Ken Miller lists a string of items - nouns & nouned verbs, by
implication the components of TQM, and suggests that they are necessary/
useful to a functioning company.
Then John L. Naman said that, like milk, TQM alone does not make a
healthy diet. I'm not in a position to argue that, either.
Both points seem reasonable, _if and only if_ I take 'TQM' as a focus
strictly on management of a production operation. ('Production' can be
of intangibles, too.) May I ask this group to clarify my thinking at
this point, and define, carefully, what TQM is, so I can be confident we
are discussing the same creature?
If I look at the Baldrige Award criteria, or more narrowly in my own
case, the Wisconsin Forward Award, I find that a good deal of the
assessment is made on how well the firm collects information about the
world, and develops from there a large view strategy to deal with that
world. Companies that neglect these critical activities don't get far,
either in the market or the award.
Does this meant that the NMBQA criteria are _not_ TQM?
That could be very good news for us sellers of this Quality stuff. Most
people don't want to hear the term, TQM, but they want the superior
results claimed by adherents.
I am not altogether debating here. I have to give a talk next month on
this subject, and I want to use my terms in a generally accepted
fashion. Not coincidentally, I have a tentative visual model that may
explain where things fit in, but I want to see what this group does with
the issues raised above, too.
Jay
--
Jay Warner
Principal Scientist
Warner Consulting, Inc.
4444 North Green Bay Road
Racine, WI 53404-1216
USA
Ph: (262) 634-9100
FAX: (262) 681-1133
email:
quality@a2q.com
web:
http://www.a2q.com
The A2Q Method (tm). What do you want to improve today?