Discussion: View Thread

  • 1.  TQM or ISO?

    Posted 03-16-1999 12:29
    To: Jorge Cuadros, Quality Engineer, Industrial Brawns S.A., Peru

    Talk about viruses!
    With due respect to Ann Marie, do not let the ideas of Business Process
    Improvement, and especially CMM, penetrate either your factory or your own
    thinking or you will slowly reduced to pursuing false goals while your
    customers all die of apathy.

    It is essential that youall start by building a reasonably mutual agreement
    regarding what Change Intitiatives your company must accomplish. This
    means that youall must build a list of the Top Ten Gaps between 1) your
    anticipated market and 2) what your company must Do, Be and Know. Then
    take a week or two to read, discuss and adopt a common mental model or
    concept for how you are going to bridge the gaps. For the reading give
    every key player a copy of Quality is Free and a copy of The One Minute
    Manager.

    Then figure out what the owners are going to Start saying and the line
    managers are going to Start doing to pursue the least challenging entry on
    the Top Ten Gaps.

    Meanwhile, do not leap into any bureaucratic programs nor unproven palliatives.

    By separate mail I am forwarding a case study regarding the renovation of
    the product development process of a family owned, leading manufacturer of
    automobile aftermarket parts in U.S.

    Good luck,
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    On Sun, 14 Mar 1999 22:22:55 -0800
    >From: Ann Marie Harmony <itm@IN-THE-MOOD.COM>
    >Subject: Re: What is first: "TQM program" or "ISO9000 process"
    [...]
    >Jorge- My background incorporates software quality engineering:
    >Here are some select spots on my personal site that incorporate
    >some good generic material.
    >
    >1. Business Process Improvement Handbook
    >generic how to, activity based costing, checklists, templates
    >http://www.ncal.verio.com/~aharmony/QA/handbook/Handbook.html
    >
    >QA Strategy and Roadmap- discussion of CMM, ISO, Best Practices
    >software orientation- Great Quality linkages page
    >http://www.ncal.verio.com/~aharmony/Mindsteps/homepage.html
    >
    [...]

    Jack Ring, 32712 N. 70th St., Snottsdale, AZ 85262-7143
    602-488-4615, Cell) 602.369.4615, Fax)602-488-4616
    Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt.
    Dance like nobody's watching.


  • 2.  TQM or ISO?

    Posted 03-17-1999 11:08
    On 16 Mar 99, at 10:29, Jack Ring wrote:
    > To: Jorge Cuadros, Quality Engineer, Industrial Brawns S.A., Peru

    > Talk about viruses!

    Hmmm- Jack- sometimes - virus is a "them" assignation as in:

    I am a leader, you are an influencer, he/she is a manipulator, we
    are crusaders- they are a virus and must be entirely eradicated.......

    We all use the same life dynamics for survival and replication-to
    varying extents and with varying degrees of success-- pattern
    recognition, response, assimilation and "camoflauge"

    You have to be very careful not to blithely enforce white and black
    hats- or you have undue impacts on the environment.

    > With due respect to Ann Marie, do not let the ideas of Business Process
    > Improvement, and especially CMM, penetrate either your factory or your own
    > thinking or you will slowly reduced to pursuing false goals while your
    > customers all die of apathy.

    The devil is in the implementation of ideas. One of the benefits I
    have derived in particular from this forum is attaching terminology to
    my precepts and understanding what I am propagating and
    disseminating from a more universalized construct. Don't chase
    people away from ideas, let them get a closer look.

    For instance- CMM- just because you don't have all competencies
    completed at one level, does not mean you cannot begin work or
    even complete competencies at the next level- it just means that if
    you don't have all your competencies at a certain minimum
    requirement- you cannot be assessed as having fully met the
    requirements of that level. You certainly can assess yourselves at
    individual competencies.

    http://www.ncal.verio.com/~aharmony/Mindsteps/cmm.html

    On the other hand I found nothing to complain about in the balance
    of your "prescription"

    I truly wonder that the "closely held" aspect of Jorge's request was
    so readily overlooked or dismissed by so many individuals here- and
    there was little effort made to determine the underlying motivating
    factors of the decision to go "quality" without a complete and clear
    understanding of the factors, terminology, processes, etc.

    It seems few on the list considered that the decision of a single
    individual could have substantial impact on the best laid plans o'
    mice and men, now or somewhere's down the road.

    Who sought to assess the "educational level" (I'm not talking
    credentials- I'm talking creating a working definition of "the problem"
    , accumulating appropriate datasets, and adequately understanding
    what resources are available to resolve it) of that significant point of
    leverage- a family kind of guy who is used to holding the reins of his
    organization?

    > It is essential that youall start by building a reasonably mutual
    > agreement regarding what Change Intitiatives your company must accomplish.
    > This means that youall must build a list of the Top Ten Gaps between 1)
    > your anticipated market and 2) what your company must Do, Be and Know.
    > Then take a week or two to read, discuss and adopt a common mental model
    > or concept for how you are going to bridge the gaps. For the reading give
    > every key player a copy of Quality is Free and a copy of The One Minute
    > Manager.
    >
    > Then figure out what the owners are going to Start saying and the line
    > managers are going to Start doing to pursue the least challenging entry on
    > the Top Ten Gaps.
    >
    > Meanwhile, do not leap into any bureaucratic programs nor unproven
    > palliatives.
    >
    > By separate mail I am forwarding a case study regarding the renovation of
    > the product development process of a family owned, leading manufacturer
    > of automobile aftermarket parts in U.S.



    $======= Better Communications Tooling ==========$
    ________ http://www.in-the-mood.com
    ______.---, | Your most valuable corporate
    // | |~ STAFF | assets just checked in....
    || _____|-|_____ __|Or did they already check out?

    $======= People Capital Development =============$


  • 3.  TQM or ISO?

    Posted 03-18-1999 00:07
    At 8:07 AM 3/17/99, Ann Marie Harmony wrote:
    [...]
    >We all use the same life dynamics for survival and replication-to
    >varying extents and with varying degrees of success-- pattern
    >recognition, response, assimilation and "camoflauge"

    Sorry to disagree but my education indicates that there are at least three
    different modes of growth; systemic, fungal and viral. Only the latter
    necessarily kills its host.
    >
    [...]
    >For instance- CMM- just because you don't have all competencies
    >completed at one level, does not mean you cannot begin work or
    >even complete competencies at the next level- it just means that if
    >you don't have all your competencies at a certain minimum
    >requirement- you cannot be assessed as having fully met the
    >requirements of that level. You certainly can assess yourselves at
    >individual competencies.

    All that is true but contrary to the official method of assessment of CMM.
    If you want to invent the Harmony Maturity Model and Assessment Method
    please reveal that you are doing that -- don't call it CMM. If you
    encourage them to believ that by ascending CMM Levels they will satisfy
    management's requirements then you are doing them a disservice. The CMM
    Assessment Method is clearly geared to make management dependent on CMM
    Assessment regardless of the improvement in actual performance.
    Accordingly, it is a virus.

    The problem with CMM is far deeper than you seem to perceive.

    Firstly, it is based on a premise (although unstated and perhaps even
    unrecognized) that an organization is a state-determined system. Any
    system that contains people, especially more than 15 people, is patently
    not a s-d system.

    Secondly, there has never been more than anecdotal relevance between CMM
    Level and Value of Artifact Produced. (That means the CMM mavens have not
    shown that an organization which is assessed to be Level 4 produces
    software that is any better than that produced by organization that is
    assessed to be Level 3 or 2). Therefore, investment in CMM cannot be
    justified.

    On the other hand, some interesting correlations with software productivity
    and quality scales that are, in fact, sound shows that the CMM Level 5 is
    equivalent to 2.5 Sigma quality. Motorola and other Six Sigma afficianados
    are not impressed with CMM.

    Thirdly, note that the content of each level has been selected by "expert"
    concensus. That is not cool but cannot be challenged prima facie.
    However, also note that the Activites called for in the ascending CMM
    Levels seem not aligned to the Baldridge Award Criteria nor the Demming
    Prize nor the ISO 9001, let alone the Crosby Price of Non-Conformance.

    But have faith.

    Jack Ring, 32712 N. 70th St., Snottsdale, AZ 85262-7143
    602-488-4615, Cell) 602.369.4615, Fax)602-488-4616
    Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt.
    Dance like nobody's watching.


  • 4.  TQM or ISO?

    Posted 03-18-1999 10:23
    Jack- My main point is:
    If we are going to have the presumption to try to understand the
    quality process ( particularly as it applies to delivering what the
    target customer now has no idea he wants or needs- but will in short
    order form a substantive demand for upon initial, prototypical
    supply), I think we had better keep open minds about what we need
    to know.

    On 17 Mar 99, at 22:07, Jack Ring wrote:

    AMH:
    > >For instance- CMM- just because you don't have all
    competencies
    > >completed at one level, does not mean you cannot begin work or
    > >even complete competencies at the next level- it just means that if
    > >you don't have all your competencies at a certain minimum
    > >requirement- you cannot be assessed as having fully met the
    > >requirements of that level. You certainly can assess yourselves at
    > >individual competencies.

    > All that is true but contrary to the official method of assessment of
    CMM.

    Was I unclear in what I wrote? We are not in disagreement. I
    thought I made a distinction between what was a CMM-level
    assessment and what you certainly could do on your own. Jack,
    you advise people every day to "dance like nobody's watching."

    Succeeding in corporate reality is not an academic exercise. This
    isn't a case of where you are actively discouraged from opening the
    book and/or reading ahead, because it would be "cheating" or
    viewed as asocial behavior.

    Even though I might not be predeterminedly invested about getting
    this certificate or that award for my client firms, I do care very much
    about recognizing and utilizing the various theories and principles.

    Considering the relative immaturity of the software/internet industry,
    and the rapid emergence of new technologies- this is the often the
    level of acumen and expertise that software QA consultants are
    expected to bring to bear on new products and service. They are
    expected to evolve replicable sustainable traceable performance, on
    the spot, in the eye of the hurricane- via thoughtful, knowledgeable,
    analytical and highly intutive processes.

    Industry standards, widely accepted for the benefit of corporate
    conformance, just aren't there.

    And a lot of times, when industry standards are in place- as in Alfa
    Romeo's disputed safety accoutrements and the US import
    regulations- the entire exercise is patently counterproductive and
    visibly contestable to the point of specious protectionism.

    " What I said never changed anybody, what they understood did."-
    Henry David Thoreau

    > But have faith.

    My best to you,
    Ann Marie Harmony

    > [...]
    > >We all use the same life dynamics for survival and replication-to
    > >varying extents and with varying degrees of success-- pattern
    > >recognition, response, assimilation and "camoflauge"
    >
    > Sorry to disagree but my education indicates that there are at least three
    > different modes of growth; systemic, fungal and viral. Only the latter
    > necessarily kills its host.

    Wish I had the time right now to do the research and debate with
    you


  • 5.  TQM or ISO?

    Posted 03-18-1999 10:38
    Jack- My main point is:
    If we are going to have the presumption to try to understand and
    evolve the quality process ( particularly as it applies to delivering
    what the target customer now has no idea he wants or needs- but
    will in short order form a substantive demand for upon initial,
    prototypical supply), I think we had better keep open minds about
    what we need to know.

    On 17 Mar 99, at 22:07, Jack Ring wrote:

    AMH:
    > >For instance- CMM- just because you don't have all
    competencies
    > >completed at one level, does not mean you cannot begin work or
    > >even complete competencies at the next level- it just means that if
    > >you don't have all your competencies at a certain minimum
    > >requirement- you cannot be assessed as having fully met the
    > >requirements of that level. You certainly can assess yourselves at
    > >individual competencies.

    > All that is true but contrary to the official method of assessment of
    CMM.

    Was I unclear in what I wrote? We are not in disagreement. I
    thought I made a distinction between what was a qualified CMM-level
    assessment and what you certainly could do on your own.

    Jack, you advise people every day to "dance like nobody's
    watching."

    Even though I might not be invested or predisposed to getting my
    client firm to jump through hoops for this certificate or that award, I
    do care very much about recognizing, utilizing and educating on the
    various theories and principles.

    Considering the relative immaturity of the software/internet industry,
    and the rapid emergence of new technologies- this is the often the
    level of acumen and expertise that software QA consultants are
    expected to bring to bear on new products and service. They are
    expected to evolve replicable, sustainable, traceable, desireable,
    measureable performance, on the spot, in the eye of the hurricane-
    via thoughtful, knowledgeable, analytical and intutive processes.

    Industry standards, even best practices, widely accepted for the
    benefit of corporate conformance, often just aren't there.

    All too often, when industry standards ARE in place- as in Alfa
    Romeo's disputed safety accoutrements and the US import
    regulations- the entire exercise is speciously protectionist and
    patently counterproductive with respect to increasing vehicle
    occupant safety.

    In the round, QA consultants are necessarily superlative learners,
    adapters and re-distributors, not mandaters or qualifiers of this
    brand of aftershave lotion or that (which would certainly curtail their
    usefulness, employability, and knowledge life expectancy).

    " What I said never changed anybody, what they understood did."-
    Henry David Thoreau

    > But have faith.

    My best to you,
    Ann Marie Harmony

    > [...]
    > >We all use the same life dynamics for survival and replication-to
    > >varying extents and with varying degrees of success-- pattern
    > >recognition, response, assimilation and "camoflauge"
    >
    > Sorry to disagree but my education indicates that there are at least three
    > different modes of growth; systemic, fungal and viral. Only the latter
    > necessarily kills its host.

    Wish I had the time right now to do the necessary research and
    debate with you- but I'm on full-time assignment to a client and it's
    taking up alot of my focus.

    AMH