Artikel 1 Process Control

382
-1

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
382
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Artikel 1 Process Control

  1. 1. Practical Process Management as aconditional step to Lean or Six Sigma ? Ir. Leo Monhemius October 2010A beehive or an ant hill are communities that behave like a single intelligent organism. An organization of humans is a community that …..W hen executing a Lean Six Sigma programma, a group of dedicated , Belts will perform projects and start implementing their solutionsinto the organization. We encountered problems in the implementationprocess. Although formally the new methods and tools were acc accepted,results started to slip after several months. Analysis demonstrated lack ofmanagement follow up, but also that the responsible managers were notaware of their lack of performance. The pressure on the organization,continuous cost reduction and permanent fear of layoffs, will result in permanentpriorities for short term results in daily work. We found that maybe anecessary condition for the application of Lean, Six Sigma or any otherimprovement programma was not yet met? This article is written forthose who recognize the symptoms. ho theseI n the article we will propose a simplified version of process management, based upon the European Foundation of Quality ,Management (EFQM), which is similar to the Baldrige Award It resulted (EFQM), Award.in a “process belt” training for all direct managers. The effect wasdeploying not only process control, but also continuous improvement.The model gives a structure in whicheventually the Lean Six Sigma projectsare accommodated. Thus the belts willlose less time in the control andhandover phase of projects, and full ndovercapacity is available for real projects.T he problem can be illustrated in the figure below. SSmall changes weremade to the implemented processesafter introduction, sometimes evencaused by the organization itself (newsoftware, transfer to Vista, legalrequirements). The performance 1 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  2. 2. reduced from the initial achievements (phase 0). But the most concerningelement was, that local managers were not aware. Although they understoodconceptually the need of control (phase 1) and even the need of continuousimprovement (phase 2), each of the managers stated that the actual workloaddid not allow time for these “theoretical” needs. Some of them rememberedthe old days when they had still time for reflection and TQM efforts. I once meta manager who stated: “I prefer to kick the ball very high than putting myenergy in conserving the ball at a too low level”.Since each of the managers was responsible for many processes, they wouldonly intervene when a major problem occurred. Slow decay of performancecan thus remain unnoticed for a long time because it can be caused by manysuccessive small changes. Furthermore individual managers indicated that itwas impossible to make the culture change alone; some had earlier workexperience with other companies and fully understood both the problem asthe proposed solution. We approached the problem with a minimized versionof the European EFQM model (or the American Baldrige model). Starting fromthe detail level of activity rather than top-down (which is the Lean element).As an example we will use the issuing of permits to work in a petrochemical plant. Ata permit desk anybody who intends to work on the plant has to receive clearance.Permit desk operators are the interface between operation and maintenance. Sincesafety is vital, time pressure is undesirable for the permit process. On the other hand,waiting time is a classical waste and should be avoided. Also the process will surfaceany other problem in the work preparation; it signals the waste in many otheractivities as well. This makes it a good first project; In other areas similar processesexist:  Monitoring sick leave may signal many other problems, not only medical but also private or conflicts at work.  Help desk questions may signal unclear forms, unclear website text and many other topics.  Punished children at school removed from the classroom and send to the headmaster may reveal problems of the teacher, of the social structures in the class, or maybe private problems of the pupil.In general such processes are a good start because they reveal the most obviouswaste in the organization. Also the employees giving the signal are not authorized toremove the root cause.B asic process execution is essential for any process. The classical SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) may seem obvious; in many cases thetext is not guiding the work process, but derived from the work processinstead. Each ISO audit will thus be a challenge because details may differ inreality.At the permit desk, experienced operators find a practical way to run their processes.Since each plant has different specific conditions, the interpretations of the formalprocess description develop differently in the course of time. For instance openinghours, permit by phone, validity over the weekend, getting the permit while somebody 2 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  3. 3. else gets the personal safety gear, … all practical interpretations around the formalprocedure.The manager does not get alarmed when the small changes are introduced in aninformal way; there are no complaints and no sudden problems. Maybe contractors, problems.who typically work at more than one plant, will complain about local rules? But in theend they will appoint dedicated foremen to each of the plants, thus avoiding problemswith the customer. The increased overhead will increase the price for the customer.A Lean Six Sigma Project, aimed at reducing waiting times and at increasing HandHandson Tools time, implemented improvements in December. The implementation metserious resistance at some of the plants, but this was considered part of the somechallenge; the Lean and Green Belt training course put strong emphasis onimplementation with good reason! After major improvements, the waiting timesstarted to return to old levels after three months, in spite of the implemented ,improvements. In response, the process was redesigned using a simple model: The basics of process management are reintroduced into the working procedures: 1. The process itself should be uniform. Temporary workers in holiday time should keep the rules of ime the daily team, and between plants (this is the difficult one) the differences should be minimized. This will not be an easy step, since employees get used to a high level of individual freedom. Also the daily team will act autonomously, in fact we encouraged this in order to autonomously, achieve higher “span of control”. The manager should only intervene if control”. absolutely needed. The lean approach is totally different at the lowest level of work. Although creativity and continuous improvement a are strongly encouraged, the details of work methods are not free for individual interpretation. Best practices are enforced upon all employees. 2. The data collection should not be the traditional data collection (waiting time for the permit desk) but instead it should contain a log of all d incidents where the ideal process was obstructed. (obvious lost time obvious time, together with the reason . This way the seven wastes are not only reason) detected during waste walks, but during the process by the direct employees. A major barrier is the open communication of problems. barrier We do not like to write down mistakes of colleagues. A contractor was in the waiting queue for 30 minutes, but forgot his paperwork and had to travel back to the office. The permit operator knows this guy and is aware that writing the log will cause questions asked, … Overcoming this barrier will require a new attitude of the management, and confidence in this new attitude by the permit desk operator at the same time. 3 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  4. 4. He must be convinced that addressing the improvement opportunity will not improvement result in negative review of colleague involved. A sufficient level manager must take responsibility over the process, in order to give sufficient support and credibility. For process blocks 1 and 2 the key word is uniformity. The acceptance of individual or plant . specific interpretations will block any future improvement; it does in fact make the process uncontrollable. Therefore a strong managerial effort to obtain uniformity is vital. 3. Collecting information will never be sustainable unless it is used for ustainable improvement. The improvement must be felt by the employee as a direct feedback, thus the response should be on a similar timescale as the work process. For a daily process, a weekly meeting can be used to collect and summar summarize the logbook entries. Biweekly or monthly may seem more efficient, but soon the logbook entries will show resignation and come to a hold after a while. 4. Closing the loop makes the whole system work. It is not necessary to act on all the signaled waste, symbolically we state that acting upon the symbolically top-3 problems will be enough to make continuous improvement. An 3 ignored cause will show up in the logbook again and acted upon when at a later time it gains the top status. The action is in fact the waste top-3 reducing activity. Unless the workers recognize the impact of the ng corrective actions, they will stop “betraying their friends” of the shop floor. Obsessive pursuing of the top-3 actions is therefore key to make 3 the loop actually work. After a few months we may expect the weekly expect meeting to become more efficient (from 1 hour to 15 minutes?) but it is essential to keep up the short frequency. Even if the actions are seemingly less important than other topics. (The mechanism behind this is the so called Hawthor effect, sincere action upon problems Hawthorne ect, can raise employee performance up to 50%, without even taking the actual improvement into account) I will explain the importance of the loop with an unusual example: when learning to drive a bicycle, at first efforts are high and the bicycle will follow a hesitant course. After some time t driving will be internalized and the bike will follow a the straight line and the handlebar does not move. This is the moment that we seem move. not to need the feedback loop anymore? What would happen if we fasten the steering mechanism? Which is equivalent to cancelling the weekly feedback mechanism? meetings of a control loop. We have now closed the loop of continuous improvement, brin bringing the organization to phase 2 2.Jsljbvljbfvljkbfxmfm n.,m nfkljdfslkjnflkjn df,.mnbKjkfdnlkjndsflkjn dffm,mnblkjndKnnblgskjbnldksgjbnlkjfgdn fgf.,m,mnbgsdlnbglkjbg P The role of the appointed process manager is important, but also the general manager has a key role. Just by walking into the area and asking for the process (instead of asking for the content) he will give vitalkjrnlkjbglkjbnglkjnb dfgknkbfdlkjbnldfkgslkjbndgslkjkbnfddlfk gslkjkbdlkjkjdgs fknbfdlkb fd support. A practical tool at this point is writing your initials in the logbookfdkjklkjbnbnlnblkjdfgnb lkdjbnlfdkLjbrlkjbsglkjbfglkjbnxfd dsljnbdfljnb 4dsf,knbdflknbgflkjbr;oohwtkbkj ,jnrglkjksjgrlkjksgbjhbsfakjhbsafkjhvbsafljhbslfjhb © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  5. 5. margin each visit. This will also stimulate your lower managers, whilst atthe same time visualize your presence to next shifts or to employees notpresent at the time of your visit. Notice the role is primarily setting thestandards: uniformity of work and obsessive feedback of waste. Thechange of managerial behavior will be easierfor organizations with a “bottom up” style.A second practical example is the use oftracing paper in a standard minutes format.This can prevent awkward writing of mi minutesby a “volunteer”. After the meeting minutes aredirectly available in sufficient copies (originallyseen in 1988, Tom Bassett 3rd Philips Oremplant). A great benefit is the possibility to make ).drawings. The fixed format makes it easier toobtain uniformity, simply by adding fields to formity,the format and by using the same block notes.Once the system is running, managers canstart asking questions on the process. “Whatwas the last waste you saw this week, howwas it entered into your logbook? Did it makethis week’s top3 ? Are there problems that youcannot address this way? How can I help you?”E nding old habits is very difficult indeed. When after some time a serious problem occurs, or when a manager observes a deficiency inthe process, the manager will be tempted to fall back into his former management style. This style is of course not wrong in itself, it is even the only professional response in the preceding phase of maturity of the organization. A direct intervention may seem to satisfy the urgency of the moment. But it will in a ency single blow destroy the confidence in the feedback loop. After the observation the manager should first ensure that his observation is entered into the logbook. Directly after that he should get in touch with the process responsible manager and shave a serious conversation.So stop direct intervention and start process intervention: 5 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  6. 6. Many improvement issues canbest be handled project byproject, carefully expandingsuccess. But changing themanagement style can benefitfrom a short wave of workshop workshops,introducing these concepts in arelatively short time.This way, managers can help hiseach other, and employees will ,recognize the efforts as part of acampaign.At this point a Lean Six Sigmaprogram will overcome the tipping point and become a movement. At firstan isolated group of extreme behaving individuals is tolerated. Eachquarter the Lean Six Sigma Belts come with change proposals andcomplain about management support. But once the broad layer of first linemanagement gets involved, the organization will see a boost of smallimprovements. Also the real tough problem will start to show up in the problemsweekly top 3 repeatedly. Now the need for a next level of control becomesmanifest.A contractor’s project leader took part in a site improvement project. His foremen inwere asked to collect information on time blockers during the day. The projectwas not that easy because employees saw their smoking and coffee breaks at smoking-stake. When the project leader visited a particular plant, he found the group atcoffee. He asked for the data sheet and concluded it was not filled in properly. Hegot angry in the full canteen about the lack of data collection and resisted theurge to put the group back to work. This group did no longer enjoy th theirundeserved break and went back to work, the loyalty with the foreman and the vedmodel behavior of the project leader had won. In a 1:1 the project leader talked tothe foreman for a longer time and explained his priorities.T he next level of process control will develop more easily for control organizations with a “top down” style. It is inevitable when eachprocess is existing in different plants or locations in parallel. But also forsingle processes a second level of control is required because of the required,different timescales between daily work and long term performance. entConceptually the loop is similar, but the structure is different since thissecond loop is not driven by the daily process, but by the improvementsactions of the first loop. 6 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  7. 7. 5. Structural problems will start to show, especially when a few parallel, identical processes exist. Now we can help the local managers by taking the generic problems ng and making these visible, together with their performance impact. Block 5 can be performed by one of the local managers as an extra task, or maybe it is coupled to a site coordinator of the specific area area.6. This is the type of information the higher manager loves to see! Similar to “problem combined with cause” entries in the logbook, also at this level the lack of performance comes accompanied by the underlying problem. Now the manager can take the actions without any e delay. In many cases a management decision can solve a major n problem; and in some cases it is too complex…7. These are the projects that we educated Black, Green or Lean belts Black, for. No more arguing with the management about the problem definition or the charter. And no more arguing with the employees about the acceptance. Belts can at last work on projects that are initiated as a documented, repeatedly occurring problems or on real occurring major issues. Arguing and discussion at the start (charter) and at the end (handover) will be reduced. This way waste in both time and energy of belts is reduced, and impact increased.We now closed the second level loop, which is the loop that seeks isbreakthroughs at the situations where continuous improvement getssaturated. (phase 4 maturity begins to develop.)From a series of permit desks a generic problem was reported. Each day timewas lost, due to collecting protective equipment. The local managers wondered equipment.why this was not done the afternoon before. The site renting system was blockingthis because it meant a second day rent for the material. Once reported to thehigher management, this problem was solved with a management decision: after15.00 hours collected materials are free of charge. This single decision saved asubstantial amount of time and increased Hands on Tool time. But the decisionwas only made possible because of the elimination of other small causes in thetime before. In fact only after eliminating daily annoyances, the advantages mebecome visible. The first feedback loop not only generates continuous heimprovement, it also eliminates noise from the organization, thus enabling realproblems to be solved. 7 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  8. 8. W ith the second loop closed, the management has time to think again. A symptom of the situation might be the possibility to devote halfdays maybe even full days to structural problems. Now at last we get thetime we need to connect strategy with daily work. The structure of theformer two loops becomes clearer now. The first loop reduces obviouswaste, but at the same time reduces the noise in daily communications.The second loop reduces work done on not-bottleneck problems becauseit will prevent projects are chosen that after a while no longer proverelevant. The waste at this level (although not so easy to see with the 7wastes, TIMWOOD) is substantial. The second loop will enable that notonly the Belts (which were the trigger of this article) but also other staff willwork only on relevant problems.A practical way to use the model is to analyze processes along the blocks of the model.We have been using 4 hoursworkshops to train themanagers. During theworkshop we sent theparticipants to theirworkstation and experiencedthat some 30 to 45 minutesare sufficient to assess thestatus of the process loops.Notice that this can beconfronting, processes thatare run in an informal waywith experienced employees may suddenly show out of control diagnosis.This is not alarming but can for instance signal a situation in which new employees cannot perform like the old ones did, causing a potential performance risk. The first diagnosis of the workshop (see flipchart) can be followed by individual projects that are aimed at implementing full loops of process control. An overview of the managers involved (see matrix) gives a summary of the progress per manager. Connecting the lower level loops (1, 2, 3, 4) to the higher level loops (5, 6, 7) requires connection between the management levels, and 8 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  9. 9. typically also top downmanagement now gets connectedto the bottom up approach fromthe primary processes. Manyorganizations will at this stage beable to integrate earlier efforts withprocess management into newefforts to introduce Lean Six tsSigma.F inally the last loop can be investigated. In fact this loop should be the connection to strategy, vision and for organizations within largecorporations, the connection to the board and to global strategy. The lastblock is:8. The feedback loop that verifies actual performance with the long term vision.Again, top-down oriented companies will be quick in connecting to this downfinal building block. On the other hand operationally focused companiesmay find a challenge.E pilogue. This article is a ilogue. simplified effort topresent a structure forprocess management. Allelements are deliberatelyoversimplified, in order toachieve a model that isprimarily a communicationtool, covering the verti verticalextremes of anorganization. From the daily romwork level where a permitoperator feels both safetypressure as productio productionpressure, causingfrustration. Trough the midlevel of operationalmanagement, where peopleare driven by problems andtheir outlook agenda’s.Finally to the strat strategy level,where the leadership team 9 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  10. 10. can hardly find time to develop a strategy and transform it into operationaltargets.It was written from the experience that many Lean and Six Sigmadeployments are started from optimistic assumptions on the actualmaturity of the organization. It was triggered by the observation that manyof the projects suffered similar problems. This way the article in itself istriggered by a feedback loop as should exist in any performanceimprovement program. Additionally to reducing this bottleneck, theproposed approach helped to generate wider support and overcoming thetipping point of the improvement program.S ummary. This article gives a simplified model but at the same time drives development of the maturity of the organization. Thisdevelopment has to go in parallel with the economic results. The resultscannot be achieved without the development. But on the other hand thenext phase of maturity is only needed when the economic improvementsof the previous phase are saturated.Phase 1, the model blocks 1 and 2, defines the first phase of maturity. Itcomes with a direct management style and instructional processes.Identifying and registration of logbook information is the first step towardsthe second phase.Phase 2, the feedback loop with model blocks 3 and 4, gives the controland continuous improvement level. It can be recognized by a reduction oforganizational noise after some time (less email, less misunderstandings),but when starting the loop it can be confronting to see the high number ofoperational inefficiencies. In this phase we need many relatively smallLean Six Sigma projects. The closed loop will make the structuralproblems visible, which is the input for the next phase.Phase 3, the system loop with model blocks 5, 6 and 7, makes theconnection to breakthrough thinking and thus to major improvements. Thephase is recognized by another type of management. The firefightingdisappeared with phase 1; in phase 2 the noise disappeared giving timefor the basic work. Now in phase 3 we will see that especially the highermanagement can afford larger blocks of time to specific higher levelproblems. In this phase the larger Lean Six Sigma projects will develop,typically optimizing between departments or between organizations. At lastthe fully trained Black belts can use their skills.Phase 4, block 8. Once this level of maturity is reached, a naturalconnection between strategy and operations is achieved. At this levelprojects can be chosen that no longer only reduce cost or solve problems.Projects that increase customer value and create breakthroughs in acreative way will be possible. 10 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  11. 11. A frozen pizza can be cooked in two distinct ways: the programmed way and the feedbackway.You can follow the instructions precisely, preheating the oven and then enter the deep instructions deep-frozenpizza, and take it out after the time on the instructions.The pizza must be perfect now, craftsmanship is overruled. And the meth is not robust for hodunexpected events.Or you can turn the oven on as soon as you enter the house, cycle to the nearestsupermarket and buy a pizza. When home again, the pizza is a little defrosted, and the oven ermarketalmost heated, you put it into the oven immediately. Check the color 2 minutes before theindicated time. Craftsmanship is encouraged and can deal with surprises. .The second approach is the philosophy of Dutch Six Sigma in Lean Six S Sigma programs. 11 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  12. 12. EFQM, Business Excellence Model,as background reading for “practical process management”.Leo Monhemius Dutch Six Sigma BV October 2010 (translated and summarized from Dutch language1998)Brief History of Quality Awards :In 1950 the Deming Prize was founded in Japan, its purpose being theencouragement of Quality Management introduced by the gurus fromUSA. As a part of restructuring Japan after WWII (Marshall program),General Mc Arthur invited the same consultants to Japan, thatsupported American industry during the war. Quality statistics were amilitary secret at that time. In after war USA, everybody tried to forget assoon as possible anything reminding the war, including TQM.In 1980 The Baldrige Award was founded in United States. Japaneseindustry at that time is competing Western industry in major areas(Automotive, Consumer electronics, Photography). The Baldrige Awardmust stimulate business excellence and thus regain the lost territory.1985 EFQM Award; founded by major business leaders in Europe. It ismeant to boost in its turn European industry. Both Baldrige and EFQMaward were further developed and gained acceptance in all areas ofactivity, including service, public health and education.1988, Dutch version of EFQM founded, as is the case for most otherEuropean countries. After a few years even within the Netherlandsregional award versions are developed, which happens in othercountries as well. The phasing described in this text is typical for theDutch self assessment in the pioneering days, but it is directly related tothe scores of the EFQM model.Phase 1 : Product Orientation (score 200)The writer of this article is interviewing a CEO on his vision about theEFQM business excellence model. The CEO gives a convincing speech,telling the reporter about his fanatics in quality. He does, in fact, notneed the model because he scores high in Leadership. All employeesknow he is always ready to take the lead in quality for the customer. Thetelephone rings … A customer complaining about a late order, to whichthe CEO had committed himself earlier. The CEO stops the interview atonce, but invites the reporter to witness his response. Full of pride theCEO shows how his employees produce a rush order. Accompaniedwith a bottle of wine he delivers to the customer in his own Mercedes … 12 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  13. 13. The CEO scores phase 1 in leadership, thus limiting further improvement of the whole organization to this level. The illustrations are meant to symbolize how every employee can only cooperate when his own skills are not a limitation anymore; if they rise above the fence, the next phase can be pursued. In phase one employees are limited to their individual skills.Phase 2 : Process Orientation (score 400)The reporter meets again with the CEO, a few years later. Theorganization developed strongly in the meantime. The CEO took severalcourses. When he suffered health problems, he had to step back a little,and he had to change his style of management. Supported by externalconsultants he initiated several change projects. No longer trying to doeverything himself. Much time was invested in training of employees,but special efforts were in changing the management style at all levels.Processes started to run smoother and the frequency of errors anddefects was reduced strongly over a period of one and a half year. Withhindsight it was easy to realize how much money was lost byfirefighting. It proved to be approximately 20% of the turnover. Astatistic that no one would have believed beforehand. Profits increasedin spite of price-erosion. It was also only afterwards that managementrecognized how much the efforts used to be focused upon firefighting.Nowadays the organization is more quiet and management has time leftfor structural improvements. The telephone rings ... The same customer is on the phone. "Everything is satisfactory, this time, however, something went wrong in delivery". The CEO finishes the interview, and again invites the reporter to join him in solving the problem. When arriving at shop floor, the cause of the problem is found within 15 minutes. In a short meeting of 45 minutes actions are agreed and recurrence of the problem is prevented. A minor change in a 13 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  14. 14. computer program and in an operating procedure are required. Theproduction manager will implement the changes, and of course start arush order for the customer. The CEO phones the customer to informhim. The CEO acts at level two for leadership.The fences per employee are no limitation anymore. At all levels teamsof employees work together and compensate for each others limitations.Although the teams achieved strong cohesion, other departments arefelt as adversaries sometimes .The next challenge is cooperation. Againhigher fence, this time around the teams.Phase 3 : System Orientation (score 600)The reporter and the CEO meet again at the yearly EFQM conference. Ithas been two years since the previous contact. After the conferencethey have dinner and the CEO tells about developments in the company.The company expanded rapidly since the last contact. Growth wasinitiated by a few large orders of new customers. These orders requireda fast offer for a new product. This imposed close cooperation betweendepartments. In early days this seemed impossible, but now it proved achallenge. When receiving the order, the customer explained that noneof the competitors made a proposal al all within the timeframe. Once theproduction started, the customers carried out audits in a way that wascompletely new to the company. In all cases long term contracts wereoffered by the customers. Growth was possible thanks to this certainty.The CEO only then realized how TQM got integrated in the wholeorganization. New customers admitted that the audit had convinced them that TQM was part of the daily work methods and not (as is often the case) a performance during the audit. Reliability and stability were the most important criteria for supplier selection. All fences within the organization are exceeded, the cooperation is seen at department level and processes are optimized within the boundaries of the organization. The customer is still outside, which is the next fence to overcome. 14 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010
  15. 15. Phase 4 : Chain Orientation (score 800)A few years later, the CEO and the reporter meet for the last time. Thereporter attends the National EFQM Award meeting, and the CEO willreceive the prize on behalf of his company. At dinner the reporter listensto the developments of the last few years. The new customers of a fewyears ago bring the company in a new situation. Long term contracts aredeveloping into stable partnerships, stimulating to develop similarrelationships with the own suppliers. Within these partnershipsimportant developments take place. Employees are exchanged,information systems are shared, research results are exchanged. Theclose cooperation resulted in a major improvement of productivity, for both partners. Because the growth exceeded this improvement, massive layoffs could be prevented. This was the case for all partners in the production chain. The meaning of the fences? Each employee is aware of his or hers contribution to the customer. In a similar way suppliers are part of the team. Exchange of employees is occurring frequently.Phase 5 : TotalQuality (score 1000)The dream hasbecome true. Basisprocesses are nolonger limited by theorganizationalstructures. ThisUtopia of QualityManagement is onlythreatened by thelack of furtherimprovement. Thereporter isconvinced, thatconsultants andmanagers will react before Utopia is reached. New ideals will develop,the EFQM model will either be extended to phase 6 and phase 7. Maybenew insights will result in a totally new model? 15 © Dutch Six Sigma B.V. 2010

×