Lindsay J.
Leading Process Improvement Consultant specializing in ISO 9001 Consulting
Can a company have an effective quality management system and assure the quality of its products and/or services without having a dedicated quality function?
Clarification added March 19, 2010:
Thanks everyone for the great insights and opinions so far. You've helped me expand the theme in an article. Feel free to comment on that too.
http://getisoblog.com/2010/03/19/without-a-dedicated-quality-function-can-a-company-have-an-effective-quality-management-system/
Good Answers (4)
Donald H.
Safety and Operational Risk Group with BP
Best Answers in: Quality Management and Standards (1)
Having a gatekeeper of a process does not guarantee success and conversely having no dedicated function does not mean failure. In the abscence of a dedicated focal point a rigorous process needs to be in place that assures:
Detailed responsibilities, accountabilities and actions
A focused continuous improvement/evergreen process
Regimented metrics and dedicated measurement by some process whether by a group or some other automation
A detailed, precise and friendly communication process for intervention if variations are discovered
A gatekeeper is capable of overcoming any shortcomings in these items so without the position or dedication of function it is imperative this process is flawless.
Trevor M.
Business Consultant
Best Answers in: Organizational Development (4), Using LinkedIn (2), Mentoring (1), Government Policy (1), Personnel Policies (1), Exporting/Importing (1), Customs, Tariffs and Taxes (1), Sales Techniques (1), Corporate Governance (1), Career Management (1)
Sure. A company does not need a dedicated quality function to achieve quality excellence. Management can take the position that quality is everyone's job. That's what concepts such as continuous process improvement, kaizen, and zero defects are based on. The problem with a dedicated quality function is that it delegates quality assurance to a particular department, rather than assuring that it becomes part of the DNA of the company. The result, in the words of Deming, is that we "remodel the prison" rather than face the challenge to "get out of it."
True quality excellence is about organizational and individual transformation that requires the involvement of all human resources, especially those who do the work. One cannot get to the root problem and move beyond simply extinguishing fires by using an information processing approach, which is what happens in the case of a dedicated quality function. Rather, as Deming pointed out, "profound knowledge" of the problem is required. Such knowledge is found among those with closest contact to the problem. More likely than not, such persons will not necessarily be located in a dedicated quality function. On the contrary, the risk to the company is that a dedicated quality function would overlook such sources of "profound knowledge". Basically, decentralization is key here.
Karen C.
President, KLC Associates --Organization and Management Consulting
Best Answers in: Organizational Development (21), Personnel Policies (8), Change Management (7), Career Management (4), Staffing and Recruiting (2), Public Relations (2), Labor Relations (2), Planning (2), Quality Management and Standards (2), Job Search (1), Mentoring (1), Mergers and Acquisitions (1), Work-life Balance (1), Corporate Law (1), Writing and Editing (1), Business Analytics (1), Corporate Governance (1), Nonprofit Management (1), Project Management (1), Small Business (1), Using LinkedIn (1)
I absolutely agree with Trevor's answer, that it is not only possible, put essential in order to create a true 'Total Quality' environment in which quality and continuous improvement are everyone's responsibility, and in which quality is 'built in' versus 'inspected in:
However, in many cases, I have consulted with companies which initially did have a centralised quality function. It would typically be the responsibility of the quality function to:
> Keep metrics on quality
> inspect the system to identify quality problems
> Identify solutions to issues
and so on.
Employees throughout the system and its sub-processes felt no ownership at all for quality. Hence the dilemma is often HOW to make the transition/transformation to a quality focussed environment. I have found a central quality group very useful in changing the mindset about quality. To provide one example, I worked with a central quality group for such an organisation. We began by defining a new group vision: Acting as a catalyst for a quality mindset revolution that would ignite a passion for quality throughout the organisation and result in a quantum leap in quality performance. Some of the first goals included:
> Making quality an equal driver to cost in decision-making
> Getting quality on the agenda of every meeting from the bottom to the top of the organisation.
> Instilling quality integrity in the product development process -- not allowing 'milestones' to be passed if quality was not really at the required level (there had been a certain amount of fudging figures and turning a blind eye).
New roles included:
> Acting as 'the voice of the customer' (that is not speaking for the customer, but ensuring that customer expressed wants and needs were communicated to and understood by the product development team and acted on).
> Being the 'right hand person' of the head of the product development process; and the quality 'conscious'.
> Gathering and feeding back to the organisation metrics on customer satisfaction, quality performance.
> Conducting workshops were designers and product development people could look at prototypes and see the quality of their contributions as well as that of the overall product.
> Teaching product development people and manufacturing people techniques of SPC and other quality tools and methods
> Building passion and interest through the organisation by involving everyone in The Quality Mindset Revolution -- workshops with functional and cross-functional groups to identify and improve systems and sub-processes they were involved in.
Ultimately, as momentum grew and people began to develop passion, commitment and expertise, the quality group shrank, until there were beachheads of ISO and 6-sigma people left, and quality became ingrained into everyone's thinking and roles.
Clarification added March 12, 2010:
With all respect to Kenneth, I have been consulting in this field for over 25 years and had the great privilege of studying with Dr. Deming.
The quality transformation I described was real and sustained, and I have generated the same outcomes with other companies and plants. It is difficult to achieve, but it is not "Utopia". It is really a matter of everyone feeling committed to and responsible for the customer and for quality. There are usually, at the end of the day, specialty functions, which I called 'Beach heads" who provide certain focussed services: Supplier quality audits; 6 sigma studies; competitor quality benchmarking; a group which worked on developing and providing training on new quality tools and analytics; ISO 9000 compliance specialists. But no longer a central function responsible and held accountable for quality. In such organisations, quality rarely goes downhill, because people won''t let it.
Also, they monitor their processes and get early warning if they are about to go out of control. If there are problems, the first place people look is at the system, not individuals.
Dennis H.
Sales/Marketing at Custom Print Products
Best Answers in: Manufacturing (1), Quality Management and Standards (1)
There are many great responses to your query, many that espouse Deming and his contemporaries quite well. Dr. Deming and others provide wonderful quality implementation tools but tools are only part of the quality equation. Company culture is indicative of Total Quality Management more so than learning the tools and the language. I have seen many businesses that post metrics, have Kaizan events, and/or spew the terminology but they rarely work to create a culture of quality. Top leadership must believe in a total quality system and demand excellence from subordinates to create a quality culture. It takes years of training and development to create the habits associated with driving quality from within the workforce. Too often the 'quality function' becomes a source for data collection and problem solving instead of a resource dedicated to workforce training and education.
In the right environment after dedicated training and once new habits have been developed can a company exist without a tradition quality function.
More Answers (19)
Yuri T.
Software Engineering / Process Improvement and Quality Systems Management Expert
Best Answers in: Software Development (33), Quality Management and Standards (13), Change Management (9), Corporate Governance (2), Enterprise Software (2), Web Development (2), Purchasing (1), Education and Schools (1), Certification and Licenses (1), Compensation and Benefits (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Work-life Balance (1), Public Relations (1), Labor Relations (1), Organizational Development (1), Planning (1), Project Management (1), Career Management (1), Ethics (1), Small Business (1), Energy and Development (1), Information Security (1)
I believe that this is possible. If there is a commitment to achieving quality excellence from the top down, through all organizational layers and all employees, from the general manager down to the newest line worker, it can be done. Is there a need for police officers if we could all agree to the rules/guidelines and all agree to follow the rules/guidelines?
In fact, I see the existence of a dedicated, independent quality function as more of an industry and regulatory requirement than an organizational one. Standards, such as ISO 9001 and the many QMS standards that have been derived from it, require a dedicated quality function. Certain customers are likely to insist on it also, especially if they are government or military.
Frances C.
Looking forward to starting my new positions in IT Operations beginning in 2012
Best Answers in: Organizational Development (3), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Career Management (1)
Short answer -- yes. Would the absence of that function makes QA/QC more difficult -- possibly. Long answer -- read on. Quality is driven by people and their understanding relative to a standard not by the existence of an organizational function dedicated to it. As long as the understanding relative to what comprises the QA/QC standard is shared by these people, it can be effective. People driving towards something in common would create a 'virtual' fquality function. These individuals might 'live' in disparate groups. That said, most system can and often are supported by the existance of a dedicated function. Why? For the same reason organizational units are created in the first place -- having a dedicated function emphasizes the importance of whatever that unit was pulled together to do. In addition, a dedicated function can serve to facilitate the aherance to the standard since these units often have additional responsibilities -- e.g. assisting others with their understanding of quality as something that can be imbedded as a part of everthing they do and as something all resources are responsible for.
Bart D.
IT Manager at Hewlett-Packard
Best Answers in: Project Management (3), Business Development (1), Inventory Management (1), Manufacturing (1), Packaging and Labeling (1), Enterprise Software (1)
Yes. I see it all the time in smaller firms where you cannot afford to dedicate a resource to any one function. In many situations you can find better quality because the person producing the product gets feedback on customer complaints (imagine you know the individual that made the product that shipped to XYZ, you could go back directly back to them with any issues or questions).
Yes. Provided the organisation has a culture that believes quality belongs to every employee - from the cleaners to the MD. All the Quality Gurus—Dr. W. Edwards Deming, Dr. Joseph Juran, Philip Crosby, Armand V. Feigenbaum, Dr. H. James Harrington, Dr. Kaoru Ishikawa, Dr. Walter A. Shewhart, Shigeo Shingo, Frederick Taylor, and Dr. Genichi Taguchi, promote this concept within their writings at some stage. Ownership of quality takes time but is possible where the organisation is willing. The aim of myself as a quality manager, ultimatley, is to become redundant, leaving behind an organisation that strives to improve the productivity and profitablity through improved quality.
Imagine a scenario where there is only one person who produces , sells & collects the profits. Do you think he requires a dedicated Quality function ? Now extend this to a larger picture. There are a number of people producing who sell & distribute the profit . DO you think they still require dedicated Quality function ? The basic theme therfore is that if the people involved in producing goods are responsible in a way to the profits earned or lost because of the Quality of goods they produce, then there is no need of dedicated Quality function. In reality this does not work so. since the remunerations are divided on different work & performance criteria & the responsibilities are divided, each person would like to maximise his gains . What ever may be the process controls , fool proofness or any six sigma system , there is still a need to have a dedicated Quality function to oversee the Quality function bereft of other responsibilites.
Raj S.
Director-R&D Competency at Huawei India R&D Center
Best Answers in: Project Management (5), Quality Management and Standards (4), Hotels (1), Business Analytics (1), Change Management (1), Organizational Development (1)
"EFFECTIVE" Quality Management system.
The answer is in your question itself.
1) what is the definition of this "Effective"
2) with what we compare and said "Effective"
3) Is the current state of "Effecive" a static or dynamic in nature
4) What is the element which constantly connects all the elements of Quality Mgmt system to be effecive
I think the answer to the above questions, will guide you whether we need a dedicated quality function or not
Vincent V.
Breakthrough Coach | Global Ambassador at Shaklee Independent Distributor
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (22), Work-life Balance (10), Business Development (10), Change Management (8), Health Care (7), Organizational Development (7), Government Policy (6), Public Health and Safety (6), Job Search (5), Staffing and Recruiting (5), Manufacturing (4), Career Management (4), Green Business (4), Energy and Development (4), Computers and Software (4), Event Marketing and Promotions (3), Economics (3), Personnel Policies (3), Internationalization and Localization (3), Customer Relationship Management (3), Business Analytics (3), Planning (3), Starting Up (3), Education and Schools (2), Freelancing and Contracting (2), Mentoring (2), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (2), Graphic Design (2), Public Relations (2), Project Management (2), Quality Management and Standards (2), Supply Chain Management (2), Wealth Management (2), Communication and Public Speaking (2), Ethics (2), Small Business (2), Enterprise Software (2), Wireless (2), Customer Service (1), Car and Train Travel (1), Conference Planning (1), Budgeting (1), Risk Management (1), Government Services (1), Compensation and Benefits (1), Health Administration (1), Environmental Health (1), Antitrust Law (1), Intellectual Property (1), Guerrilla Marketing (1), Writing and Editing (1), Corporate Governance (1), Bond Markets (1), Futures Markets (1), Inventory Management (1), Personal Investing (1), Branding (1), Market Research and Definition (1), Product Design (1), Pricing (1), Positioning (1), Professional Organizations (1), Professional Networking (1), Green Products (1), Information Security (1), Telecommunications (1), Software Development (1)
Lindsay, although I'm inclined to say that certain types of companies or should I say production processes, could benefit from a dedicated quality function, if only to stay on top of the lastest quality control technologies and methods and train others in using them, in practice it is best to instill accountability for the quality control function in every participant in the production process, from purchasing through production to sales. Only online participants have knowledge and complete understanding of quality and production issues. A dedicated quality manager could support the quality function, but ideally that should be it, a support role, not a hierarchically superior position. The quality support manager could assist in training staff what to look for, how to diagnose potential issues, how to optimize a workstation etcetera pretty much like an industrial engineer. For maximum effectiveness, quality should be an integral part of the business function of every step in the production process, whether it be of a service or manufacturing nature. Management should empower everyone to work in a collaborative atmosphere so that production issues that affect quality can be addressed quickly and efficiently.
No.Many companies are following Kaizen, Zero defects practices.Others have
put emphsis on
1.Training of Managers
2.Continous training of supervisors & workers
3 Interactive sessions on Quality by External experts
In many case % rejection has come down,despite increase in
Producton .
To maintain this is a difficult task.Hence a quality check is required to
ensure that parts shipped out are as per standard & customer
specifications.
A quality check provides a buffer so one can at times increase speed of production,aware that there will be a check.
So a dedicated Quality function is required
Regards
Uday Kharkar
Absolutely. Quality should be the job of every employee. Empower employees to take ownership of the process and have each one double check the quality of their part of the business. You could also create a quality assurance team, with representatives from different departments working tofether to ensure the product meets their standards.
David K.
Planning, Analyzing & measuring performance. Avid blogger discussing Lean, Project Management and Workplace Improvement.
Best Answers in: Business Analytics (4), Planning (3), Organizational Development (2), Career Management (2), Using LinkedIn (2), Corporate Governance (1), Change Management (1), Quality Management and Standards (1)
@Karen
Great answer. It seems as though the "What" is easy to identify, however, the "how" part of quality is often much more difficult to determine.
Wouter D.
Mobiliteit - CO2 - EUR - ADMIN = BeLikeUs
Best Answers in: Facilities Management (2), Business Analytics (1), Organizational Development (1)
Following Drucker's "The President's Gestapo" statements about self control, quality is a responsibility for all contributors, and the quality function should ONLY play a supporting role. I wonder: when a specialist quality function is necessary, has the task under control grown too large?
Links:
Kenneth S.
Sr. Systems Analyst/Associate Manager at Accenture Technology Solutions
Best Answers in: Ethics (4), Staffing and Recruiting (2), Change Management (2), Organizational Development (2), Quality Management and Standards (2), Job Search (1), Personnel Policies (1), Public Health and Safety (1), Work-life Balance (1), Property Law (1), Business Development (1), Customer Relationship Management (1), Corporate Governance (1), Labor Relations (1), Planning (1), Packaging and Labeling (1), Career Management (1), Business Plans (1), Enterprise Software (1), Information Security (1), Using LinkedIn (1)
I must disagree with most answers here I'm afraid. Only in a utopian organization can you have effective quality assurance without any single part of it being dedicated to quality.
Sure, they don't have to be names Quality-anything, but someone somewhere in the organization better be dedicated to quality. I'm not talking about a mental disposition, but specifically that it is someone's role and responsibility to be dedicated to assuring quality.
And there is such a dedicated function in every organization, whether they are aware of it or not. You can find them if you identify who gets kicked out first, when the quality drops below minimum acceptable standards.
This is not to say that Kaizen, Quality Circles and all these other wonderful things aren't critical in achieving high quality - but someone somewhere decided to implement it. It didn't just spring up on it's own - but even if it had, someone somewhere supports it and keeps it alive.
I believe that any and all organizations who have achieved high quality, have a dedicated quality function. It may not look or sound like your typical QA department, but it is there.
Cheers :-)
From my "front-line" exposure to various-sized organizations that have a dedicated quality function and those that don't, this is not likely. Larger companies without experienced quality leadership seem to have a stunted view of the strategic value that quality can have have for their company. This perspective results in significant funding and resource shortfalls. Even start-up companies are not immune from quality issues, partly because many aspects of their business are outsourced and they have limited visibility into quality issues, and limited resources with which to mitigate them.
Theory is lovely, but can anyone point to specific companies that they consider to have "an effective quality management system and assure the quality of its products/or services without having a dedicated quality function"?
In mine point of view the answer is no. Nowadays Project Managers suffer hardly pressure from Customer and Internal Organization. At this scenario Quality becomes out of priority for them. So Quality function is deeply needed to assure and control quality, helping project to get closed on the right way (successful). Please bear in mind that Quality involves all steps in a project since conception until closure.
Regards,
M. Sguario, PMP
Scott B.
Factotum
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (22), Career Management (7), Change Management (5), Ethics (5), Business Development (4), Planning (3), Professional Networking (3), Economics (2), Internationalization and Localization (2), Writing and Editing (2), Organizational Development (2), Professional Organizations (2), Education and Schools (1), Mentoring (1), Conference Venues (1), Accounting (1), Risk Management (1), Government Policy (1), Government Services (1), Personnel Policies (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Environmental Health (1), Advertising (1), Direct Marketing (1), Internet Marketing (1), Graphic Design (1), Customer Relationship Management (1), Lead Generation (1), Sales Techniques (1), Corporate Governance (1), Equity Markets (1), Philanthropy (1), Personal Real Estate (1), Small Business (1), Energy and Development (1)
Yes, but someone needs to define and start it and there must be controls in place to govern it. So there needs to be an implementation of policy, documentation, and training. In my opinion, not having the function is difficult to sustain. But if you have the right program and right individuals, it is possible.
SEB
Links:
Brent F.
Operations VP - Ware
Best Answers in: Change Management (3), Organizational Development (3), Business Development (1), Planning (1), Professional Networking (1)
Yes. As long as the most visible, most influential people in your organization are compensated based on the quality of it's products or services.
Brian L.
Facilitator, speaker, coach, healthcare & technology commercialisation, business development and management consultant.
Only if everyone is capable of operating a quality assurance programme rather than quality inspection.
Gus H.
Material / Inventory Forecaster at MetroLink St Louis
Best Answers in: Professional Networking (1)
Being from a manufacturing environment I would have a hard time agreeing to having good Quality without having a dedicated Quality function.
This would mean a total "TRUST" in your suppliers, their suppliers, and your internal work force. I've seen too many rejects from vendor materials and in house work, to ever agree to put my "Trust" in folks ensuring to have a highest degree of Quality.
Everyone is trying to take short cuts and to pass things thru with the idea that no one would notice.
Also depending on the product I would never put a part on an Aircraft without Quality approval.
