Quality Management - Lecture

10,050 views

Published on

Quality Management - Lecture

Published in: Business
0 Comments
11 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
10,050
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
40
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1,237
Comments
0
Likes
11
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Quality Management - Lecture

    1. 1. QUALITY MANAGEMENT Autumn 2005 Lectures ppt-1 31.10.-1.11.2005 PRINT ALSO THE EFQM MATERIAL, pp. 3-15, for Tue 1.11, see the link in the course site Professor Taina Savolainen
    2. 2. DEVELOPMENTS, DIRECTIONS AND PARADIGMS IN QUALITY THINKING
    3. 3. HISTORY OF QUALITY THINKING to discover evolution,paradigms, and directions <ul><li>Quality- antique concept? </li></ul><ul><li>Periods and paradigms of quality </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Craftmanship – nest of ideal quality concept </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Industrialization – ’rise’ of quality (measurement) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Competition and globalization – quality boom ?! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Self-evident part of business– frustration and ignorance?! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>survival-game, change & must of improvement </li></ul></ul>
    4. 4. PARADIGMS OF QUALITY Classical theories ’HARD’ SIDE OF QUALITY <ul><ul><li>1. QUALITY CONTROL (1920-40-l.) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>INSPECTION (Taylorism) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mechanistic view of a human being; belief in rationalism and economic motives; task and functions dispersed, measurement </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SPC (1930’s -) Shewhart, and Deming later on </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Prosess control, eliminating variation, sampling methods </li></ul><ul><li>2. QUALITY ASSURANCE (1950’s - ) </li></ul><ul><li>Quality is not free! quality costs </li></ul><ul><li>Management responsibility; how much does it cost! </li></ul><ul><li>how much to invest? </li></ul><ul><li>TQC: Total Quality Control (Feigenbaum , 1950’s) </li></ul><ul><li>Reliability engineering); aircraft industry </li></ul><ul><li>ZERO DEFECTS: towards the soft side of quality: </li></ul><ul><li>Management, HR involvement, training, motivation (Y-theory) </li></ul>
    5. 5. PARADIGMS - Classical theor ies CONCLUSIONS <ul><ul><li>Quality Management is: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>’ Defensive’ , reactive, negative attitude towards quality! </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Afterwards control –picking up default products </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Repairing deafults, separate departments of quality control </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Not a ’business’ of managers or supervisors; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>it is a duty of engineers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Are we not seeing this still these days? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>control, guest for measuring and deep-rooted belief in rationalizm </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>cf. quality systems, ISO9000, approaches to the assessment of quality and it’s role in organizations! </li></ul></ul>
    6. 6. PARADIGMS OF QUALITY Management theories <ul><li>’ Soft’-side of quality; human issues, management role </li></ul><ul><li>Traces back to ’Social Man’ School of thought in management </li></ul><ul><li>and early 1960’s - Zero defect thinking; ’right the first time’ (P. Crosby) </li></ul><ul><li>1970-80’s: Total QM strategic issue – competitive advantage, a system for managing the organization </li></ul><ul><li>TQM invaded in Finland in mid- 1980’s </li></ul><ul><li>1990’s: TQM, learning, org. culture, teams,assessment </li></ul><ul><li>2000’s: ’assessment movement’, competitive ability, change, </li></ul><ul><li>Third sector: social communities (member oganizations), social enterprises and organizations involved. </li></ul>
    7. 7. EIGHT DECADES OF QUALITY THINKING Main approaches in summary: <ul><li>1920-50 : Quality Control, Assurance </li></ul><ul><li>1960-:Human approach emerges; quality circels </li></ul><ul><li>1970-80; TQM, strategic quality, competitive advantage,customer </li></ul><ul><li>1990-: teams, learning, public sector involved </li></ul><ul><li>quality awards ; rise of quality assessment </li></ul><ul><li>2000-: organizational challenges of new millenium: change, leadership, (assessment and improvement) </li></ul>
    8. 8. The human issues The technical issues It’s the SOFT stuff that’s hard The HARD stuff is easier ’ SOFT and HARD’ Sides of Quality Management In harmony?
    9. 9. SIX CORNERSTONES OF QUALITY MANAGEMENT Employee Involvement Continuous Improvement Concept of TQM Concept of Quality Strategic Competitive Advantage Leadership & Mgmt Role Customer & Partnership Orientation
    10. 10. CORNERSTONES OF QUALITY MANAGEMENT 1-3; STARTING POINTS OF QUALITY THINKING <ul><li>BROAD QUALITY CONCEPT, </li></ul><ul><li>- OUTPUT, PRODUCT </li></ul><ul><li>- ACTIVITY/PROCESS </li></ul><ul><li>- ORG.’S ACTIVITY/PROCESSES;TOTAL QUALITY </li></ul><ul><li>2. QUALITY - STRATEGIC COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE </li></ul><ul><li>- WHY QUALITY: TWO PATHS OF QUALITY IMRPOVEMENT </li></ul><ul><li>- DEVELOPMENT MODEL FOR THE ENTIRE ORGANIZATION FOR ENHANCING COMPETITIVENESS? </li></ul><ul><li>3. CUSTOMER ORIENTATION </li></ul><ul><li>- NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS AS A STARTING POINT &ULTIMATE GOAL </li></ul><ul><li>- SATISFACTION AS DECISIVE CRITERIA </li></ul><ul><li>- EXTERNAL/INTERNAL CUSTOMERS </li></ul>
    11. 11. <ul><li>FIRST CORNERSTONE OF QM </li></ul><ul><li>CONCEPT OF QUALITY </li></ul><ul><li>Fitness for use (J.M. Juran) </li></ul><ul><li>Organization’s ability to </li></ul><ul><li>meet and/or exceed </li></ul><ul><li>customer and partnership </li></ul><ul><li>expectations &needs </li></ul><ul><li>(The Nordic Service School) </li></ul>
    12. 12. VIEWS OF QUALITY QUALITY PROCESS PRODUCTION/ DELIVERY (APPLIED FROM P. Lillrank) . PRODUCT/SERVICE CHARACTERISTICS VALUE PRICE VS. QUALITY COMPETITION STRATEGIC CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ENVIRONMENT STAKEHOLDERS
    13. 13. BROAD CONCEPT OF QUALITY SYSTEMS ORG. STRUCTURE MGMT& LEADERSHIP HUMAN RESOURSES FACILITIES EQUIPMENT QUALITY OF THE ORG’S ACTIVITY PROCESSES CUSTOMER SUPPLIER TOTAL QUALITY, DEFINITION OF TQM : ”An organizationwide commitment to infusing quality into every activity through continuous improvement” (Daft, 2006)
    14. 14. SECOND CORNERSTONE OF QM 2. QUALITY - STRATEGIC COMPETITIVE MEANS &ADVANTAGE -WHY QUALITY: TWO PATHS OF QUALITY IMRPOVEMENT - QUALITY FOCUSED MANAGEMENT MODEL FOR THE ENTIRE ORGANIZATION FOR ENHANCING COMPETITIVENESS ?
    15. 15. <ul><li>TQM AND COMPETITIVENESS </li></ul><ul><li>(Powell, 1995) </li></ul><ul><li>Intangible resources matter more: </li></ul><ul><li>open organizational culture, management commitment, </li></ul><ul><li>employee involvement </li></ul><ul><li>No formal adoption of TQM is necessarily </li></ul><ul><li>needed (quality programs) to be successful </li></ul><ul><li>Tools and techniques are easier to imitate; </li></ul><ul><li>intangible resources are imperfectly imitable </li></ul><ul><li>Focus on developing tacit , behavioral, imperfectly </li></ul><ul><li>imitable resources: </li></ul><ul><li>creating a culture within which quality improvement </li></ul><ul><li>can thrive/develop </li></ul>
    16. 16. 3RD CORNERSTONE: CUSTOMER FOCUS (ORIENTATION) CUSTOMER PRODUCT Philosophical VALUE PRODUCTION
    17. 17. CUSTOMER IN TQM CUSTOMER-DRIVEN CUSTOMER FEEDBACK & INVOLVEMENT CUSTOMER SATISFACTION CUSTOMER FOCUS COMPETITIVE- NESS
    18. 18. CUSTOMER AS RESOURCE CONQUERING THE HEART Emotions SHARING INFORMATION, ADVISING CUSTOMER COMMITMENT/ INPUT/ ” MONEY” (APPLIED FROM STORBACKA & LEHTINEN, 1997)
    19. 19. Discussion questions: 1) Poor quality - how can you see that? Take examples of products, services, etc. 2) What is the implication?
    20. 20. Theoretical and other Notions on The Quality Movement: Past, Present and Future
    21. 21. <ul><li>TQM - A MANAGEMENT IDEOLOGY (PHILOSOPHY) </li></ul><ul><li>( Savolainen 1997): </li></ul><ul><li>The various arts of managing organizations (‘isms’)) </li></ul><ul><li>provide frameworks, concepts, models and methods </li></ul><ul><li>to understand, change and develope </li></ul><ul><li>managerial and organizational practices; </li></ul><ul><li>The ultimate goal is a better business </li></ul><ul><li>performance and enhancing of competitiveness </li></ul><ul><li>MANAGEMENT IDEOLOGIES ARE </li></ul><ul><li>REAL FORCES AND MODELS FOR MANAGEMENT </li></ul>
    22. 22. HOW TO LOOK THE QUALITY MOVEMENT <ul><li>DYNAMICS OF THE MOVEMENT </li></ul><ul><li>HOW THE MOVEMENT HAS SPREAD? </li></ul><ul><li>Early adopters , role models </li></ul><ul><li>Public sector developments </li></ul><ul><li>Patterns of deploying QM programs in leading comp. </li></ul><ul><li>(see the lecture ppt later on) </li></ul><ul><li>THEORETICAL LINKS & PERSPECTIVES </li></ul><ul><li>Organizational change & continuous improvement </li></ul><ul><li>Organizational culture, learning, HRM, etc. perspectives </li></ul><ul><li>Financial performance & TQM </li></ul><ul><li>(more in workshop presentations) </li></ul>
    23. 23. TYPICAL FOR THE QUALITY MOVEMENT(TQM) <ul><li>Most widely applied and spread management model or philosophy in USA in the last two decades </li></ul><ul><li>Integrates and legitimates many management models/philosophies applied and practiced in the 1980’s and legitimates them, for example, (MBO, QWL, participative management) </li></ul><ul><li>Holistic (total quality) model; integration of technical, cultural, organizational and behavior aspects. </li></ul><ul><li>Concepts are still used that were created and developed in </li></ul><ul><li>1980 - 1990 </li></ul>
    24. 24. <ul><li>DYNAMICS OF THE MOVEMENT </li></ul><ul><li>The Japanese and US Quality Movements </li></ul><ul><li>SIMILARITIES among the two movements </li></ul><ul><li>- Ideologically both relied on the same philosophy </li></ul><ul><li>- Began with inspection </li></ul><ul><li>- Moved to SPC and quality assurance </li></ul><ul><li>- Applied Quality Circles </li></ul><ul><li>- Focused strongly on education and training </li></ul><ul><li>Stimulated & supported by a small number of experts </li></ul><ul><li>Were organized through a national non profit </li></ul><ul><li>promotional organizations (ASQ and JUSE) </li></ul>
    25. 25. The Japanese and US Quality Movements DIFFERENCES among the two movements: - In Japan quality ideology spread faster - The success was notable, if not miraculous - The US movement progressed slowly - Did not achieve any breakthroughs (despite some well-known, prominent role models)
    26. 26. THEORETICAL LINKS: QM IS LINKED WITH ORGANIZATION & MGMENT THEORIES MANAGEMENT THEORY Leadership ORGANIZATION THEORY Structure Org. Change QUALITY MANAGEMENT Customer focus, CI, Teamwork
    27. 27. QUALITY IMPROVEMENT - AN ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE PROCESS SOFT ‘ be through’ (live) change processes as human beings emotions, experiences,will HARD Management of projects and processes;quality tools and technics VISION, MISSION PURPOSE GOALS RESULTS, PERFORMANCE LEADERSHIP PEOPLE MANAGEMENT
    28. 28. HOW DOES THE QUALITY MOVEMENT INCREASE UNDERSTANDING OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE <ul><li>the fundamental question: </li></ul><ul><li>how and why do organizations change? </li></ul><ul><li>Nature of change process; linear, straight-forward </li></ul><ul><li>process or complex, non-linear process? </li></ul><ul><li>Change forces; external or internal? </li></ul><ul><li>Change mechanisms: adaptation or selection? </li></ul><ul><li>Change processes and mgmt strategies in org. </li></ul>
    29. 29. HOW DOES THE QUALITY MOVEMENT INCREASE UNDERSTANDING OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE? <ul><li>Change is shown by: </li></ul><ul><li>Changing concept of quality - major change during </li></ul><ul><li>the decades; dynamic and ever changing concept </li></ul><ul><li>Changing customer thinking; Customer-orientation </li></ul><ul><li>Processes of continuous imrovement (CI) </li></ul><ul><li>Process management and process developments </li></ul><ul><li>Leadership strategies (participation) </li></ul><ul><li>HRM strategies and processes in TQM practices </li></ul>
    30. 30. <ul><li>SIMILARITIES/LINKS AND DIFFERENCES: </li></ul><ul><li>AREAS ESSENTIALLY IDENTICAL </li></ul><ul><li>Top management leadership </li></ul><ul><li>HRM – employee involvement, teams, career mgmt </li></ul><ul><li>2. AREAS WHICH WOULD BENEFIT FROM MGMT THEORY </li></ul><ul><li>Implementation issues - organiz. specific (TQM universal) </li></ul><ul><li>RESEARCH AREAS: MGMT PRACTICES WOULD </li></ul><ul><li>BENEFIT FROM TQM </li></ul><ul><li>information processing </li></ul><ul><li>strategy implementation </li></ul><ul><li>process improvement </li></ul><ul><li>customer focus and satisfaction </li></ul>QUALITY MOVEMENT & MANAGEMENT THEORY
    31. 31. <ul><li>Conclusions: </li></ul><ul><li>Several links but different concepts and terminology </li></ul><ul><li>Quality movement is practitioner-based: Japanese engineers </li></ul><ul><li>Movement spread to USA driven by practitioners </li></ul><ul><li>As a consequence: challenges related to concepts; </li></ul><ul><li>e.g. Continuous improvement – ad hoc technique </li></ul><ul><li>Concepts are linked with many organization theory </li></ul><ul><li>approaches - such as operations research, systems theory, </li></ul><ul><li>motivation, org. culture, org. learning </li></ul>QUALITY MOVEMENT & MANAGEMENT THEORY
    32. 32. <ul><li>SOME PROSPECTS FOR FUTURE </li></ul><ul><li>Sustaining of the movement - </li></ul><ul><li>Success of TQM implementation </li></ul><ul><li>Rhetoric over substance </li></ul><ul><li>Original TQM approach vs. new </li></ul><ul><li>approaches in the name of TQM </li></ul><ul><li>Research on mechanisms/practices </li></ul><ul><li>to reveal the real effects of the philosophy </li></ul>
    33. 33. <ul><li>SOME PROSPECTS FOR FUTURE </li></ul><ul><li>IMPACT OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES? </li></ul><ul><li>Organizing of work (teams;employee level) </li></ul><ul><li>Work motivation; apportioning of rewards </li></ul><ul><li>in organizations </li></ul><ul><li>Learning orientation </li></ul><ul><li>Top-down implementation approach vs. </li></ul><ul><li>real employee empowerment </li></ul>
    34. 34. ATTENTION! SEE A FEW COMPLEMENTARY SLIDES OF THE EFQM MODEL IN THE FOLLOWING. WE’LL USE MAINLY PRINTED MATERIAL FROM WEB-SITE ”INTRODUCTION TO EXCELLENCE”
    35. 35. <ul><li>The EFQM Model is key in four ways: </li></ul><ul><li>as a framework which organisations can use to help </li></ul><ul><li>them develop their Vision and goals for the future </li></ul><ul><li>in a tangible, measurable way </li></ul><ul><li>as a framework which organisations can use to help them </li></ul><ul><li>identify and understand the systemic nature of their business , </li></ul><ul><li>the key linkages and cause and effect relationships. </li></ul><ul><li>as the basis for the European Quality Award , a process </li></ul><ul><li>which allows Europe to recognise its most successful </li></ul><ul><li>organisations and promote them as role models of </li></ul><ul><li>Excellence for others to learn from. </li></ul><ul><li>as a diagnostic tool for assessing the current health of </li></ul><ul><li>the organisation. Through this process an organisation is </li></ul><ul><li>better able to balance its priorities, allocate resources </li></ul><ul><li>and generate realistic business plans. </li></ul>
    36. 36. The fourth, diagnostic use, is known as SELF-ASSESSMENT the process of Self-Assessment is a catalyst for driving business improvement The EFQM definition of Self-Assessment is as follows: Self-Assessment is a comprehensive, systematic and regular review of an organisation's activities and results referenced against the EFQM Excellence Model . The Self-Assessment process allows the organisation to discern its strengths and areas for improvements and culminates in planned improvement actions which are taken and monitored for progress.
    37. 37. EFQM: ”RADAR”/”TUTKA” logic RESULTS/GOALS, APPROACHES DEPLOYMENT ASSESS AND REVIEW
    38. 38. <ul><li>Success level - EFQM </li></ul><ul><li>Company visit >500p. </li></ul><ul><li>Finalist ~550p. </li></ul><ul><li>Prize winner ~620p. </li></ul><ul><li>Award winner Best Prize winner </li></ul>
    39. 39. <ul><li>2001 Category for Large Businesses and Business Units </li></ul><ul><li>No Award Winner </li></ul><ul><li>DHL Portugal </li></ul><ul><li>Westel Mobile Telecommunications Co. Ltd. </li></ul><ul><li>2001 Category for Operational Units </li></ul><ul><li>No Award Winner </li></ul><ul><li>No Prize Winners </li></ul><ul><li>2001 Category for Public Sector </li></ul><ul><li>St. Mary's College Northern Ireland (Award Winner) </li></ul><ul><li>No Prize Winners </li></ul><ul><li>2001 Category for Subsidiary SMEs </li></ul><ul><li>Siemans Tele Industry SA Greece (Prize Winner) </li></ul><ul><li>2001 Category for Independents SMEs </li></ul><ul><li>Zahnarztpraxis Switzerland (Award Winner) </li></ul><ul><li>Maxi Coco-Mat SA Greece (Prize Winner) </li></ul><ul><li>QMS AG Quality Management Services AG Germany (Prize Winner) </li></ul>The European Quality Award Winners
    40. 40. <ul><li>2002 Cathegory for Large Business Units </li></ul><ul><li>No Award Winner </li></ul><ul><li>Dexia Sofaxis </li></ul><ul><li>2002 Category for Operational Units </li></ul><ul><li>No Award Winner </li></ul><ul><li>Bosch Sanayi ve Ticaret AS </li></ul><ul><li>2002 Category for Public Sector </li></ul><ul><li>No Award Winner </li></ul><ul><li>Customs and Tax Region Aarhus </li></ul><ul><li>2002 Category for Independent SME </li></ul><ul><li>Springfarm Architectural Mouldings Ltd </li></ul><ul><li>ASLE, Workers Incorporated Companies Association </li></ul><ul><li>Maxi Coco-Mat SA </li></ul><ul><li>2002 Category for Subsidiary SME </li></ul><ul><li>No Award Winner </li></ul><ul><li>Banc International d’Andorra – Banca Mora </li></ul>The European Quality Award Winners
    41. 41. <ul><li>2003 Cathegory for Large Business Units </li></ul><ul><li>No Award Winner </li></ul><ul><li>Siemens Nederland NV </li></ul><ul><li>2003 Category for Operational Units </li></ul><ul><li>Bosch Sanayi ve Ticaret AS </li></ul><ul><li>Grundfos A/S </li></ul><ul><li>Solvay Martorell Site </li></ul><ul><li>TNT Post Group Information Systems </li></ul><ul><li>2003 Category for Public Sector </li></ul><ul><li>Runshaw College </li></ul><ul><li>Kocaeli Chamber of Industry </li></ul><ul><li>2003 Category for Independent SME </li></ul><ul><li>Maxi Coco-Mat SA </li></ul><ul><li>Hunziker and Co </li></ul><ul><li>Microdeco </li></ul><ul><li>Robur S.p.A. </li></ul><ul><li>Schindlerhof Klaus Kobjoll GmbH </li></ul><ul><li>2003 Category for Subsidiary SME </li></ul><ul><li>Edinburgh International Conference Centre </li></ul>The European Quality Award Winners
    42. 42. The European Quality Award Winners <ul><li>2004 Category: Large Organisations and Business Units </li></ul><ul><li>Yell, United Kingdom - Award Winner and Prize Winner in Leadership and Constancy of Purpose and in People Development and Involvement </li></ul><ul><li>Siemens AG Power Transmission and Distribution, Germany - Prize Winner in Results Orientation </li></ul><ul><li>Knorr-Bremse Systems for Commercial Vehicle, Germany - Finalist </li></ul><ul><li>Solvay Pharma, Spain - Finalist </li></ul><ul><li>TNT Express – Finalist </li></ul><ul><li>2004 Category: Operational Units </li></ul><ul><li>TNT Post Group Information Systems, United Kingdom - Prize Winner in People Development and Involvement </li></ul><ul><li>T-Systems Development Centre South West GmbH, Germany - Prize Winner in Customer Focus and in People Development and Involvement </li></ul><ul><li>T-Systems Multimedia Solutions GmbH, Germany - Finalist </li></ul><ul><li>2004 Category: Public Sector </li></ul><ul><li>Kocaeli Chamber of Industry, Turkey - Award Winner and Prize Winner in People Development and Involvement </li></ul><ul><li>Colegio Ursulinas - Vitoria, Spain - Prize Winner in Leadership and Constancy of Purpose </li></ul><ul><li>Lauaxeta Ikastola Sociedad Cooperativa, Spain - Finalist </li></ul>
    43. 43. The European Quality Award Winners <ul><li>2004 Category: Small &Medium-sized Organisations- Subsidiary SMEs </li></ul><ul><li>EMAR Satis Sonrasi Musteri Hismetleri AS, Turkey - Prize Winner in Results Orientation </li></ul><ul><li>SKF Türk Sanayi ve Ticaret Ltd.STI, Turkey - Prize Winner in Corporate Social Responsibility and in People Development and Involvement </li></ul><ul><li>2004 Category: Small &Medium-sized Organisations- Independent SMEs </li></ul><ul><li>Fonderie del Montello SpA, Italy - Prize Winner in Leadership and Constancy of Purpose </li></ul><ul><li>Hunziker and Co, Switzerland - Prize Winner in People Development and Involvement </li></ul><ul><li>Schindlerhof Klaus Kobjoll GmbH, Germany - Prize Winner in People Development and Involvement </li></ul>
    44. 44. <ul><li>Finnish Quality Award Winners (EFQM) 2001-2004 </li></ul><ul><li>2004 </li></ul><ul><li>Anttila Oy, department store </li></ul><ul><li>10 Recognitions for Excellence </li></ul><ul><li>2003 Large organizations, units category: </li></ul><ul><li>Stora Enso Ingerois Oy (subsidiary of SE Oyj), Inkeroisten kartonkitehdas, folding boxboard manufacturing </li></ul><ul><li>2003 Public sector and other non-profit org. category: </li></ul><ul><li>Elektroniikkalaitos (Unit of Military Finland) </li></ul><ul><li>2002 No winners </li></ul><ul><li>2001 Stora Enso Oyj, The Oulu Mill (printing paper and boards manufacturing) </li></ul>

    ×