Re: YOU are responsible, even when YOU are not to blame (long)

[Andrew Plato <gilliankitty -at- yahoo -dot- com>]

--- SteveFJong -at- aol -dot- com wrote:

> I won't argue with you about the central importance of consistency to 
> quality. Rather than make the effort to read any of the URLs I provided, you 
> seem to have repeated your opinion, so I won't waste time providing more; 
> I'll simply state that you don't know what you're talking about and move on.

I know exactly what you're talking about. I have run a company for a decade.
And I have worked inside 100 or more organizations. I've seen places that work
well and places that don't. And by and large, the root cause of why some
organizations are a success and others are not, is the people working there. 

Process, methods, and theories from some author are only as good as the people
who use them. Hence, the skill, dedication, and intelligence of the people
working at a place are the single largest factor in an organization's success. 

You could build processes all your life until your death, and those processes
will never overcome the scalding intensity of human stupidity. 

> You seem to lack knowledge of root-cause analysis or any other 
> quality-management technique. Ignorance is not a point of view. I'll simply 
> say that it's one of the tools for quality improvement; that I've 
> demonstrated how it would work in an analysis of a trivial tech-writing 
> problem (typos in documents) and a significant one (late projects); and that 
> the results of such methods speak for themselves. I can't make you drink. But
> 
> the true irony is that you actually are agreeing with a tenet of Deming's 
> teachings: that process, the responsibility of management, is almost entirely
> 
> responsible for quality problems.

Its a job, not a religion. The ideas Deming (et al) offer and useful, but they
are not the end-all-be-all of business. There is a lot more to running a
business than religiously building processes and mandating quality initiatives.


> I, on the other hand, do *not* feel that people are "irresponsible, lazy, 
> ignorant morons."

Not all people are morons, just most. About 50% of the working populace is lazy
and ineffectual. Another 25% are competent but undermotivated. 20% are
motivated and capable and 5% are break-out leaders and innovators. Those odds
vary, and I am sure I said different numbers in the past. 

> No one believes Crosby at first, but he's done pretty well for 
> himself. (He was originally the quality director at ITT, which has a lot of 
> white-collar components; he saved them hundreds of millions of dollars a 
> year.) 

Is this a religion or a business method? 

Andrew Plato 

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Purchase RoboHelp X3 in April and receive a $100 mail-in 
rebate, plus FREE RoboScreenCapture and WebHelp Merge Module.  
Order here: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l/


   Help celebrate TECHWR-L's 10th Anniversary starting this month!
Check out the contests at http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/special/contests/
Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you, happy birthday TECHWR-L....

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.