Take Care of Your ‘Ugly Baby’

The job of a quality professional includes telling organizations they have "ugly babies" that need help. Ugly babies can be defined as dysfunctional quality management systems (QMS) or processes that create unproductive work for employees. Quality systems can be dysfunctional despite successful audits.

A QMS or process that is certified to a standard can operate in a dysfunctional state because the process or system, as designed, is unable to correct itself, and the related certification body is not strong enough to contribute to the effort. Certification bodies may or may not expose the root cause of dysfunction because they normally audit for compliance to a standard. A registrar actually can perpetuate dysfunction inadvertently if its auditors are inexperienced and the organization interprets their stamp of approval as meaning the organization’s processes and systems are in good shape.

A 2012 article in the Journal for Quality and Participation lists ways for a certification body to significantly improve its contribution to organizational quality. An organization won’t advance from certification if it pursues the certification for the piece of paper—neglecting the benefits of developing a real and effective QMS.

An organization representative often will call a quality professional for help with system dysfunction and describe symptoms that are overwhelming the organization’s efforts. This article outlines 10 of the most common symptoms of a dysfunctional QMS.

1. Frequent quality blips or surprises: In a dysfunctional QMS, firefighting is common and rewarded. The management style rewards heroes who can fight fires, and an organization usually just focuses on the problem of the day rather than identifying the root cause.

2. Ineffective preventive action: Preventive action is completely misunderstood in some dysfunctional systems. Process and product risk analyses may be performed, but no relationship between preventive action and risk analysis makes it into written procedures or practices. The connection between preventive action and continuous improvement also may be missing. Written procedures for corrective and preventive action are often combined, and the processes are not clearly differentiated.

3. Ineffective corrective action leading to repeat problems: Some problems are considered inherent in the business, and their root causes are therefore never addressed. Creative problem solving is deemed to be a luxury and not given the necessary effort or time. Weak responses to repetitive problems are accepted. Many customer complaints and internal problems recur. Problem solving consists of increased inspection and retraining of operators.

4. The quality function isn’t visible to upper management and has no role in strategic planning: Staff members with minimal or no professional quality training are hired and promoted. Quality technical certifications are not valued, understood or considered in job requirements. The quality function is still viewed as an inspection function in many organizations. The quality manager may not be an active participant in any upper management discussions or in strategic planning.

5. Change is resisted and takes too long: Change is not promoted as a positive way to improve. Maintaining the status quo of a formal quality system certification that looks good on the surface is deemed at risk if it’s changed. Change is initiated only if it is forced by a customer.

6. Management reviews are not productive or frequent enough, and they’re dreaded by employees: A thorough review of the organization’s progress, effectiveness and efficiency is one of the most valuable tools created by use of QMS standards, but review is not always fully used. To keep records clean for the registrar, real problems are not discussed. Reviews are viewed as boring, all-day punishments for participants.

7. Overwhelming documentation maintenance: Document reviews required by QMS standards are often dreaded by employees, and changes are avoided at all costs because of the tedious approval process. Computerized document control systems are built around existing documentation, and unused documentation is not eliminated after it is in the system.

Many procedures are written to describe what is perceived as an ideal system and may not reflect actual practice. Procedures may have been copied and adopted from another organization because that organization accomplished formal certification. At least one employee, maybe more, has a full-time job controlling and managing the documentation systems.

8. Tedious and voluminous record keeping: Extra records are kept so anyone can prove what happened. The general attitude is, "when in doubt, keep a record." No review of need for recordkeeping is conducted. Lean thinking is not applied to this area, and extensive paperwork is presumed to be a natural byproduct of quality system certification.

9. Not keeping up with customer growth: A customer’s quality requirements may change, but the changing quality requirements are not part of the supplier’s strategic plan. The quality system, in fact, is not considered in the organization’s overall strategy. A supplier organization may not be growing at the same rate as that of its customer and, therefore, is not prepared when the customer’s requirements change. Planning does not involve customer and supplier quality representatives.

10. Weak growth in process technology and market share: Upper management values personal computers and may have IT support, but applying process technology improvements generates a fear of needing additional expensive technical support. The value of process improvements not required by the customer is not clear to upper management. Computers in the office make managers believe their organization is technologically up-to-date.

Correcting dysfunction
Over time, formal quality system certification generally promotes consistency in products and processes, but it’s important to remember that certification provides a structure the organization must use to continually improve. Lack of improvement eventually results in dysfunction.

Correcting and improving system components, such as competencies, meeting content, communication methods, responsibilities, employee reward systems and participation levels, and using tools such as quality cost and lean thinking, can correct dysfunction and reduce unproductive work for employees. These are all helpful in providing opportunities to improve your ugly baby.

Article Reference: QM