 |
 |
|
 |
Two Hidden Gems of Continual Improvement
By Craig Cochran
With a pair of basic actions, you can lead your
organization to true long-term improvement.
Quality system practitioners are undoubtedly beginning to wrestle
with the issue of how to satisfy ISO 9001:2000's continual improvement
requirements. The primary requirement--to continually improve the effectiveness
of the quality management system--seems easy enough to meet, but it's
also very narrow. What about continual improvement of the entire organization's
effectiveness, as opposed to just the quality management system's effectiveness?
What about long-term competitive advantage? Aren't these the sorts of
results that organizations should really strive for? The good news is
that there are plenty of actions that will lead to continual improvement
of both the quality management system and overall organizational performance.
A couple of simple actions--we'll call them the two hidden gems of continual
improvement--will lead to both kinds of improvement. Best of all, both
actions are straightforward and intuitive.
The correct application of a corrective and preventive action system is
one of the opportunities organizations most often overlook. Revitalizing
this system will go a long way toward driving continual improvement.
The first action organizations can take to get the most out of their corrective
and preventive action systems is to actively investigate the root causes
of problems. And this means uncovering the real root causes, not simply
restating the symptoms. True root cause investigation requires discipline,
time and analytical effort, all of which are in short supply in most organizations.
Personnel may not even understand what the term "root cause"
means.
Two measures can get organizations moving in the right direction in this
regard. The first is to reject responses that don't indicate that true
root cause analysis has taken place. If a response seems suspect, it probably
is. Root cause responses that might indicate a lack of analysis include
"management oversight," "employee error," "failure
to follow procedure" and "unknown." These responses are
not guarantees that root cause analysis was neglected, but they are reasonably
significant hints. Remember to be diplomatic when sending corrective or
preventive actions back to the responsible parties.
Second, training may be required to encourage better root cause investigation.
One option is to hold a short course in root cause analysis and problem
solving. This course could easily be designed and presented in-house,
but there are also plenty of course providers who would be happy to do
it for you for a fee. Topics might include:
| • |
What exactly is a root cause? |
| • |
What are the techniques for determining root causes? |
| • |
What are typical steps for problem solving? |
| • |
What analytical tools are appropriate at each stage of problem solving? |
| • |
How do you conduct an effective meeting? |
| • |
How do you manage team dynamics in a problem solving environment? |
Introductory training of this kind could easily be carried out in eight
hours or less but would be a huge investment in your system's effectiveness.
Remember, root cause analysis and problem solving aren't competencies
that most people develop without training and a lot of practice.
Another tactic is to revisit the way your corrective and preventive actions
are recorded and tracked. How user-friendly is the system? If your organization
is using a paper-based system, the corrective action reports (CARs) and
preventive action reports (PARs) should each fit onto one side of a single
piece of paper. The longer and more complicated the form is, the less
receptive people will be to using it. Also consider the number of approval
signatures required. Do you really need more than one or two signatures?
Additional signatures can add days to the processing while contributing
little or nothing to the effectiveness of the actions being taken.
An electronic system is a viable option for many organizations. Any company
with an e-mail system can easily use this medium to transmit corrective
and preventive actions, even if the system consists of nothing more than
attaching a file to an e-mail message. This also makes the system more
usable for suppliers, subcontractors and others outside the organization.
The simple act of transmitting CARs and PARs as e-mail attachments will
save days over the old method of sticking them in interoffice envelopes
and hoping they don't get buried on somebody's desk.
The scope of the corrective and preventive action system should also be
reviewed. Is your organization applying the system as broadly as possible?
There may be opportunities left unexploited. Make sure that the following
categories are at least considered within your system:
| • |
Processing problems |
| • |
Internal nonconformities |
| • |
Late deliveries |
| • |
Internal audit findings |
| • |
Customer complaints--internal and external |
| • |
Warranty claims |
| • |
Customer returns |
| • |
Supplier and subcontractor problems |
| • |
Management review (especially for preventive actions) |
| • |
Other forums where data is analyzed (especially for preventive
actions) |
Some organizations use a two-tiered approach to corrective and preventive
actions. Specifically, individual problems are recorded and investigated
in a separate system, only to become official corrective or preventive
actions after the same problem has occurred multiple times, impact on
the customer is found to be significant or problems exceed a certain predetermined
dollar amount. This approach is fine as long as the criteria makes sense
and is rigorously enforced. Remember, ISO 9001:2000 requires that actions
be appropriate to the effects encountered, so make sure there's a logical
match. Not conducting an investigation combined with not taking action
is unsatisfactory regardless of how the organization structures its system.
Registered organizations should also check with their registrars, as some
have more conservative interpretations of when official corrective and
preventive action must be applied.
Verification of actions is one of the final steps in all corrective and
preventive action systems; it's also one of the most important steps.
Who should be tasked with verifying actions? People who can verify actions
must fulfill two basic criteria: They need to have enough independence
to review the actions in an objective manner, and they must have a basic
technical understanding of the issues underlying the actions. This doesn't
mean that the person verifying the action has to be an expert; it only
means that he or she must be able to grasp the technical effects of the
action. If we're dealing with a document control problem, the technical
aspects will probably be relatively minor. If we're talking about retrofitting
an extruder screw in order to improve the plasticity of a synthetic polymer,
the technical aspects might be more complicated. Use common sense.
Once it's determined who will be verifying the actions, what should verification
prove? At a minimum, three types of evidence should be sought:
| • |
Evidence that the action relates to the identified root
cause |
| • |
Evidence that the proposed action was actually implemented |
| • |
Evidence that the action was effective in preventing recurrence
of the problem. This, clearly, is the most important detail to verify.
Typically, this type of evidence might take some time to compile,
requiring that actions remain "open" longer than expected.
It's better that actions remain open and ultimately lead to true prevention
of recurrence than be closed in a hurry and achieve only nice, clean
records. |
Finally, broadcast the successes of your corrective and preventive action
systems. If the systems have worked especially well in investigating and
solving a problem, let everyone know about it. Make sure to give credit
to the individuals who were involved, too. When the systems are shown
to get positive results, personnel are more inclined to use them as improvement
tools on a regular basis. The ultimate goal is to develop a corrective
and preventive action system that works so well it becomes an "institution";
you will have reached this point when nobody is able to even imagine not
using the system to help drive the organization's success.
Simply by making sure their existing corrective and preventive action
system is working correctly, most organizations will find they have an
abundant source of evidence showing continual improvement.
People are what distinguish average organizations from great ones. The
difference is not so much in the caliber of personnel, but in the degree
to which the personnel are used to their full potential. One way of exploiting
the full range of human creativity and resourcefulness is to give personnel
a voice in recommending improvements. This can be achieved in a number
of ways, but one of the most typical is through a suggestion system.
Suggestion systems have almost become clichéd by now. They have
come and gone (and come again) in most organizations, and they are known
by a dizzying array of names and acronyms. However, the basic structure
of such a system is simple:
| • |
Provides a means for personnel to propose improvements (typically
a form) |
| • |
Evaluates the inputs |
| • |
Implements the practical ideas |
Unfortunately, suggestion systems normally have a useful lifespan of
two years or less because employees start getting the notion that their
ideas aren't quite as valued by the organization as they had originally
believed. After having personally managed a corporationwide suggestion
system for more than six years, I have assembled a list of key factors
that make the difference between a system that works over the long haul
and a system that is doomed to failure:
| • |
Ask personnel to focus on issues from the standpoint
of what the customer (internal or external) is concerned about. Focusing
on the customer will help keep inputs from straying too far into the
realm of the absurd. |
| • |
Acknowledge all input--even the crazy ideas. Acknowledgement doesn't
have to be anything more elaborate than saying: "Hey, we got
your suggestion. Thanks a lot. Unfortunately, cost and practicality
won't allow us to put shag carpeting in the production area as you've
suggested, but we appreciate the idea. Keep the ideas flowing."
Personnel usually don't mind having their ideas turned down if there's
a reason for it. Nobody, however, likes his or her ideas to disappear
into a black hole. |
| • |
Clearly define the scope of the system. Successful suggestion systems
are usually fairly narrow in scope: ideas, problems or potential problems
related to an employee's job, processes, equipment or tools that can
eventually affect the customer. This means that personnel problems,
policy disagreements, rumors, grievances, philosophical issues and
the like are not considered. While these can be important issues,
they aren't appropriate for a suggestion system. |
| • |
Make the system simple. The form shouldn't be more than half a page
long or have more than four spaces (name, date, department, idea/problem).
If the issue is more complicated, invite personnel to attach whatever
additional information is necessary, but don't impose a lot of bureaucracy
on the user at the onset. Don't make the evaluation process complicated
either: It usually doesn't take a huge committee of experts to separate
the practical ideas from the impractical. |
| • |
Keep first-line supervisors involved. Supervisors must believe that
they are part of the system instead of being circumvented by it. This
can be achieved by simply making the appropriate supervisor the first
point of contact with an idea. The supervisor can then prescreen the
suggestions for inappropriate issues and will feel involved in the
program. Supervisors will subconsciously (or consciously) kill the
system if they feel it compromises their ability to supervise or trumps
their authority. |
| • |
When the issue requires problem solving, get the employee involved
in the solution. Often, the person who submitted it knows the most
about the problem and its variables. Employees are also the most affected
by the issue at hand, so they're highly motivated to get results.
Be careful, though, about involving employees who aren't comfortable
with being involved or trained in the required methods and tools.
That's not to say everyone has to have a Ph.D. in problem solving,
but they certainly need to understand what brainstorming is before
they're asked to participate in such a session. |
| • |
Keep personnel apprised of the progress of their ideas' implementation.
Many ideas and solutions are long-term in nature. Some might even
require capital expenditures. In most cases, people don't mind waiting
for results as long as they know that progress is being made and the
issue hasn't been dropped. |
| • |
Inform management about the big successes. If the system isn't supported
at the top, it won't matter who else cares about it. The best way
to keep top management's support is to show them the benefits. The
more dramatically and frequently this is done, the better. |
| • |
Offer sincere recognition for the implemented ideas. Recognition
doesn't mean cash and prizes; it simply means a genuine and public
word of thanks from someone representing upper management. Obviously,
the higher the level of management providing the validation, the more
effect the thanks will have. One very effective method is to hold
a special recognition luncheon for everyone and then recognize personnel
in front of the group. However, don't go down the road of offering
cash and prizes unless the organization is prepared to deal with the
disgruntled employee who believes his or her wonderful idea was worth
at least as much as that of the other employee who received a much
bigger prize. With cash and prizes as incentives, the system might
quickly become an unmanageable monster. |
| • |
Periodically remind everyone that the system exists. At least once
a year, everyone should be retrained on the scope and procedures of
the suggestion system. People have short memories, and there are always
newfangled programs vying for our attention. |
| • |
When appropriate, link your suggestion system to your corrective
and preventive action system. This makes sense because problems that
are worth addressing at all are worth addressing in a structured,
documented manner. Linking the systems also serves to strengthen both
of them because it helps personnel understand how they relate to one
another. |
Both of these so-called gems--correct use of corrective and preventive
actions and getting all levels of personnel involved in initiating improvements--are
quite basic, but their simplicity and ease of application make them especially
appealing. If both initiatives are implemented, organizations should find
that they have a ready source of continual improvement that helps drive
success over the long term.
Craig Cochran |
About the Author:
Craig Cochran is a project manager with the Center for International
Standards & Quality, part of Georgia Tech's Economic Development
Institute. He's an RAB-certified QMS lead auditor and the author of
Customer Satisfaction: Tools, Techniques and Formulas for Success
and The Continual Improvement Process: From Strategy to the Bottom
Line, both available from Paton
Press. CISQ can be reached at (800) 859-0968 or on the Web at
www.cisq.gatech.edu. |
|
The Continual Improvement Process: From Strategy to the
Bottom Line
Continual improvement is not optional. It is a condition of survival.
Every organization must have systematic methods for making smart decisions,
attacking problems, improving its products and services, and repelling
competitors. Anything less than a systematic, disciplined approach
is leaving your future in the hands of chance. This book presents
a range of practical methods for driving continual improvement throughout
the organization. The starting point is leadership, with a clear definition
of mission, strategy, and key measures. These themes are then carried
throughout the enterprise, informing everyone on the issues that matter
most to survival and success. Strategic approaches for the deployment
of metrics, review of organizational performance, effective problem
solving, internal auditing, process orientation, and cultural development
are also described in detail. Practical tools and examples are provided
at every step of the way, enabling immediate implementation of the
concepts. This book is more than a guide to continual improvement;
it is a guide to leading and managing any organization. |
| 
Buy
Amazon
|
Customer Satisfaction: Tools, Techniques and Formulas
for Success
Customer satisfaction is the single most important issue affecting
organizational survival. Despite this fact, most companies have
no clue what their customers really think. They operate in a state
of ignorant bliss, believing that if their customers were anything
less than 100-percent satisfied they'd hear about it. Then they
are shocked when their customer base erodes and their existence
is threatened. The key to competitive advantage is proactively gauging
customer perceptions and aggressively acting on the findings. The
techniques for doing this don't have to be difficult, they just
have to be timely and effective. This book explores a range of practical
techniques for probing your customers' true level of satisfaction.
Tools and specific instructions for use are described in detail,
enabling the organization to get started immediately. The tools
range from very basic to highly sophisticated, providing a path
for organizations to follow as they progressively become more familiar
with the unique drivers of customer satisfaction. This is the perfect
reference for organizations that want to continually improve and
outpace their competition.
|
top of page |
|
