AUTHOR(s): Cocheu, Ted TITLE(s): Building a leadership foundation for quality. Summary: Human resources development (HRD) professionals can contribute to their organizations' quality efforts by facilitating the learning of senior managers about the concept of quality. Often, top executives stand in the way of improvement because of their tendency to resist training, lack of understanding of the concept, inappropriate delegation, fondness for quick fixes, and dismissal of the expertise of their employees. HRD practitioners can help senior managers overcome these obstacles with the use of a four-step program. The first step is to encourage executives make a quality assessment of their organization in terms of such factors as customer service, competitiveness, employee satisfaction and supplier feedback. The second step involves encouraging these managers to develop a shared vision and philosophy for improvement. The third step is helping top management develop a quality-management system. The final step involves assisting executives in establishing goals and developing strategies and plans. Training & Development p51(8) Sept 1993 v47 n9 DESCRIPTORS: Executives, Training of_Technique Total quality management_Training HRD can play an important role in helping senior managers lead their organizations to improvement. Here is a four-step model for guiding HRD practitioners in educating executives about quality. On the first day of a recent training-for-quality conference, nearly 400 of us who participated were just finishing lunch. The keynote speaker had presented a half-dozen slides when he stopped to ask, "How many of you feel you have the commitment of top managers for quality improvement in your organizations?" We looked around with anticipation. About 30 or 40 hands went up, only 10 percent of the group. That informal poll served to confirm my own chilling observation as a presenter at two other recent conferences. At both conferences, the pervasive theme--and the subject of great frustration to trainers and quality professionals--was helplessness. That feeling came from being expected to provide training to support quality initiatives that executives don't fully understand and to which they're not committed. Having worked on several quality-improvement efforts in different industries during the past 10 years, I had hoped we'd made more progress regarding managerial commitment. Every quality and management guru--from W. Edwards Deming to Tom Peters--agrees on at least one point: The leadership for quality improvement must come from the executive suite. Bringing about fundamental organizational change isn't a bottom-up proposition. Yet, here we are still bemoaning the fact that our leaders aren't leading. Having focused so intently on the issue of leadership at the conferences, I wondered if the following scenario deserves some consideration. Do we sit waiting for senior managers to show their commitment and involvement, while they sit waiting for employees below them to make change happen? Is it possible that senior executives believe they've charted a new course and directed the needed changes and that they're frustrated with others for not taking the initiative and showing leadership? Perhaps we have an interesting stalemate, in which everyone is waiting for everyone else to make the next move. In the meantime, precious seconds tick away on the time bomb of escalating competition and consumer revolt. Is this confusing and frustrating? No doubt. Is it a challenge for HRD professionals to influence the destinies of their organizations? Absolutely. HRD has proclaimed that the commitment of senior managers is the key to improvement. HRD practitioners have said that their ability to function and succeed as trainers depends on that commitment. It follows then that the challenge for HRD is to figure out what it can do to help bring about managers, commitment. Executive dilemmas Albert Einstein said that "problems can't be solved by the same thinking that created them." His observation has important implications for people who lead organizations. Leaders have to accept the fact that current thinking and past actions have contributed to the problems they face. And they must change their thinking if they want to get different results. The most stubborn barriers to organizational improvement may be senior managers, reluctance to admit their own culpability for existing problems and their resistance to educating themselves about managing for quality. Also, senior managers, limited experience and training in managing quality can be an obstacle to their participation in quality efforts. As Joseph Juran said, "Executives may have experience in managing business and finance, but not necessarily in managing quality." As HRD practitioners, we can wait for executives to learn about quality and leadership on their own, or we can seize the opportunity to facilitate their learning. Of course, anyone who has tried to help senior managers learn knows the task is fraught with dilemmas. Those who hope to carry out an educational mission and pave the way for improvement must first understand the dilemmas involved and how to avoid or overcome them. Resistance. Senior managers tend to be busy people. They may not have the time or inclination to engage in education. They're paid a lot of money to know what to do already. It makes them uncomfortable to admit that they might not know what to do. Also, executives feel inundated by the daily demands of running a business; they don't have much time to think about education. Lack of understanding. Many executives suffer from a classic dilemma. They think they understand something when they really don't. Consequently, they don't realize that they don't understand. That dilemma is intensified by their typically strong personalities and by corporate politics. It's difficult to tell a boss and his or her bosses that they don't understand something, especially when they think they do. Inappropriate delegation. Many executives make the mistake of delegating quality to subordinates, as they would delegate routine business tasks. Traditionally, managers are taught that they must be good delegators in order to carry out their responsibilities effectively. The problem is that improvement requires leadership, and leadership can't be delegated. Quick fixes. Deming refers to one of the main obstacles to improvement as managers, "hope for instant pudding." When managers delegate the responsibility for improvement, the desire for quick fixes is encouraged. But in the world of quality, patience and long-term commitment--sometimes uncommon in business--are virtues. Dismissal of internal expertise. When it comes to improvement, the adage, "It's difficult to be a prophet in your own land" is especially true. Many executives have the same blind spot; they don't utilize the expertise of their own employees. In other words, familiarity breeds contempt. Overcoming the barriers Helping executives learn requires creative methods. One approach is to replace training with learning. Though many executives resist being "trained," they usually can appreciate the opportunity to learn on their own terms. Remember that learning is the objective; training is only a means to achieving it. And training may not be the most effective means for executives to learn. Executive education is a doing/learning cycle of examining information, coming to conclusions, taking actions in response to perceived problems and opportunities, seeing what happens, and changing the course of action until desired results are achieved. As HRD professionals, we are responsible for helping to facilitate, focus, and speed up the doing/learning process whenever and wherever possible. Juran warns that senior managers may be reluctant to accept insiders and subordinates as teachers. To get an improvement effort off the ground, it may be necessary to hire an external consultant. Rather than resisting that fact of life, direct your energies toward selecting an appropriate consultant--one who will work well in the organization's culture and with the people involved. It's important to educate executives off site, away from the office and every hiccup of the business. Resist the temptation to deal with quality as part of regularly scheduled staff meetings. Learning requires an environment that is conducive to open dialogue, reflection, and future-oriented thinking--difficult things to attain in the midst of the daily hubbub. A resort-type setting within a short flight from the office seems to work best. The learning objectives should be tangible. According to adult-learning theory, the best way to get people's attention is to appeal to their self-interest. Most people are happy to learn how to do things more effectively if they already think those things are important. In educating executives, it's best to avoid discussing learning outcomes and focus instead on accomplishing executives, goals. Tangible outcomes tend to build support for learning and lower resistance to it. It's critical to establish a results-driven format. Bright, high-energy, action-oriented executives get antsy when discussions don't lead immediately to conclusions and decisions. They have a lot on their minds and are constantly under the pressure of many responsibilities. Senior managers hate feeling that their time is being wasted. Meetings should be structured to achieve conclusions decisions, and action plans. Executives are more willing to listen to people whom they perceive to be at their own levels or higher. Therefore, it's essential to choose appropriate speakers and presenters. It's more effective to have executives from companies with reputations for quality express their views than it is to have internal staff or consultants speak. For example, winners of the Malcolm Baldrige Award can share "war stories" to help executives consider alternative points of view. Replace "total-quality management" with "improvement." In the same way that learning is the objective and training is a means, improvement is the objective and TQM is a means. But TQM may not always be the most effective approach for achieving rapid and continuous improvement. Two years ago, many attendees of quality conferences were from manufacturing businesses. But at two recent quality conferences, the attendees were from financial, health-care, retail, and government organizations. To those people, manufacturing-oriented terms such as "quality" and "defects" don't have much meaning Though people might struggle in trying to apply the term "quality" to their particular businesses and functions, they easily see the potential value of "improving" what they do. And improvement isn't limited to quality; it also pertains to all of the elements of a business that affect organizational viability. Another reason to replace TQM with improvement is that TQM refers to a specific, programmatic approach that may not be appropriate in every situation. Organizations can and do achieve significant, lasting improvement without shrouding their efforts in the cloak of TQM. The last thing some organizations need is another program. Instead, they need to know how to manage themselves to achieve rapid, continuous improvement. Many executives cast a cynical eye on people who try to sell them on the latest TQM approach. But those same executives may welcome the counsel of people who can help them cope with the many trials and tribulations that beset their organizations. The executive learning process There is no universal formula for helping executives gain the understanding and commitment they need to lead improvement efforts. Each organization has its own history, culture, and personality. Those factors should be considered when structuring the learning process for senior managers. It isn't possible to prescribe the exact timing and duration of the learning activities, but the following model can help executives learn by doing, while it builds a foundation of leadership for improvement. The foundation involves developing a shared vision and philosophy on quality as well as defining improvement goals, a viable strategy, and a framework for implementation. Step 1: The quality position. The objective of step 1 is to develop the creative tension needed to stimulate a vision for improvement. Such tension is created when people realize there are significant discrepancies between the way things are and the way they'd like them to be. Encourage executives to make a quality assessment of the organization. They should ask questions in the following areas: * Customer service. "What do customers like and dislike about working with us?" "Can we count on their continued loyalty?" "How will customers, requirements continue to evolve?" "What will they require from suppliers?" * Competitive analysis. "How do we compare with competitors, in terms of quality, reliability, service, time-to-market, technology, pricing, and perceived value?" "What are our strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats?" * Cost of nonconformance. "What does it cost us to do business at our current level of quality?" "How much could we save by doing things more efficiently?" "How much more competitive could our pricing be?" How much more could we return to investors if our costs were lower?" * Employee satisfaction. "How motivated and committed are our employees?" "To what extent do they feel they can effect positive change?" "How much do they trust senior managers?" "Do they think managers care about their ideas, desires, and concerns?" * Supplier feedback. "How many of our quality problems do we bring on ourselves through the way we work with suppliers?" "What could we do to work more effectively with suppliers to help them improve their quality, timeliness, and pricing?" Step 2: A shared vision and philosophy for improvement. Executives should conduct a no-holds-barred discussion of where they think they currently stand in terms of the above areas. Then they should consider whether they liked what they saw when they looked in the mirror. If the answer is yes, there's no need to go further. They have no compelling need to change. If the answer is no, then the facilitator should ask them what they didn't like. How would they like to be seen in the eyes of customers, employees, and suppliers? How would they like to be positioned relative to competitors? What would be a more viable cost/price structure? What is the future they'd like to see? Their heartfelt responses to such questions may plant seeds of motivation that can bloom into the executive vision and commitment that is needed to stimulate the concern and imagination of others in the organization. The next phase of this step-developing a philosophy of quality that represents senior managers, values--goes to the heart of Deming's concern for "constancy of purpose." Executives need the opportunity to share their beliefs, biases, and concerns about quality in an open, candid forum. Frequently, they may agree on quality goals and plans without realizing that they disagree about their underlying values and assumptions. Executives, differences can confuse others in the organization and can threaten to undermine an entire improvement effort. The final quality philosophy represents senior managers, shared beliefs and values regarding the kind of organization they want to have and the way they want to manage it. Executives should ask the following questions: * "How will we treat customers?" * "What kind of relationships do we need to have with suppliers?" * "How will we make and implement decisions?" * "Do we want to continue solving problems by fighting fires, or do we want to adopt a prevention-oriented approach?" * "How do we want to treat employees?" * "What is the relationship between worker happiness and customer happiness?" Getting answers to those questions is important. But more important is having people understand the implications of the answers. For example, if an organization says that the customer is always right, is it prepared to have a no-quibble return policy on products? If it says it wants to create partnerships with suppliers, is it prepared to stop buying mainly on the basis of the lowest cost? If it says it wants employees to show more initiative, is it prepared to support them when they take risks and make mistakes? An explicit philosophy can serve as a powerful integrating force for improvement--if it has been tested for all of its implications, if it encompasses all of the key relationships in the business, and if it supports the quality vision. Typically, executives don't understand the importance of a philosophy until they've taken the time to develop one. Step 3: A quality-management system. These days, there's a lot of talk in all types and sizes of organizations about applying for quality awards and certifications. There are the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, the International Standards Organization 9000 quality series, the NASA Excellence Award for Quality and Productivity, the President's Award for Quality and Productivity Improvement, and the Health Care Forum/Witt Commitment to Quality Award, to name just a few. More important than the awards and standards are their criteria. Organizations can use the awards, criteria to guide their own improvement efforts. A critical element in building a leadership foundation is providing a visible means for defining, structuring, and measuring quality. Giving executives a better understanding of quality-management systems and of the value of such systems can help them make more informed, committed decisions about which systems are right for their organizations. Step 4: The goals, strategy, and plan. This step is a natural outgrowth of the first three steps. Assessing customer satisfaction, competitive position, cost of nonconformance, employee satisfaction, and supplier feedback will have uncovered discrepancies between what is and what is desired. The discrepancies constitute gaps in an organization's performance that must be overcome. They serve as starting points for defining improvement goals. At this stage, it's necessary to move closer to the quality vision, to make the quality philosophy a reality, and to put a quality-management system in place. Those actions will provide grist for the goal-setting mill. Implementing the goals requires the kind of overall structure that only an improvement strategy can provide. The strategy must encompass every phase of the quality cycle including the following: * Preparation and planning. These first two phases are accomplished through building a leadership foundation. * Awareness. After setting the initial direction, senior managers must gain the understanding and commitment of everyone in the organization. Employees should receive information and training about where the organization is going and why. Follow-up should include ongoing communication that shows employees that managers are serious about improvement and that progress is being made. * Deployment. The implementation of a quality-management system begins during this phase, in which an improvement-team infrastructure is put into place. This is the time for extensive team training on empowerment, meeting management, problem solving, decision making, and quality tools. Senior managers and members of the quality-management-system implementation team should receive special training. * Implementation. Quality is about improving processes. In this phase, training for business-process improvements and statistical process control gives improvement-team members the necessary skills for making things happen. * Continuous improvement. Once the improvement process has begun, it's vital to evaluate and reward progress. Review goals and reset them when changing conditions warrant. Regular, rigorous follow-up is the linchpin for accountability and for creating a sense of urgency. It's important to establish a never-ending cycle of improvement, involving assessment, goal setting, implementation, and evaluation. Once employees master basic skills, they can learn more sophisticated methods as required. And the effort to build a learning organization can begin in earnest . Following the development of overall strategy, the initial leadership foundation is finalized through implementation planning, in which ideas are turned into tangible actions that involve schedules, milestones, and measurements. Make no mistake. Completing executive education is just the first leg on a long voyage. The key to success lies in charting the course. Here's hoping that the next time we meet at a training-for-quality conference we'll have moved beyond the search for leadership and are busy exploring new horizons. Ted Cocheu is director of organizations development at Conner Peripherals, 3081 Zanker Road, San Jose, CA 95134. This article is adapted from his new book, Making Quality Happen: How Training Can Turn Strategy Into Lasting Improvement, published by Jossey-Bass. To purchase reprints of this article, please send your order to ASTD Customer Support, 1640 King Street, Box 1443, Alexandria, VA 223132043. Single reprints, at $6 each, must be prepaid. Bulk orders (50 or more) may be billed. Phone 703/6838129 for price information.