restaurant - Essay Example

Running Head Quality Assurance Program Quality Assurance Program for Moose Winooski's Restaurant Moose Winooski's Restaurant is a popular Canadian restaurant chain proposing unique and friendly atmosphere and excellent food. Quality service is one of the main requirements and strategic goals of the chain. Moose Winooski's recognizes quality as successfully conforming to customer specifications. There is an increasing understanding that quality improvement efforts must be driven by the organization's need to achieve maximum results with limited resources (Burrill and Ledolter 1999). Many organizations express their support of and desire for quality through posters, memos, and recognition programs. However, merely philosophizing about the importance of strategy or publishing statements of management's support of the notion is not enough. Moose Winooski's has introduced quality assurance programs aimed to improve service quality, sustain strong brand image and leading position of the market. In Moose Winooski's, Quality Assurance (QA) programs involve all departments and employees. What is required is a business process to aid organizations in focusing their total quality efforts on issues that most directly support strategy. By focusing on the quality strategy, Moose Winooski's makes significant progress toward the overall goal of increasing customer satisfaction. Organizationally, QA can be seen as a new philosophy of business and a part of culture (Goetsch and Davis 2003). A proper balance of these actions results in working more effectively together toward increasing overall quality. Moose Winooski's there is a need to adopt quality as a business strategy whereby workers would enjoy the working environment and be proud of the resulting products or services. Part of achieving this result is encouraging and managing the participation of these workers in their day-to-day jobs (Goetsch and Davis 2003). For instance, the standards of the company are based three keys: 'performance, support and innovation' (Moose Tracks 2007). At the organizational level, QA programs are determined by careful planning, control and feedback mechanisms. Personally, QA means commitment and high level of responsibilities, sense of belonging and support for success, effective teamwork and positive culture. Moose Winooski's states that: "our goals, passions, and values are the foundation of Moose Winooski's, and the source of six principles that guide out behavior and the conduct of our business: hospitality, respect, fairness, fun, sharing, and courage" (Moose Tracks 2007). There are no differences in view points because in Moose Winooski's, management provides leadership and direction to each level of the organization. The key is to provide each function with a clear understanding of its specific role in implementing organizational strategy. Each member of Moose Winooski's is then in a position to offer and implement suggestions and process improvements specifically designed to support the strategy (Goetsch and Davis 2003). With a shared understanding of the strategy and quality assurance management more effectively and efficiently manage organizational efforts. Managers are responsible for providing active leadership to the organization. This includes providing feedback, encouragement, constructive criticism, and discipline so that a pervasive, well-understood success paradigm exists and all team members know their expected role. Employees in Moose Winooski's are responsible for fully participating in the strategy development process. They then embrace the resulting plans and do their part to implement them fully. Finally, they should approach their day-to-day job in a way that supports the organization's goals (Marath and Turnbull, 1998). QA programs are designed to link with organization's goals and strategies, vision and aims. In general, QA programs are based on four main functions of management: planning, organizing, leading and controlling. There are very clear and distinct roles for both managers and employees in Moose Winooski's (Burrill and Ledolter 1999). QA programs developed by Moose Winooski's have Process Orientation. Moose Winooski's is overwhelmed by the number of possibilities available upon which to focus its quality efforts (Marath and Turnbull, 1998). With a myriad of processes from which to choose, Moose Winooski's resolves the problems and improves the processes that have the most significant impact on its ability to be successful. For instance, it introduces comments cards and actions plans aimed to ensure food quality and service quality, further cost analysis and order controls (Marath and Turnbull, 1998). QA programs are introduced and worked at three levels: (1) management, (2) performance and (3) assessment. For quality efforts to succeed, they become the way to manage the organization. Quality efforts are treated as an integral part of day-to-day managerial processes (Wadsworth et al 2002). For example, quality efforts are incorporated into Process Control and Business Process Improvement discussed and examined at separate meetings. Further, high-level managers are held accountable for specific results from these efforts. One of the ongoing challenges for organizations whose quality efforts center on process improvement is to determine where to focus resources. This is accomplished through a multi-step analysis that aids the organization in determining the relationship between its processes and its business strategy (Moose Tracks 2007). Once the management team has agreed on its mission and generated a list of quality standards and specific objectives to achieve, the next step is to implement the action plans. Although the divisions are collectively owned by the management team, each action plan has to be implemented by an individual or a small group of individuals responsible for the success QA (Wadsworth et al 2002). When an action plan requires teamwork, a task force is often formulated to implement it. Specific responsibility is established for each individual or group that is responsible for an action plan. Working sessions are often used to facilitate the implementation process and are attended by those who are directly responsible for the completion of key activities. Specific issues, such as problems related to adequate resource allocation and particular actions to be initiated, are discussed at these working sessions. Because the list of activities tends to be long, these working sessions focus on a prioritized list of activities that require the most attention (Burrill and Ledolter 1999). The main strengths of QA are conscious attitude, improved moral and culture, increased productivity and customer satisfaction, strong management team and longevity of service among management team. The main weaknesses are high actual costs and lack of budgeting responsibilities, not enough management-by-walking-around and lack of effective employee suggestion program. Thus, these weaknesses do not have a great impact on service quality and QA (Burrill and Ledolter 1999; Moose Tracks 2007). The vivid example of one QA program is measurement and evaluation of guest satisfaction. Moose Winooski's asks each guest to fill in the comment card. If guests mention some problems or poor service, the manager is obliged to respond and make corrective actions within the next 24 hours. This process ensures high service quality, monitoring and control of quality. Another example of QA is consistency and compliance to Menu Specs. This program consists of the four main steps: planning manual and sites visits, controls and structured feedbacks. In general, QA programs are planed and control by managers responsible for QA and feedback. The purpose of this program is to review the progress to date, review the original missions, and update, reorient, or reprioritize the objectives. Manuals are posted to employees; Divisional Food and Beverage managers examine the food, and then ensure it compliance with the standards (Burrill and Ledolter 1999). When structured feedback is performed, sites are instructed to post pictures in the kitchen. Copies are available to the staff and compliance to the menu is discussed with the managers. The organizational managers periodically review the status of each of the key action plans and take appropriate actions when a plan has not been implemented as scheduled. This action can take the form of a revision of the plan, allocation of additional resources, or abandonment of the plan. Reassessment of the firm's mission, profiles, and action plans is conducted at this stage to ensure that these elements are in line with changing business environments and market demands (Goetsch and Davis 2003; Moose Winooski's Home Page, 2007). QA programs allow each person to support high quality standards of the restaurant and ensure that he perform well. The entire organization needs to have the same understanding of what the right answers are, and the assumptions leading to the answers, to effectively compete. The impact of individual quality efforts is greatly increased if organizational members have a shared mental model of the system within which they function, including the issues affecting the system (Wadsworth et al 2002). The challenge in developing success QA is to create an appropriate quality models that work for the entire organization. Productivity increases and fragmentation decreases in organizations that are able to implement QA. By involving each organizational member, organizations are able to find common threads that are shared in every group and they discover that they have more in common than not. They also ensure that strategy is consistent with and supportive of consumer needs and demands (Moose Winooski's Home Page, 2007). The three items I gained from this interview are that (1) quality assurance should be introduce to the entire organization, (2) it should be a part of organization's culture and standards, (3) it should be well-planned and monitored by the managers (Interview 2007). The QA development process should be part of a management cycle review that should be revised on an annual basis. If a significant change occurs in the firm's mission, QA must be reinitiated. This is suggested as a guideline rather than as a fixed routine because QA approach should modify it to fit his/her own situation and purpose. Once Moose Winooski's has facilitated new approach, QA processes will bring about a sharper focus in organizational activities (Wadsworth et al 2002). Because the process ensures a clear linkage between a general philosophy of public policy making and the actions necessary to apply the philosophy in specific situations, Moose Winooski's using QA programs will be more likely than others to avoid wasted, uncoordinated, or contradictory efforts. In sum, the example of Moose Winooski's vividly portrays that the unified QA mission, with its accompanying programmatic focus, will inevitably bring about a greater feeling that those working within the organization make up a team, with each member having her or his own important role to play. Overall efficiency will significantly improve, and it is less likely that personnel will feel isolated or alienated from the organization and their coworkers will therefore not only make government organizations work better, but make them more humane and enjoyable workplaces as well. The QA program includes the use specific techniques in analyzing, developing, and implementing public policies. The QA programs are managed and maintained through ongoing evaluation, with a primary emphasis on continually improving organizational processes and outcomes. In today's changing economic environment, organizations like Moose Winooski's face changes from time to time that significantly affect their basis for competition. Moose Winooski's needs QA programs to ensure their success and unique brand image. QA needs to be constantly reviewed. This ongoing process of review sharpens the definition of the organization's understanding of what is required to succeed. This is necessary to ensure that decision-makers do not lose sight of what it takes to succeed or possibly miss opportunities resulting from changes in the competitive environment. References 1. Burrill, C.W., Ledolter, J. (1999). Achieving Quality Through Continual Improvement. Wiley. 2. Goetsch, D.L., Davis, S.B. (2003). Quality Management: Introduction to Total Quality Management for Production, Processing, and Services. Prentice Hall; 4 edition. 3. Marath, J.M. Turnbull, J.E. (1998). The Quality Advantage: A Strategic Guide for Health Care Leaders. Jossey-Bass; 1 edition. 4. Moose Winooski's Home Page (2007). Retrieved 08 November 2007, from http://www.moosewinooskis.com/company.phpPHPSESSID=456f9345e2f3ed237b3b3f7c1676e6b0 5. Wadsworth, H.M., Stephens, K.S., Godfrey, A.B. (2002) Modern Methods For Quality Control and Improvement, 2nd Edition. Wiley. 6. Interview (2007). 7. Moose Tracks (2007). Read More