Re:Quality Integration?

["Mike Woolbert" <mawoolb@charter.net>]

Quality Improvement Department means many things to many organizations.  =
If QID is a bunch of inspectors, it is a failure from the start.

I think the role of the QID is to provide a source of profound knowledge =
and process improvement methodology. Many companies currently believe =
that having a Quality Improvement Department is a conspicuous cost, =
dedicated to "old news". Benchmarking with other companies reinforces =
the need to "integrate" quality. Generally, the "integration" is just =
code for eliminating QID line item associated costs, with the assumption =
that quality gains will be self-sustaining. Without a focus for =
systematic improvement, the pressure of budgets, appraisals and =
productions goals will cause a systematic elimination of improvement =
systems.

Usually management gets tired of statistics, root cause and not knowing =
who to blame. Quality processes are counter-intuitive and don't allow =
the wielding of overt power. Most managers are happier with poorer =
results and more personal power to blame the "guilty". What good is =
being boss, if you can have the employees quake in fear?>

It hurts to see a powerful positive force, like QID, which is paying its =
way many times over, eliminated.  Being an internal Quality Consultant =
is invigorating and addictive, but usually has a sad ending. Quality =
success leads to management complacency and elimination of the =
concept/group.

Quality is usually replaced by a string of quick fix, stupid management =
tricks.  As Deming said, "Survival is not a requirement.". =20

>Mike Woolbert