Re: More on Homer Sarasohn

["David Chase" <SSDCHAS@lottery.state.ca.us>]

In a message dated 06/12 9:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Jim Clauson 
<jim@jclauson.com> wrote:

<< For those of you that would like to understand in what kind of soil
Deming planted his seeds in post-WWII, you need to read about Homer
Sarasohn, one of only a handful of Americans that taught before Deming
in Japan.>>

------------

Here's a recent web article about Homer Sarasohn from Robert X. Cringely:

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20000525.html

Cringely writes on technology and computing issues; the article is one of 
Cringely's weekly postings on his web site. 

As a Deming admirer, I'm a bit reluctant to refer my fellow DENizens to this 
article, because - sacrilege! - he actually criticizes Deming for capitalizing 
on the work of Sarasohn. Still, the article provides some fascinating details 
on the challenges Sarasohn faced in establishing quality principles in 
Japanese manufacturing industries. Although we now tend to think that 
the words "Japan" and "quality" are practically synonymous, Sarasohn 
noted that it took decades for quality principles to take hold in Japan.

Speaking of quality - and what else do we ever speak of? - I'd like to get
the DEN perspective on the practice of avoiding using the word "quality"
in favor of such terms as: continuous improvement, process improvement,
Deming management methods, etc.

I recently attended a meeting of Quality Coordinators in California State 
government. The guest speaker was the Quality Manager for the North 
American Administrative Services operations of a major computer 
manufacturer. He talked about his company's long-standing commitment 
to quality. Over time, however, he reported that the Q-word had fallen out 
of favor - even in his company which uses Statistical Process Control 
methods every day. His company now uses the term "Business Leadership 
System" to encompass the firm's quality and customer-focused systems. 
He admitted that although he was the Quality Manager, he would be 
happy to find another term besides "Quality"  to use in his job title.

Several group members commented on the "Quality is a dirty word" 
phenomenon, and said that they resorted to using terms like "continuous 
improvement" to avoid turning off management and staff who think that TQM 
is a failed management fad. In my organization, we recently started a "Process 
Improvement" initiative, complete with references to the PDSA cycle. When I 
commented that this looked remarkably like the beginnings of a formal quality 
program, I was told that "we really don't want to use the quality word - we 
prefer process improvement. If we get a new agency Director, he or she may 
not support TQM. But they probably won't have any trouble with an effort to 
improve our processes."

Seems like we may have become ashamed of the Q-word - fearful of being 
seen as some kind of wild-eyed quality zealot, promoting a faded eighties 
organizational fad. 

How are you all dealing with this shame-of-quality  issue?
================================================================