TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT

CHANGE FOR
THE BETTER
C
ROGER BROOKS, ASTON entral to the installation of the kaizen approach is to reduce this
BUSINESS SCHOOL TQM philosophy into an variation in method (C), and the
organisation is kaizen. This application of statistical process control
literally translated means is excellent in highlighting this variation.
'change for the good' and is a philosophy Clearly, there must be a current best
of continual improvement. These are not way of performing a task and this needs
major miraculous leaps in performance, to be defined. Once this has been decided
Instead of generating but small easily accomplished incre­ it is the leaders responsibility to ensure
mental steps. Once these improvements compliance to this standard (C). As
improvement in leaps and have been made, they need to be compliance is achieved, so the variation
bounds, kaizen provides small, sustained. in method reduces, which is followed by
easily accomplished Many manufacturing managers a reduction in variation in the quality
incremental steps which need to consider this to be like pushing a ball up indicator that is being considered (A).
be both sustained and an incline and inserting a wedge into The next stage of kaizen has been
position to stop the ball from rolling back achieved - zero variation in the quality
continuously improved upon. between each upward push. There is also indicator. At this stage, any small
a common perception that the size of the improvements which can be applied to
organisation relates directly to the the process can be easily measured to
weight of the ball and that the current determine their effect before adoption
culture of the organisation is the gradient and so setting a new better way of
of the slope. By the use of simple working (D). The change is easy to
empowerment techniques, the slope can measure as there is no background noise
be reduced and the upward force upon from process variation. This incremental
the ball greatly increased. improvement (D), because not everyone
is immediately aware of it, causes
process variation and so the cycle of
continuous improvement continues.
THE COMPONENTS
OF KAIZEN Many companies have tried to
implement kaizen but failed at the
compliance to the best way of working
At its simplest, there are three main through poor ownership. Typically,
stages to kaizen and these are best standard operating procedures (SOP) are
described in Fig. 1. written which define the current best
If we consider some type of quality way of working within the BS5750
indicator in any function or team, such framework, but the way in which these
as scrap, rework or pound value process are written and their content is
loss, there will be a variation (B). This inappropriate to compliance. Often, SOPS
can arise from many causes, such as a are written by the process experts, such
lack of standard practice. In this case, it as R&D, passed to operations and left to
can range from different approaches to gather dust. The R&D function then
problem-solving to different ways of becomes immersed in the process line
setting up process machinery. One of the and dragged from its main
first steps in the achievement of a full responsibility. The same occurs with

AUGUST 1993 51
TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT

APPLICATION OF
EMPOWERMENT
Before the best method can be
practised, it needs to be defined and a
more appropriate method than the SOP is
the use of process manuals in a process
improvement framework (Fig. 3).
Each manual covers an area of
operations (in the case of manufacturing
a stand-alone part of the plant) and
details in intimate detail each process
step in the setting up, running and
shutting down of each operation. This is
not only in terms of the next process
step, but why it is needed to provide the
essential contextual view. As such detail
is needed, cross-functional teams compile
the manual's skeleton, but it is the full
cross functional teams - a 'star chamber' way but do not necessarily follow it - operations team (e.g., operatives to
forms and those outside it have little region C to region B. Ownership and foremen) who place the detail into the
motivation to support the kaizen supervisory support moves the parties to manual. The empowerment process is
implementation. Also, the format of the region A. Now there has been a step now under way as everyone is involved
SOPs is such that a contextual view, improvement and a reduction in the in the process and must now think in a
essential if process variation does occur variation of the quality indicator. By detailed process step fashion. This
and needs to be solved, is missing. The moving from A to D to C to B and so on additionally fosters the process
matter is further complicated because a we have achieved full kaizen. orientation needed for kaizen. The review
SOP is results oriented and not process
oriented - it is a sequence of instructions The improvements (region D) can come of the detail and the team selecting the
to follow to produce a product. These can from any area and how they are achieved best method produces motivated teams
be considered as process steps, but not to is widely practised and understood (not individuals within a team) with
the intimate level required if kaizen is to (problem-solving, Ishikawa, CEDAC, Pareto, process ownership and group agreement
be successful. quality circles). The dissemination and on the current best way.
ownership needed to move from C to A Additionally, the process of defining
A solution which is being adopted by (even though ownership helps in region D) the 'best' right way asks fundamental
some innovative companies is the use of rests upon empowerment questions about the process which
technology and empowerment tech­
niques to drive kaizen. The central issue
of standardisation and process
improvement has been shown to yield
cost savings well into seven figures,
particularly with cultures which are well
established and seen to have a high
inertia.
The philosophy can be divided into
four regions, as shown in Fig. 2.
If we have two individuals or teams
(say in operations) which are both
following the current best method (zero
quality indicator variation such as scrap)
then we can say that both individuals or
teams know all of the method and
practice it - they are in region A, the
same region as in Fig. 1. If a process
improvement is introduced, particularly
from an external source (say R&D), then it
is likely that neither individual or team
will be initially aware of it and so cannot
practice it - region D. By training in this
new process improvement, both parties
eventually become aware of the new best

52 AUGUST 1993

generates process improvement ideas.
These need to be trapped and presented
to the process improvement teams
allocated to each stand-alone part of the
process. Also, the data capture removes
areas of the process which are seen as
areas of 'dark magic'. This increases
flexibility and reduces an individual's
expert power.
Shift rotation and allocated team
responsibility to each stand-alone part
of the process ensures total ownership
and continual improvement, as shown
in Fig. 4. Shift 1, which inherits the shift 2
process manual for improvement, is
motivated to improve it and not degrade
it as shift 2 will inherit the process
manual back again at a later date.
Using the workforce, the process
manual can be produced in many
different ways, such as:
• The use of paper only.
• The use and combination of
multimedia (some authoring
packages are ideal for this).
• The use of stepped manuals (more to achieving process improvement.
than one manual exists in varying
depths of detail).
Clearly, with complex process flows the have achieved the following objectives:
tracking and modification systems are
ideally suited to multimedia.
The selection and training of trainers
provides the mechanism for the current
best way to be passed to all who will
need to practice it. Following the
empowerment philosophy, trainers can • Subliminal detailed process
be encouraged to define their own skill
shortfalls and, therefore, requirements.
For example, a trainer may need to be • The generation of a large quantity of
trained in not only training skills, but
AUGUST 1993
TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT
also facilitation skills if that individual is
to take the chair role in the process
improvement teams.
Such ownership and empowerment of
individuals to define the current best
way and improve upon it enables on-line
trainers and supervisors to easily achieve
compliance. In some cases, managers'
prior perceptions of some of the people
which work for them have been
shattered by extraordinary commitment
Exploratory research into companies
which have adopted this route has
shown that the use of process manuals
• Empowerment to define and improve
processes.
• Definition of process steps to an
intimate level across departments,
functions and teams.
orientation to all levels within the
organisation.
improvement ideas.
• Enhancement of compliance to the
best method at all levels.
These objectives are the corner stones
of kaizen, but there are also other
strategic benefits to the organisation.
The training roles and the organisation
structure which is set up can be
immediately applied to any future
initiatives (be this in the operations area
or elsewhere) as the trainers are, in effect,
change agents. This is particularly suited
to the definition of cells and or strategic
business units where local
accountabilities and ownership are
essential.
EXTERNAL VIEWS
This technique has produced a great
deal of excitement within those
companies which have adopted it. The
technique which has found immediate
application to operations is finding
applications in other functions where
value added processes need to be
understood and improved. A
Government Training Body has awarded
the pioneers of this a National Training
Award for the innovative methods and
the way that it has brought benefits to
that company. □
Roger Brooks is a member of the market-driven
quality management research group at Aston
Business School. He may be contacted at Aston
Business School, Aston University, Aston Triangle,
Birmingham B4 7ET, UK (Tel: (021) 3593011,
Fax:(021)3334313).
53