[ Home ] [ Up ] [ About this Site ] [ Book Info ] [ Six Sigma & Lean ] [ Other/Links ] [ Peace or Conflict? ] [ Good to Great ] [ Performance Excellence ] [ Feedback? ]             Weblog

Revision Date: Feb 2, 2008

Transformation to a World That Works for Almost Everyone

 Introduction

I choose to believe that most of world's problems are resolvable if more people are provided with the support and encouragement needed to utilize more of their unique potential. The level of support provided is situational and could range from a kind word to a stranger to the development of a cure for cancer. But I also believe that support and encouragement are not enough unless we also share a common language and methodology for continually taking action that leads to increased knowledge, wisdom, and positive results.

I believe the foundation for this common language exists and I refer to it as the quality technology. Excellent quality is the result of doing the right things right and is uniquely defined by each individual. Technology is the application of knowledge for practical ends. 

I did not create this technology but synthesized it from contributions from many individuals and sources.  The discovery to me was the modern day equivalent of learning that the world is not flat.  Unlike the earth is flat paradigm where skeptics could get on a ship and see for themselves that there were new worlds, the quality paradigm, once discovered, changes the way you look at the world forever and significantly improves individual and collective leadership, decision-making and problem resolution skills. The technology is so simple and profound, that it is being applied by children as well as by corporate and world leaders.

 Purpose

The intent of sharing my story is not to convince you that the quality technology is "the answer" but to convince you that I believe that it is an effective course of action for supporting a transformation to a world that works for almost everyone and that my actions are congruent with my beliefs.  A secondary objective of sharing my story is the hope that it will inspire you to pursue your unique dreams and passions despite what others may think of the rightness of your direction. You can always learn from constructive feedback, but ultimately, you decide the course of action.

Background

In 1988, as an auditor for the Department of the Navy, I had the opportunity to attend a four-day seminar conducted by Dr. W. Edwards Deming that introduced me to some radical and revolutionary ideas. Dr. Deming was one of the Americans who helped the Japanese after WWII to transform their manufacturing industries from making low tech and cheap products to the highest quality products in the world today. (In June 2005, the editors of Fortune magazine recognized Deming's work with the Japanese as one of the 20 best calls in business history).

During his presentations, Dr. Deming asked, "what percent of problems in your organization were due to the system?"  I agreed that it was over 94% but I wondered what this had to do with other related topics he introduced such as categorizing grades in schools, employee performance appraisals and the use of  numerical goals and standards as deadly diseases. What did he mean when he implied that by using traditional problem solving approaches, that the majority (if not all in some cases) of changes result in no improvement?  What did he mean when he implied that given our resources and potential, that the United States was one of the most underdeveloped countries in the world?

After returning from the seminar, I started studying Dr. Deming's book, Out of the Crisis, and started reading additional books on quality that although were written in English, read like a foreign language.  I also started to integrate and synthesize the work of others from a wide variety of disciplines to include theology, philosophy, business, psychology, and science. I also concluded that as an auditor, I was adding little value to the organization because although my audit reports and findings did assess the degree of compliance, they never resulted in a change in the system that would have prevented the problems that I was tasked with helping to identify and resolve. I also started to realize that changing the system of government also requires the involvement of the system owners -- the American people.

In 1989, I transferred to the U.S. Army Finance and Accounting Service (USAFAC), where I worked to support a total quality management (TQM) initiative that integrated the components of what Dr. Deming referred to as a System of Profound Knowledge (SoPK) into an organizational change strategy. This provided me with the opportunity to attend more training and gain more application experience.

After about two to three years of applying this new technology in a wide variety of areas and organizations (work, sports, Army Reserve, family relationships, schools, community action groups) that at first appeared to be fairly simple (but not easy), my "light" as they say, went on. I also learned from other practitioners that this long learning curve was not unusual. I was convinced however, that I could shorten the learning time for others by translating the quality jargon into more common language and helping people to apply it to their particular situation.

In 1990, USAFAC was merged into the Department of Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) and the TQM initiative was ultimately phased out. In 1991, I modified some of our TQM core courses and started a total quality improvement certificate program at Indiana University, Purdue University at Indianapolis (IUPUI). I recruited additional instructors and taught courses to support others to learn and apply the quality technology.  I also helped to develop a quality applications course at the local community college (Ivy Tech State College) and served on their business advisory board.

In my first class at IUPUI, I was given some information on the American Society for Quality (ASQ). ASQ was formed in 1946 to promote the application of the quality principles, methods and tools in industry. I immediately joined my local section which provided me with leadership opportunities, mentors and a support network of like-minded practitioners. With this support, I helped to develop two courses that were provided at the Public Library.  We also partnered with a local elementary school where I worked with school teams to help them achieve phenomenal results through application of the quality technology.  In May of 2000, our section hosted the 54^th Annual Quality Congress (AQC) that was attended by people from throughout the world.  In conjunction with the AQC and for the first time, a track of courses were developed that were free and open to the general public. We raised over $15,000 to locally promote and market these sessions which included an insert in the Indianapolis Star newspaper. Our local initiatives have resulted in two best practice recognitions by ASQ.  I also worked with the Central Indiana Regional Citizens League (CIRCL) to develop a prototype for a community quality of life index.

From 1991 through 1998, I worked on  "the book."  The book was written to provide a comprehensive overview of quality but also provide practical guidelines that could be immediately applied to improve quality in any aspect of life.  Initially, I thought it would take me about nine months to convert my seminar notes to book form. Well, seven years (part-time) later, my book, Success Through Quality, Support Guide for The Journey to Continuous Improvement was published by Quality Press. In addition to the book, I am working to continually improve my website to help support more people to learn about, test and apply the quality technology.

In 1987, the United States developed the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award  (MBNQA) to recognize organizations that were striving for world-class quality. This criteria has been adopted for use in many state and city quality award programs. In 1999, the award criteria was expanded to include Health Care and Education and in 2004, the award was expanded again to include a not for profit category. The award criteria serves as a template or model that can help organizations work towards achieving performance excellence. The criteria also will help to provide a common language across industries. As an officer in the Indianapolis Section of ASQ, I worked to apply the Baldrige criteria to our section which received a Best Practice recognition from ASQ and I also worked to promote application of the criteria in education at the K-12 level. ASQ recently published a book on how the Baldrige criteria can be applied in improving homeland security. The book is titled: Homeland Security Assessment Manual: A Comprehensive Organizational Assessment Based on Baldrige Criteria by Donald Fisher.  

In December 2000/January 2001, when DFAS senior leaders expressed interest in applying the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) criteria to improve organizational performance,  a colleague and I who was a MBNQA examiner, had the opportunity to brief  the director and his direct reports on the advantages of applying a total quality transformation model to help align organizational improvement initiatives such as MBNQA, Balanced Scorecards and Six Sigma.  The director established a Quality and Performance Assessment Group and appointed a member of the Senior Executive Service (SES),  to establish an initial prototype and proof of concept.  An overview of our initial efforts was documented in the January 2002 issue of ASQ's Quality Progress magazine in an article tilted: Measuring Quality in the Department of Defense. Successes and demonstrated potential of the technology led to the establishment of a Lean/Six Sigma Program Office.  I am currently back at DFAS supporting DoD/DFAS business transformation with a focus on effectively deploying strategy.

In November of 2001, the Military Intelligence Detachment (MID) that I commanded was mobilized for two years. As you might expect, we successfully applied the quality technology in providing WMD related assessments to the warfighters that they used to assess the risks associated  with a respective operation (s). The unit received two consecutive Commander Cup Awards which included recognition on the quality of our contributions in support of the Global War on Terror. I  volunteered for an additional 11 months to finish up work on development of a process modeling and simulation tool that is used to help assess the technological capabilities of adversaries to help ensure US forces maintain technological overmatch.

In 2006, I completed my masters degree in Strategic Studies from the U.S. Army War College where I gained more insight  on how the "Success Through Quality"  technology can be applied to support "Peacefighting" throughout the world to help reduce the causes that lead to conflict.  The following presentations provide an outline of key concepts:

The President has identified that "the gravest danger our Nation faces lies at the crossroads of radicalism and technology."  The threat of a WMD related attack on the U.S. has been expressed as "its not a matter of if, but when."  Application of the quality technology is the best weapon we have to prevent conflict, and if prevention fails, to respond to the situation quickly and decisively with a minimum loss of life.

Lessons Learned Along the Way

Probably one of the greatest lessons that I've learned along the way is that if you want to change the world, your must first start with yourself.  Additional lessons learned include the following:

Improving the System.  Problems represent outcomes from systems and processes. If you don't like the outcomes, you must improve the system. You improve it by identifying the purpose of the system, the respective stakeholders, e.g., customers, employees, suppliers, community, stockholders, government, families, etc., and providing application support that will result in an upward trend in the number of things gone right and a downward trend in the number of things gone wrong as defined by the stakeholders. The challenge is to improve something in one area without making it worse in another. The stakeholders provide feedback on whether or not things are getting better or worse.

No Substitute for Action. If you want to understand the quality technology, you must apply it -- there is no other way.

An Indirect Approach. When my "light" as they say went on, I became somewhat of an evangelist in trying to relate the difference between change and improvement. Over the years, I've mellowed a little and pursue more of an indirect approach.

Problems are Optional. A significant insight for me was realizing that choices are mandatory and problems are optional. The status quo is the absence of problems but is where we choose to spend most of our time. For example, if your doctor tells you that you need to loose 50 pounds, you must choose either to accept the situation or choose the option to lose the 50 pounds.  Losing the weight may require several months but maintaining your optimum weight will take a lifetime.  Leadership included convincing people there are problems and working with them to resolve them.

The Grass is Not Always Greener.  In my experience, too many organizations today agree that "employees are our most important asset" but maintain a system that requires people to lower their expectations of the contributions that they will be allowed to make. In other words, employees are often expected to "check their brains at the door."  I used to think that this situation was unique to government, but I've worked with people representing literally hundreds of organizations and this situation is common. It is a remnant left over from the industrial revolution that is slowly changing. As a civil servant, I work in the system to improve efficiency (doing things right) and through my outside activities, I work on the system to try and improve effectiveness (doing the right things). 

It Must Begin with Top Management?  It can start with you. I believe that we have three levels of control or power: direct, some and little. If you lead by example to improve the things you have the most control over, you are more likely to influence the areas you have the least control over.  In my various positions, I have been successful in a few instances in raising the awareness and influencing the behaviors of  "top management."  The most successful organizations are those that can best optimize the three levels of power among the stakeholders. Leaders in these types of organizations have recognized that by giving up power they gain more.

Know Thyself (still working on it).  Tools such as the Myers-Briggs personality profile have helped me to be more effective in my personal relationships. Everyone has preferences and each preference has strengths and weaknesses. Understanding these preferences has helped me to be a more effective leader. Diversity, be it racial, age, cultural, philosophical, gender, or personality, is critical to achieving optimum results. The number of right answers (effective alternatives) are unlimited and the diversity of views helps understand and prioritize needed actions.  The quality technology helps to determine if change results in improvement.  I estimate that I have either led and/or facilitated over 150 improvement teams and to paraphrase American humorist Will Rogers, I never met an improvement theory I didn't like. Application of the quality technology results in a 100% success rate because you always learn something new.

We Have Always Needed Leaders.  It's not that people don't know what they should do or could do, it's that we often choose not to do it or need someone to show us the way.  In many situations when it comes to change, a few people are adamantly for or against it and everyone else is somewhere in between.  A leader has always been on one extreme or the other and must have a commitment to a desired end state that is greater than the follower's desire and commitment to maintain the status quo.  Leadership usually involves spending more time and energy than anyone else, it can be lonely because no one can truly understand the depth of the leader's vision, and if you do it well, people feel proud of their accomplishments and don't even know of your involvement.  Personal satisfaction to me comes from helping others achieve success through quality which also helps me to improve my knowledge, skills and abilities.

Common Sense but Not Common Practice.  With few exceptions, people can agree on facts (objective observations) and what the ideal would be in a perfect world and can agree on one or more alternative course of actions (common cause) for helping to achieve the ideal. Typically though, many leaders spend a significant amount of their time trying to convince or coerce other people to their point of view that is perceived to benefit some at the expense of others. Ideals represent alternatives that unite people, not divide them. For example, our founding fathers agreed on the fact that English rule was unacceptable and agreed on the ideals of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They disagreed on many things to include the issue of slavery, who could vote and the amount of power that should be granted to the States as opposed to the federal government. Their common cause was to develop a system of government based on ideals that could be continually improved through amendments to the Constitution and new laws. It is up to each citizen to strive to live up to these ideals in areas that we each have the power and responsibility to improve. The result will be a better quality of life for us all.

Summary

In his January 20, 1961 Inaugural Address, President Kennedy challenged the people of the world to work together in the struggle against the common enemies of mankind: tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself. He went on to say that:

All this will not be finished in the first 100 days. Nor will it be finished in the first 1,000 days, nor in the life of this administration, nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this planet. But let us begin.