| Revision as of 12:35, 28 May 2006 edit207.69.58.166 (talk) →== Spam or necessary? ==← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:35, 28 May 2006 edit undo207.69.58.166 (talk) →== Spam or necessary? ==Next edit → | ||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
| Does anyone else see the attributions and '''two''' links to John Stark as useful or link spam? After all, why is an unknown consultant used as the definition reference? ] 01:06, 5 March 2006 (UTC | Does anyone else see the attributions and '''two''' links to John Stark as useful or link spam? After all, why is an unknown consultant used as the definition reference? ] 01:06, 5 March 2006 (UTC | ||
| Deming Takes Issue With TQM | |||
| by | |||
| Paul S. Forbes | |||
| Chairman & CEO, The Forbes Group | |||
| It seems that we Americans are pushovers for the latest fad. Let someone package old wine in new bottles and give it a catchy name, and before long, the buzzwords are on every tongue and associations vie with each other to adopt the new cure-all. The latest of these fads to be eagerly embraced by American management is what is known as Total Quality Management (more familiarly known as TQM). TQM is sold as America's answer to Japan's well-known cult of excellence, which in turn was the brainchild of an American, W. Edwards Deming. Deming helped the Japanese recover from the devastation of their industry after World War II. He advised them to jettison the cheap, poor-quality products for which prewar Japan was notorious, and to develop instead a reputation for customer satisfaction through quality and value. They succeeded beyond anyone's expectations. In the meantime, while an impoverished but determined Japan was sacrificing immediate consumption to invest in the future, American management got lazy. The postwar years found us with the only intact industrial plant in the world. We sat back and let the dollars roll in. We were the world's source for products, and we thought the good times would go on forever. Gone was American preoccupation with building and selling a better mousetrap. American business built bureaucracies and began to fossilize just as Japan and Europe were building newer and more efficient production facilities to replace the old, devastated ones. By the 1980s, it seemed more profitable and more fun to engineer takeovers and to gamble with corporate assets than to build competitive products. We lost our world preeminence in manufacturing and instead became the leading debtor nation. And during this time, American associations, lulled by the copious flow of member dollars, often settled into comfortable bureaucracy. When Japan's success was traced to Deming's principles, Americans rushed to adapt them to this country. The result was TQM and the Malcolm Baldrige Award, which have been trumpeted as evidence that Americans have once again become serious about quality. Companies have been rushing to embrace it, and now the enthusiasm has spread to the association world. What does guru Deming think about the American response? Consider just a few of his reactions to the application guidelines for the Baldrige Award:(The guidelines) will do incalculable damage to American industry. The damage will be done not only to companies that apply for the award: many companies, with no intention to apply for the award, are using the guidelines internally. No one could measure nor imagine the destruction to our economy that will come from such misguided efforts. Why is TQM, the American incarnation of quality management, viewed with such horror by Deming, the acknowledged don of the quality fraternity? Because America has embraced the style without the substance. The Deming method is based on a number of fundamental principles that must all be religiously followed if a Japan-like success is to be achieved: Rather than making money, the company's mission is to stay in business and provide jobs through customer satisfaction, innovation, research, constant improvement and maintenance. In associations, the customer is the member and the challenge is to provide exceptional value for each dues dollar and service dollar collected. Quality comes not from inspection but from improvement of the process, in partnership between management and workers. In associations, this means involving members, staff and leadership in a strategic management process that is centered on meeting member needs. Companies should stop purchasing on the basis of low price, but seek the best quality and work to achieve it with a single supplier for each item in a long-term relationship. This principle applies to associations as well as to corporations. Continually work to improve service and quality and to reduce waste. Associations tend to launch quality campaigns with much fanfare and then forget them as attention is drawn to some new challenge. Institute continuous training. Most workers can't do their jobs because no one tells them how and they learn from watching others who may not be role models. How many associations have well thought-out training programs? Stop telling people what to do and punishing them. Leading consists of helping people do a better job by providing help and guidance to those who need it. It's a well known fact that you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. People hesitate to ask questions or make suggestions out of fear of their supervisors. Stop evaluating people and start listening to them. You don't need annual performance reviews if you are providing real-time, constructive feedback to staff. Break down walls between departments. Otherwise departments will have goals that conflict. This is as true of associations as it is in the corporate world. Eliminate slogans, production targets, pep talks, quality logos, and quality campaigns. These are seen as just so much hot air by both staff and members, and are largely ignored. Remove barriers to pride of workmanship. Give employees what they need to do a quality job. | |||
| This column appeared in the May 22, 1992 edition of Association Trends | |||
| == TQM in my business == | == TQM in my business == | ||
Revision as of 12:35, 28 May 2006
- TQM is not limited in its application
What does this mean? And who makes this claim?
And while we're at it, is "total quality management" a generic term like "software development", or is it "Total Quality Management" (proper noun)? If it's the latter, then who developed it? Who espouses / promotes it? How much does it cost?
How is TQM different from "quality control"?
Most of all, what evidence is there that this is not just another industry buzzword? We're trying to run an encyclopedia here, and people who want to know what TQM is, apart from the hype, will come here to find out. Uncle Ed 13:16, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- TQM is management philosophy, much like scientific management, administrative management, and human relations management. It describes the principles that managers use to run an organization or unit. Quality control generally refers to a function of an organization. TQ
M is a generic term, but it is usually capitalized. I'm not sure why, other than just tradition. Note that Management by objectives is usually capitalized in spite of also being a generic term. TQM is usually credited with being started by W. Edwards Deming, although h e based the principles of TQM off of what he learned from others.
- I don't think that he came up with the name "Total Quality Management", but he did use it in the later part of his career (after he came to the U.S.). I think that it has enough credibility to be more than just a buzzword. It's been around in Japan since the 1950s, and it's been in use in the U.S. since the 1980s. It's hard to say what companies have used it since it is a philosophy of operations rather than a specific product. From my understanding, it is quite common in Japan. I know that some well-known U.S. companies that have been credited as using TQM principles have been Xerox and Saturn. --Cswrye 01:17, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Origin of TQM name
Retired United States Air Force (Tactical Air Command) General Bill Creech claim in his book that he coined the term "Total Quality Management," in early 1980's. (page 6 of The Five Pillars of TQM, Bill Creech, Trumen Talley Books , New York 1995, ISBN 0-452-27102-9 ). At the time Japanese automobile manufactures were grabbing a greater share of the American market with cars of higher quality then American cars. Creech claim he created TQM without knowing of Deming's or Juran's works. He devised the term from a total approach to put quality in every aspect of management. The name then spread throughout the United States Department of Defense.
TQM was popular from about 1985 to 1995. It has since been replaced by other methods (such as Six Sigma). TQM was a group of techniques used to improve an organization. It typically included:
- Company wide quality control ("TQM is not limited in its application"
- Continuous quality improvement
- Total customer satisfaction or service
- Total employee involvement
- Integrated process management
(See The Quality Book, by Greg Hutchins, published by QPE, Portland OR. 199
Although based on sound principles TQM ultimately faded away. It began to be thought of as a fad or hype that did not produce results. The reason for TQM's failure are discussed in Hutchins' book and in Juan's book, Juran on Quality by Design, J.M. Juran, The Free Press, 1992, ISBN 0-02-916683 7. Reason include the long time needed to see result (it can take up to six years, not a quick fx), poor definition the
goals, lack of top management buy-in, vague plans, fear (will I engineer myself out of a job?), confusion (TQM uses a mixture of techniques and principle that managers may not understand), and poor definition of responsibilities. RustySpear 00:44, 11 January 2006
- If that is true, General Creech is self-promoting. The phrase Total Quality Control was used by A. V. Feigenbaum as early as the 1951 publication of his book, Quality Control: Principles, Practice, and Administration.. In any case, Deming was teaching Shewhart's principles, and even he attributed much to Shewhart. Deming was a popularizer and probably better known than other pioneers because the Japanese quality revolution forced Americans to rediscover what had been developed here - something that was attributed to Deming, but also included Training Within Industry and the incredible Japanese advancements. Ehusman 01:04, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
== Spam or necessary? ==
Does anyone else see the attributions and two links to John Stark as useful or link spam? After all, why is an unknown consultant used as the definition reference? Ehusman 01:06, 5 March 2006 (UTC
TQM in my business
I have recently implemented the tqm philosphy and have been amazed at the improvements
The companies production has gone up 200% The sales of our product have increased dematactly The quality of my product has substantually improved to meet ISO 9001 standards Sexual harasment has reduced stightly my business is sex toys incorparated
Cheers mortem toys and co