Communicating With Management
Presented
to The
Charlotte
North
During the decade of the eighties there has been a definite shift from the conventional "enforcer" quality programs to cost based quality programs. You can recognize these programs by the alphabet soup created by their names. Regardless of what we call them, TQA, SQC, Q#1, etc., they ultimately have the cost/price ratio as a common denominator. This can be a blessing or a curse.. a blessing because the programs recognize that a viable quality program is a sound business strategy.... A curse because they can add even more confusion to the limited vocabulary that transfers information and direction to and from the quality organization.
I remember well my first opportunity to communicate with management. As I, like all of us, had been taught we must have management support, I was happy to have been selected to make a presentation to my division manager and his staff. I was fully prepared. I had graphs and charts depicting our quality shortcomings from every angle: rework, scrap, warranty, defect rates at every point in the process, material review horror stories, and records of all delinquent corrective actions plans. My well rehearsed speech went without flaw, no interruptions, negative comments or argument over the figures presented.
I felt mildly proud as I said "Thank you gentlemen", and took my seat.
Then the boss said to me "Charles, except for the agonizing details, we see reports like this all the time. Just what is it you would like for us to do?"
Well, I was a bit taken back by that remark. I believed it to be self evident. I could think of no clever response. I merely said "I want you to understand that these things I talked about today are problems and should be fixed."
The boss nodded in agreement and said, "You have succeeded in the first half of your objective, I understand that these things are problems, now what are YOU going to do to fix them?"
Obviously I had completely missed the mark. I thought management just simply didn't understand. Actually, I didn't understand. If you are having a bit of trouble following that thought you can appreciate the depth of my bewilderment at the time. It was like I was talking in a completely different language, which, of course, I was.
As quality professionals, we understand all of the quality jargon and appreciate it's precision; however,...
When we take its understanding for granted it leads to us to being thought of as...
"that detached group with an endless array of forms, procedures, and nit picking standards"...
"that group always seems to have a representative present when there is trouble". .
"that group that's always saying 'if you would do so and so you wouldn't have this trouble'"
We suffer from the "Sigma Stigma"
In the coming decade with increasing concern for quality, productivity and the position of American products in the world markets we must realize that the game of quality is won or lost in the management arena.
One of the things we have to do is develop a vocabulary for expressing the merits of our quality programs as basic business strategies, we must learn the business language, think, act, and present the image of the practical business people we really are.
Some insight into how quality is viewed by others we deal with may be helpful.
What is the meaning of quality to:
CEO? COO? Sales and Marketing? Engineering?
The Chief Executive Officer usually thinks of quality in terms of "relative merit" i.e., how are our products and services as compared to the rest of the industry? Generally this includes stockholder or investment quality, and may be considered a matter of style. There is seldom a real knowledge of the activities of the quality function outside of manufacturing and inspection.
The Chief Operating Officer, particularly in a manufacturing business may view quality as an inspection function. Our most visible work has been in the manufacturing areas, in fact we have gained such a great reputation for work in this area that many company presidents and management in general view quality as strictly a manufacturing oriented function.
Quality assurance people are assigned to sort out problems to assure shipments, decide which, from a batch of defectives, are good enough to use anyhow, get things "signed off" and deal with government or customer quality representatives. In addition, they are expected to maintain the highest product quality and most important be "reasonable".
Sales and marketing usually equate quality with bells and whistles "bang for the buck". They seldom use real quality as something that sets their products apart from the competition. Reliability means "if it breaks bring it back we'll fix it".
Engineering likes to think of quality as state of the art sophistication, uniqueness or creative investment.
Our interface should be with all functions in the organization; manufacturing, material control, engineering and marketing.
Our performance in engineering, marketing and most support areas has not been as effective as it should be.
When you consider that 70 to 80% of the factors that determine product quality are achieved within these the other areas, particularly engineering and marketing... this view can seriously impede progress in improving product quality.
We must shake this manufacturing oriented image if we are to really participate in the strategic decisions of our company.
There are some recognitions involved in overcoming this image and obtaining support, participation, and resources for the less traditional, non-manufacturing oriented quality activities.
Quality is defined as "conformance" to requirements and "fitness" for use. (Quality = Conformance & Probity)
There are two interrelated considerations in this definition of quality. The first applies to a product or service where the producers (workers) are far removed from the customer or users of the products or services. Quality, in this sense, happens when the product or service conforms to the requirements defined by the order, drawing, specifications, etc.
The other consideration relates the specifications, order, or drawing to the expectations, needs, and fitness for intended use; this is referred to as "probity".
Probity is a measure of the congruence of the specification to the requirements of the intended use and relies on a comprehensive knowledge of the customer's needs. The probity consideration is important because conformance characteristics are often confused with the characteristics of design or the suitability of the specification (probity) resulting in inappropriate trade-offs during production of a product or execution of a task.
The dual definition of quality is essential in identifying where to take action when problems are encountered and also useful in effective communications. For example, a production technician might not understand "this part is not quality because it will not meet the customer's expectations". Conversely some tension could be created by explaining to a customer that he has no right to complain since the part he received is "to the print" and it's not bad quality just because it don't fit in his widget.
Most people think that quality is good. Sometimes quality professionals make the mistake of trying to sell goodness rather than quality. Everyone claims to believe in goodness and everybody wants it. What's to sell? When we speak of goodness, people tend to think in terms of narrow trade-offs associated with quality as conformance where it must compete with effort, cost, and time resources. This is where we get into trouble with quality because it must become analog instead of digital, i.e., almost like the print; almost to specification; just a little off; almost meets the customers needs (he won't notice the difference)...
Quality is a parameter and must be measurable. Often conventional programs talk in terms of defect rates, percent returns etc., which in the final analyses results in a goodness appraisal.
Although these terms are measurable, a performance measure in terms of cost will provide the greatest utility in that it is universally understood and provides for objective value assessments of alternative actions.
The basis for establishing cost as a quality performance measure is that non conformity and improbity cost money. If absent for the life of the project, there would be no cost of non-quality. The "cost of non-quality" measure then depicts the deviation from the ideal.
There are three categories of cost usually represented in a cost of non-quality measurement system: prevention, detection and failure.
Prevention costs are those expended trying to keep things from going wrong... usually the most neglected area.
Detection costs are those used to find out if anything went wrong... these are things like inspections and tests.
Failure costs are those needed to fix the things that went wrong... rework, scrap, warranty, etc.
These are fairly easy to understand and on the surface seem similar to the normal expenses of operating a business; however, they only tell part of the story.
For example, rework is not just the cost of the labor for doing something over because labor resources have been diverted from productive activities for effecting the repairs; these resources come straight out of plant capacity.
Scrap is not just the cost of items thrown away, but the cost of replacement, the cost of extra inventory required to cover shrinkage, the carrying cost of inventory stranded because of shortages, not to mention the e expediting costs. Warranty is not just the cost to replace or repair discrepant items delivered to the customer, but includes the cost of delayed accounts receivable, the loss of customer confidence and lost productivity of any sales personnel involved in adjusting the complant.
Obviously, all of these considerations do not show up directly on the cost of non-quality or any other accounting schedules, but the elements are important measures and are particularly useful in determining the relative merits of alternative investments or action plans.
Getting Support
Quality practitioners often complain about the lack of commitment to quality by management and their peers in other functions. This perception of non-commitment, aside from the complaining, often negatively influence their actions and performance and precludes their participation in the strategic planning of the business. This loss of energy, frustration and lack of effectiveness is unfortunate, and for the most part, unnecessary. A management group that is not committed to quality most likely has a quality function that has not communicated or exercised the leadership required to obtain the commitment.
What do we really want when we ask for management support and commitment? Actually it's not just one thing, its a series of elements that together mean management support.
Clout - That is, representation on the staff equal to other functions.
Accessibility - To discuss concerns and ideas.
Resources - Sufficient for required quality activities.
Information - In sufficient depth to allow planning and operation of the quality function in concert with the company plans and objectives and current business conditions.
The authority to act.
A professional quality organization that is efficient and effective. Management cannot credibly support quality as an organizational objective unless the quality departments are competent and maintain an image of competence with peer functions.
Leadership - Achievement of the organizational quality objectives can be viewed as a project and the quality people are the project leaders. The success of this project requires not only the application of resources of the quality department, but the resources of other functions as well. Your effectiveness in team building for this activity will depend upon the authority of knowledge. The authority of knowledge cannot be granted by any office, it must be earned.
Integrity - Management must be able to count on the accuracy of what you tell them. Facts and opinions are wanted, but you must identify which is which. Also, talk to them in terms they can understand without an extensive course in Statistical Quality Control.
Be Helpful - Don't confine your activities to quality assurance activities. Participate in business discussions. Business plans should contain a quality section that is an important part of our overall business strategy. Your participation is important to your profession and company.
An obstacle to effective communication is often created by our interfaces with other functions and understanding our relationship with other functional managers. This relationship can affect our ability to gain the resources we require.
All functions are in competition for the company's resources. When you're asking for resources to support a product qualification or reliability program you're competing for the same resources that must satisfy requests for another engineer, a clerk for material control, an advertising campaign, a new rework station.
We have to recognize that the other functions work from and are strongly dedicated to a very narrow point of view. Although we in quality sometimes fuss about it, it's as it should be. Can you imagine a company where marketing is not totally dedicated to order input or engineering to the best design and manufacturing to getting the products out the door.
Effectively selling Quality Program involves abilities not normally provided for by our training. The Malsows and McGregors have given us rules for communicating with and motivating subordinates, but when it comes to our boss and peers new devices are called for.
Perhaps we could benefit by following the lead of our friends in marketing. They make a marketing plan by finding out how their products or services can solve the customer's problems, then translate these into sales pitches and advertising campaigns.
We need to find the leading causes of happiness for management and our peers and demonstrate how improvement in quality performance can help achieve these objectives. Sometimes we talk in terms of problem avoidance, i.e., avoiding unhappiness. That may have limited success in maintaining the status quo; however, to really make progress what you sell must create happiness.
What are the leading causes of happiness for:
Management? - Engineering? - Manufacturing?
A useful tool might be to make a Communications manual (Organizational Maintenance Manual) for each group you need to influence. List their problems, the things that make them happy, and the ways the quality program can help them succeed. Understanding their perspective can make your job easier.
If you are able to do this well, your counterparts in the other functions, even those traditionally considered adversaries, will adopt your projects and ideas as their own providing support for the resources you need and assuring a smooth implementation of the program elements.
The quality professional can be truly effective only if he can credibly and effectively communicate with management. Thank You
Copyright © 1988 Charles Prier
Click Here to E-Mail your Comments
Return to ALL ABOUT QUALITY