Are YOU The Barrier To Quality Improvement?

There is no question that the Total Quality Management bandwagon is getting more crowded.  At the same time as some people (particularly line staff) are getting tired of what they see as empty TQM rhetoric, organizations are continuing to move towards some form of quality improvement process.  Unfortunately, most of the people jumping on the bandwagon will end up falling amid the wheels.  Some estimate that 80% of TQM efforts fail.

That's the bad news.  The REALLY bad news is that the main contributors to these failures will be the very people who find the ideas attractive, or even compelling.  The managers and executives.  You, maybe?  

Blame Is Irrelevant

It isn't completely "fair" or even relevant, to point a blaming finger at managers trying to lead an organization into continuous quality improvement.  What is important...no, what is critical is that managers develop an awareness of how their style, approach and assumptions about management, and behaviour  play a determining role in the success of quality improvement efforts.  As with employees, assigning blame is wasteful, but identifying areas where improvement is warranted is productive.

We are going to take a look at some of the ways managers sabotage their own quality improvement efforts and suggest some ways to avoid self-inflicted barriers to quality.

Ready!  Fire!  Aim!

Like any newly discovered management concept, Total Quality Management encourages, at least initially, an almost religious fervor on the part of some managers.  If this excitement is focused and managed effectively, it can become a great impetus for organizational change.  Unfortunately, a common response by the excited manager is to implement TQM processes, before developing a knowledge base that has both breadth and depth.

Managing a continuous improvement organization requires that the leaders understand a great number of things (breadth) and understand these things in a non-superficial way (depth).

The list of necessary "areas of understanding" would fill this entire newsletter, but the TQM leader must have an understanding of organizational culture, organizational and personal change processes, TQM principles, employee empowerment methods, leadership skills, team-building, and problem-solving techniques.

A simple ability to use the buzz-words isn't sufficient.  The quality leader must go through a process of taking this information and transforming it into guidelines for his or her own behaviour.  Probably the most common problem in TQM implementation is the manager's inability to change his or her behaviour so that it is congruent with the words being spoken.

Rx

The literature on successful quality implementation almost uniformly reports a long "run-up" time before the kick-off.  Some companies report periods as long as three years of management learning before implementation began.  Take your time, and make an accurate assessment of your own knowledge and understanding first.

If you want continuous improvement, you need to be continuously improving yourself.  Take every opportunity to learn about organizations and quality by attending seminars, talking to other managers, and reading.  Consider reading your favorite book on quality at least twice. 

Finally, if you aren't personally willing or able to learn what you need to know, stay away from TQM processes.  Staff will quickly pick up that you don't know what you are doing, and you are just as likely to destroy productivity as to increase it.

Do You Know Your Management Self?

It sounds so trite, yet it is so essential.  People manage as they have been managed, and life in organizations teaches us the "right" way to manage.  This acculturation process develops managers with very in-grained ways of doing things, many of which are unconscious or automatic.  Leading a quality improvement process requires a new and different approach and philosophy of management.

The common error is that management will act inconsistently.  Even with the best of intentions a manager will tend to use "old ingrained management techniques" when they are inappropriate.  The result is that the manager is perceived as not "walking the quality talk".  This inadvertently sends the message that the manager is not serious about quality improvement.  Staff's little BS detectors twitch!

The best way of countering the natural tendency to revert to an old management style is to be aware of your own management philosophy and style.  There's a catch.  We aren't talking about some abstract philosophy here.  We are talking about your philosophy and style as it is demonstrated in behaviour and action. 

Rx

Periodically, recall your decision-making and interactions with staff.  Assume that your behaviour reflects your philosophy, and work backwards.  Ask yourself the questions:  "Since I behaved this way, what does that say about my approach to management?"  "Is this behaviour consistent with my talk?

More importantly, find out from your employees how they see your management style.  It is their perceptions that are most important, not yours. 

Work continuously at increasing the congruency between your talk and your actions.

Let's Rumble?

You can't improve quality in an organization that is characterized by an avoidance of conflict and disagreement.  As a leader of the organization, you set the tone regarding the acceptability of challenging decisions, opinions and actions.  If
you shy away from receiving these kinds of challenges, you will "tell" employees that you aren't serious about improvement. 

You have several important roles to play in terms of influencing how conflict and disagreement are managed.  These are listed below.

Rx

Encourage employees to question you on your decisions or statements.  Also make it clear that when staff disagree with you, you expect not only a critique, but viable, thought-out alternate suggestions.

Lead a process to set ground rules for the disagreement management process. 

In any public forum (eg. staff meeting), make sure that it is understood that the person chairing that meeting is responsible for the enforcement of the disagreement management ground rules.

Learn some basic mediation skills that you can use when disagreement between staff members becomes unmanageable by the parties involved.  

I Can! I Can!?

The implementation of quality improvement processes is complex. Managers sometimes do not recognize that there are times where they need help from outside the organization.

In situations where there is a high degree of employee skepticism, a history of inconsistent managerial communication, or mistrust, it may be necessary to have an external party to build credible communication pathways between management and staff.  In particular, this is useful when staff and the manager are "out of touch" with each other.  That is, the manager has perceptions of the organization and him/herself that do not match those of the staff in the organization.

Unfortunately, it is difficult for a manager to identify when this is necessary.

Rx

Be alert to signs that your communication about quality improvement is not being received with openness or support.  If you get a "gut" feeling that it isn't going right, consider bringing in a consultant to diagnose possible mis-perceptions or hidden barriers.

Keep in mind that even the best manager will not be party to all of the comments, and feelings of staff.  If there is a sense of mistrust, people may not tell you even if you ask.  Also keep in mind that in most cases, initial mistrust can be overcome, but it may require some outside intervention.  

Conclusion

To conclude, very often it is the manager that becomes an impediment to the implementation of quality improvement processes.  Keep in mind that there are some requirements that need to be in place for continuous improvement efforts to succeed.

Managers need to have a non-superficial understanding of organizational change processes, leadership skills, quality improvement concepts, organizational culture, etc.  Managers also need to identify their own management biases and philosophy, not in an abstract way, but with respect to their day-to-day actions. Managers also need to help establish a climate in which disagreement is managed effectively, and finally, managers need to recognize situations where they would benefit from third party intervention.

By addressing these issues, you are less likely to become a barrier to quality improvement.