The input-output diagram for the quality control process. 

Contexts in source publication

Context 1

... companies discovered that the West was unwilling to buy their products—Japan had acquired a reputation for making and exporting shoddy goods. The inability to sell became an alarm signal and a stimulus for launching the Japanese quality revolution during the 1950s. Within a few decades, that revolution propelled Japan into a position of world leadership in quality. This quality leadership in turn enabled Japan to become an economic superpower. It was a phenomenon without precedent in industrial history. The cumulative effect of these massive forces has been to “move quality to center stage.” Such a massive move logically should have stimulated a corresponding response—a revolution in managing for quality. However, it was difficult for companies to recognize the need for such a revolution—they lacked the necessary alarm signals. Technological measures of quality did exist on the shop floors, but managerial measures of quality did not exist in the boardrooms. Thus, except for Japan, the needed quality revolution did not start until very late in the twentieth century. To make this revolution effective throughout the world, economies will require many decades—the entire twenty-first century. Thus, while the twentieth century has been the “century of productivity,” the twenty-first century will be known as the “century of quality.” The failure of the West to respond promptly to the need for a revolution in quality led to a widespread crisis. The 1980s then witnessed quality initiatives being taken by large numbers of companies. Most of these initiatives fell far short of their goals. However, a few were stunningly successful and produced the lessons learned and role models that will serve as guides for the West in the decades ahead. Lessons Learned. Companies that were successful in their quality initiatives made use of numerous strategies. Analysis shows that despite differences among the companies, there was much commonality—a lengthy list of strategies was common to most of the successful companies. These common strategies included: Customer focus: Providing customer satisfaction became the chief operating goal. Quality has top priority: This was written into corporate policies. Strategic quality planning: The business plan was opened up to include planning for quality. Quality Control Defined. “Quality control” is a universal managerial process for conducting operations so as to provide stability—to prevent adverse change and to “maintain the status quo.” To maintain stability, the quality control process evaluates actual performance, compares actual performance to goals, and takes action on the difference. Quality control is one of the three basic managerial processes through which quality can be managed. The others are quality planning and quality improvement,. The Juran trilogy diagram (Figure 2) shows the interrelation of these processes. Figure 2 is used also to describe the relationships between quality planning, quality improvement, and quality control and the fundamental managerial processes in total quality management. What is important for this section is to concentrate on the two “zones of control.” In Figure 2 we can easily see that although the process is in control in the middle of the chart, we are running the process at an unacceptable level of waste. What is necessary here is not more control but improvement—actions to change the level of performance. After the improvements have been made, a new level of performance has been achieved. Now it is important to establish new controls at this level to prevent the performance level from deteriorating to the previous level or even worse. This is indicated by the second zone of control. The term “control of quality” emerged early in the twentieth century (Radford 1917, 1922). The concept was to broaden the approach to achieving quality, from the then-prevailing after- the-fact inspection, to what we now call “defect prevention.” For a few decades, the word “control” had a broad meaning which included the concept of quality planning. Then came events which narrowed the meaning of “quality control.” The “statistical quality control” movement gave the impression that quality control consisted of using statistical methods. The “reliability” movement claimed that quality control applied only to quality at the time of test but not during service life. In the United States, the term “quality control” now often has the narrow meaning defined previously. The term “total quality management” (TQM) is now used as the all-embracing term. Their “total quality control” is roughly equivalent to our term “total quality management.” In 1997 the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE) adopted the term total quality management (TQM) to replace total quality control (TQC) to more closely align themselves with the more common terminology used in the rest of the world. The quality control process is one of the steps in the overall quality planning sequence,. Figure 3 shows the input-output features of this step. In Figure 3 the input is operating process features developed to produce the product features required to meet customer needs. The output consists of a system of product and process controls which can provide stability to the operating process. Quality control and quality assurance have much in common. Each evaluates performance. Each compares performance to goals. Each acts on the difference. However they also differ from each other. Quality control has as its primary purpose to maintain control. Performance is evaluated during operations, and performance is compared to goals during operations. The resulting information is received and used by the operating forces. Quality assurance’s main purpose is to verify that control is being maintained. Performance is evaluated after operations, and the resulting information is provided to both the operating forces and others who have a need to know. Others may include plant, functional, or senior management; corporate staffs; regulatory bodies; customers; and the general public. The Feedback Loop . Quality control takes place by use of the feedback loop. A generic form of the feedback loop is shown in Figure 4. The progression of steps in Figure 4 is as follows: 1. A sensor is “plugged in” to evaluate the actual quality of the control subject—the product or process feature in question. The performance of a process may be determined directly by evaluation of the process feature, or indirectly by evaluation of the product feature—the product “tells” on the process. 2. The sensor reports the performance to an umpire. 3. The umpire also receives information on what is the quality goal or standard. 4. The umpire compares actual performance to standard. If the difference is too great, the umpire energizes an actuator. 5. The actuator stimulates the process (whether human or technological) to change the performance so as to bring quality into line with the quality goal. The feedback loop is a universal. It is fundamental to any problem in quality control. It applies to all types of operations, whether in service industries or manufacturing industries, whether for profit or not. It applies to all levels in the hierarchy, from the chief executive officer to the work force, inclusive. However, there is wide variation in the nature of the elements of the feedback loop. In Figure 5 a simple flowchart is shown describing the quality control process with the simple universal feedback loop imbedded. The Process . In all of the preceding discussion we have assumed a process. This may also be human or technological or both. It is the means for producing the product features, each of which is a control subject. All work is done by a process which consists of an input, labor, technology, procedures, energy, materials, and output. For a more complete discussion of process. The so-called Deming Chain Reaction was actually borrowed from a model that Walter Shewhart developed. He probably borrowed the idea from another thinker. Basically the idea was for management to move away from thinking about quality as a desirable outcome, to thinking about quality as a competitive strategy. Competitive strategy as a concept has been around for centuries. A person selling an item similar to that sold by another can compete on price, by selling it for less money. Perhaps the seller may try to compete by adding extras, gift-wrapping, for example. Technical companies compete by being technology leaders and being on the cutting edge of new developments. There are no end to methods to compete. But some methods are more effective in the long run than others. It is not a mistake that Deming’s first published book on the subject was entitled “On Quality, Productivity and Competitive Position”. In the book, he sets forth the reasons why emphasis on quality leads to productivity improvement and how that is a very effective competitive strategy in the long run. Phil Crosby in the early 80s in his book, “Quality is Free” pointed out that improving quality lowered cost. But Deming had shown this to the Japanese 30 years earlier. And, Deming pointed out the benefits of developing a competitive strategy based on quality. One of the problems in talking about quality is that many people have pre-conceived notions of quality is. For some it is meeting specifications. Joseph Juran defines it as ‘meeting customer requirements’. Zero Defects was Crosby’s nostrum, but is really just another way of saying quality is meeting specfications. Deming’s ideas are much broader than that and are, perhaps, best captured with the phrase ‘continual improvement’. This term connotes the ongoing nature of the strategy. According to Deming, quality is not a state to be achieved in manufacturing, but is, rather, an ongoing company-wide effort at continual improvement. What Bill Conway called “the process – the way everyone thinks, talks, works and acts every day.” After all the ...

Context 2

... their products—Japan had acquired a reputation for making and exporting shoddy goods. The inability to sell became an alarm signal and a stimulus for launching the Japanese quality revolution during the 1950s. Within a few decades, that revolution propelled Japan into a position of world leadership in quality. This quality leadership in turn enabled Japan to become an economic superpower. It was a phenomenon without precedent in industrial history. The cumulative effect of these massive forces has been to “move quality to center stage.” Such a massive move logically should have stimulated a corresponding response—a revolution in managing for quality. However, it was difficult for companies to recognize the need for such a revolution—they lacked the necessary alarm signals. Technological measures of quality did exist on the shop floors, but managerial measures of quality did not exist in the boardrooms. Thus, except for Japan, the needed quality revolution did not start until very late in the twentieth century. To make this revolution effective throughout the world, economies will require many decades—the entire twenty-first century. Thus, while the twentieth century has been the “century of productivity,” the twenty-first century will be known as the “century of quality.” The failure of the West to respond promptly to the need for a revolution in quality led to a widespread crisis. The 1980s then witnessed quality initiatives being taken by large numbers of companies. Most of these initiatives fell far short of their goals. However, a few were stunningly successful and produced the lessons learned and role models that will serve as guides for the West in the decades ahead. Lessons Learned. Companies that were successful in their quality initiatives made use of numerous strategies. Analysis shows that despite differences among the companies, there was much commonality—a lengthy list of strategies was common to most of the successful companies. These common strategies included: Customer focus: Providing customer satisfaction became the chief operating goal. Quality has top priority: This was written into corporate policies. Strategic quality planning: The business plan was opened up to include planning for quality. Quality Control Defined. “Quality control” is a universal managerial process for conducting operations so as to provide stability—to prevent adverse change and to “maintain the status quo.” To maintain stability, the quality control process evaluates actual performance, compares actual performance to goals, and takes action on the difference. Quality control is one of the three basic managerial processes through which quality can be managed. The others are quality planning and quality improvement,. The Juran trilogy diagram (Figure 2) shows the interrelation of these processes. Figure 2 is used also to describe the relationships between quality planning, quality improvement, and quality control and the fundamental managerial processes in total quality management. What is important for this section is to concentrate on the two “zones of control.” In Figure 2 we can easily see that although the process is in control in the middle of the chart, we are running the process at an unacceptable level of waste. What is necessary here is not more control but improvement—actions to change the level of performance. After the improvements have been made, a new level of performance has been achieved. Now it is important to establish new controls at this level to prevent the performance level from deteriorating to the previous level or even worse. This is indicated by the second zone of control. The term “control of quality” emerged early in the twentieth century (Radford 1917, 1922). The concept was to broaden the approach to achieving quality, from the then-prevailing after- the-fact inspection, to what we now call “defect prevention.” For a few decades, the word “control” had a broad meaning which included the concept of quality planning. Then came events which narrowed the meaning of “quality control.” The “statistical quality control” movement gave the impression that quality control consisted of using statistical methods. The “reliability” movement claimed that quality control applied only to quality at the time of test but not during service life. In the United States, the term “quality control” now often has the narrow meaning defined previously. The term “total quality management” (TQM) is now used as the all-embracing term. Their “total quality control” is roughly equivalent to our term “total quality management.” In 1997 the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE) adopted the term total quality management (TQM) to replace total quality control (TQC) to more closely align themselves with the more common terminology used in the rest of the world. The quality control process is one of the steps in the overall quality planning sequence,. Figure 3 shows the input-output features of this step. In Figure 3 the input is operating process features developed to produce the product features required to meet customer needs. The output consists of a system of product and process controls which can provide stability to the operating process. Quality control and quality assurance have much in common. Each evaluates performance. Each compares performance to goals. Each acts on the difference. However they also differ from each other. Quality control has as its primary purpose to maintain control. Performance is evaluated during operations, and performance is compared to goals during operations. The resulting information is received and used by the operating forces. Quality assurance’s main purpose is to verify that control is being maintained. Performance is evaluated after operations, and the resulting information is provided to both the operating forces and others who have a need to know. Others may include plant, functional, or senior management; corporate staffs; regulatory bodies; customers; and the general public. The Feedback Loop . Quality control takes place by use of the feedback loop. A generic form of the feedback loop is shown in Figure 4. The progression of steps in Figure 4 is as follows: 1. A sensor is “plugged in” to evaluate the actual quality of the control subject—the product or process feature in question. The performance of a process may be determined directly by evaluation of the process feature, or indirectly by evaluation of the product feature—the product “tells” on the process. 2. The sensor reports the performance to an umpire. 3. The umpire also receives information on what is the quality goal or standard. 4. The umpire compares actual performance to standard. If the difference is too great, the umpire energizes an actuator. 5. The actuator stimulates the process (whether human or technological) to change the performance so as to bring quality into line with the quality goal. The feedback loop is a universal. It is fundamental to any problem in quality control. It applies to all types of operations, whether in service industries or manufacturing industries, whether for profit or not. It applies to all levels in the hierarchy, from the chief executive officer to the work force, inclusive. However, there is wide variation in the nature of the elements of the feedback loop. In Figure 5 a simple flowchart is shown describing the quality control process with the simple universal feedback loop imbedded. The Process . In all of the preceding discussion we have assumed a process. This may also be human or technological or both. It is the means for producing the product features, each of which is a control subject. All work is done by a process which consists of an input, labor, technology, procedures, energy, materials, and output. For a more complete discussion of process. The so-called Deming Chain Reaction was actually borrowed from a model that Walter Shewhart developed. He probably borrowed the idea from another thinker. Basically the idea was for management to move away from thinking about quality as a desirable outcome, to thinking about quality as a competitive strategy. Competitive strategy as a concept has been around for centuries. A person selling an item similar to that sold by another can compete on price, by selling it for less money. Perhaps the seller may try to compete by adding extras, gift-wrapping, for example. Technical companies compete by being technology leaders and being on the cutting edge of new developments. There are no end to methods to compete. But some methods are more effective in the long run than others. It is not a mistake that Deming’s first published book on the subject was entitled “On Quality, Productivity and Competitive Position”. In the book, he sets forth the reasons why emphasis on quality leads to productivity improvement and how that is a very effective competitive strategy in the long run. Phil Crosby in the early 80s in his book, “Quality is Free” pointed out that improving quality lowered cost. But Deming had shown this to the Japanese 30 years earlier. And, Deming pointed out the benefits of developing a competitive strategy based on quality. One of the problems in talking about quality is that many people have pre-conceived notions of quality is. For some it is meeting specifications. Joseph Juran defines it as ‘meeting customer requirements’. Zero Defects was Crosby’s nostrum, but is really just another way of saying quality is meeting specfications. Deming’s ideas are much broader than that and are, perhaps, best captured with the phrase ‘continual improvement’. This term connotes the ongoing nature of the strategy. According to Deming, quality is not a state to be achieved in manufacturing, but is, rather, an ongoing company-wide effort at continual improvement. What Bill Conway called “the process – the way everyone thinks, talks, works and acts every day.” After all the nonsense is stripped away, the fact is that Japanese ...