How Quality Management Affects Organizational Success by Peter DeCaprio

As quality management has evolved, realistic goals have been defined. These goals are now well documented in standards such as ISO/TS 16949 and AS9100, which emphasize accountable management systems for delivering products that meet or exceed customer needs. At the same time, companies are struggling to balance their focus on meeting customers’ needs with effective management of their own resources. This balancing act is not easily achieved because managing both the internal processes and end-user expectations effectively requires employing radically different management styles. Standardized procedures are necessary to address the challenges associated with combining product quality with continuous improvement objectives across an international supply chain. However, this need for standardization does not preclude the opportunity to employ creativity when identifying methods for achieving these objectives.

It is important to balance the need for standardization with creativity in achieving effective quality system objectives.

The following are some typical internal challenges associated with maintaining a robust quality system: Peter DeCaprio

Loss or lack of knowledge by key personnel
Dissatisfied employees who have lost faith in the company’s ability to provide quality products and services
Lack of understanding among internal departments about how they contribute to product quality
Poor communication between various departments – including the engineering, manufacturing, marketing, sales/service, ethics/compliance, etc. functions
Focus on speed vs. accuracy of problem-solving

These are just some typical challenges that often exist within organizations where people are working together to produce high-quality products and customer service. As you can see, these challenges are interrelated. One department’s actions (or lack thereof) will impact other departments and vice versa.

Processes that support effective quality system objectives include:

People involvement
Problem solving/ root cause analysis
Continual improvement/fact-based decision making as an example of people involvement, consider an organization whose employees believe they should be empowered to make decisions without having to wait for upper management approval. These employees may feel disconnected from the mission or their job, ultimately leading to lower productivity levels. When upper management tries to find out why there is a shortage of materials on the shop floor, they might hear an explanation like “We didn’t order enough.” Under this scenario, there was no formal process to communicate material requirements throughout the company.

It is necessary to define both functional and departmental processes that support product quality objectives.

This brings us to problem-solving/ root cause analysis (RCA). RCA helps improve continuous improvement by identifying the “root” causes of problems, which leads to effective preventative actions to eliminate defects. This process should be considered during all phases of the product life cycle – from design through delivery and final disposal. Problem-solving requires documenting potential failures, conducting root cause analysis on those failures, developing solutions, and taking corrective actions in order to prevent recurrence or mitigate consequences when a defect occurs. People’s involvement in each step is essential for success.

Continual improvement refers to ongoing efforts to increase productivity while maintaining a competitive edge. The purpose is to enhance the product or service that is offered, increase productivity and introduce new products/services. There are many tools available to facilitate this process – including Six Sigma, Lean, Theory of Constraints (TOC), and Total Productive Maintenance (TPM).

These processes should be documented in the quality system so everyone understands their role in these activities. However, it can become difficult for companies whose quality manuals contain hundreds of pages because senior management must review them regularly. This leads back to our initial thesis statement about balancing standardization with creativity to improve effectiveness. I believe you cannot have too few documents for your company’s size – but you can definitely have too many!

The answer lies in identifying the key functions that must be performed to meet quality system objectives and documenting those functions in a way that is easy for the people who need the information to understand.

Key questions:

Who needs access?
To what level of detail do they need?
What processes support product/ service quality?
How does my company measure up against industry norms (e.g., AS9100, ISO 9001)?

When you address these issues early on with senior management, you can define key performance indicators that allow you to document only the minimum required information without sacrificing customer satisfaction or acquiring competitive advantages. Key performance indicators are typically communicated through dashboards – reporting tools that provide the right data at the right time so people know exactly where they stand with regard to quality objectives.

Conclusion by Peter DeCaprio:

By understanding the difference between standardization and creativity, you can avoid the pitfalls of over-documentation and enjoy numerous benefits such as: