Re: Returned mail: Host unknown

["Brian F. Gregg, N04-3A, ext. 2724" <bgregg -at- FOXBORO -dot- COM>]

Ray Bruman writes:

>I looked for my "Quality" binder in my office but I must have
>left it at home.  There was a whole issue of Forbes (or was it
>Fortune?) devoted to the "Quality" movement in late 1992, perhaps
>September?  As you'd expect, there are a lot of expensive seminars
>and course-leaders making tons of money off preaching.  The real
>surprise was that some (I may have exaggerated with "most")
>Baldrige winners have completely abandoned the effort that won the prize.
>One was an electric utility in Florida, Florida Power and Light, I
>think it's called. Other case studies were fascinating, too.

There are some extenuating circumstances involving a couple of companies
that have won the Baldridge award. FP&L experienced a change in management.
The new management did not have the faith in the quality program that the
old one did. (BTW, they won the Deming award, not the Baldrige award.) It's
interesting to note that while their quality program was in place, they
were a profitable company. Since throwing it overboard, their
profitability has slipped. Another company that won the award subsequently
closed due to financial circumstances that arose *before* trying for the
award.

The debate about whether or not it pays to go for the Baldrige has prompted
some people to track the stock of the Baldrige winners. It turns out that,
as a whole, the stock outperforms any of the formal indices.

>Bottom line; good organizations and good employees don't need to
>be "trained" and bad ones can't be taught.  Deming himself refused
>to deal with any organization whose CEO wouldn't attend, which
>eliminated many hopeless companies.

Deming indeed refused to help any company whose CEO did not actively
participate in the company's quality program. It points out the importance
of a strategic quality plan. Ironically, this is what makes the Baldrige
assessment so valuable. So much of the scoring depends on top management's
performance, no company could hope to contend unless there is a strong
management commitment to total quality and to the employees.

I have a problem with the term "trained" in the above statement. Total
quality is more of a philosophical change. Although some training is
involved (i.e. process definition and control techniques), it is more
importantly a cultural change to approach improvement using structured
problem-solving techniques.

I hear your statement about expensive seminars and people making money off
of this. Some are good and some are worthless. I think as much can be gained
by reading Deming, Juran, et al and benchmarking some companies that have
achieved enormous success with total quality principles. There are many good
examples out there.


BG

-Quid, mei vexare?-