QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND TECHNIQUES

WHY QUALITY- the requirements -

WHY QUALITY

Linking Quality to Business Performance Quality to:

Customers (internal and external) Service / Product Providers Stakeholders Society

Who is the customer? The External Customers

Also the internal customers The person who receives your work The person who receives instructions

from you

BUT

Who is the customer? The External Customers

Also the internal customers The person who receives your work The person who receives instructions

from you

BUT

Q1: Identify the types of external customers

Q2: Are all the different types of customers

treated the same?

Who is the customer? The External Customers

Also the internal customers The person who receives your work The person who receives instructions

from you

BUTQ1: List the internal customers who you have to

relate to every week.

Q2: What product do you deliver to your internal

customer?

Q3: Identify who your internal suppliers are, and

what product they deliver to you.

THE KANO MODEL OF QUALITY

The Kano Model of Customer (Consumer) Satisfaction classifies product attributes based on how they are perceived by customers and their effect on customer satisfaction. These classifications are useful for guiding design decisions in that they indicate when good is good enough, and when more is better. Kano product characteristics can be classified as:

•Threshold / Basic attributesAttributes which must be present in order for the product to be successful, can be viewed as a 'price of entry'. However, the customer will remain neutral towards the product even with improved execution of these aspects.

•One dimensional attributes (Performance / Linear)These characteristics are directly correlated to customer satisfaction. Increased functionality or quality of execution will result in increased customer satisfaction. Conversely, decreased functionality results in greater dissatisfaction. Product price is often related to these attributes.

•Attractive attributes (Exciters / Delighters)Customers get great satisfaction from a feature - and are willing to pay a price premium. However, satisfaction will not decrease (below neutral) if the product lacks the feature. These features are often unexpected by customers and they can be difficult to establish as needs up front. Sometimes called unknown or latent needs.

THE KANO MODEL OF QUALITY

CustomerSatisfaction

Degree of Achievement

Basic Quality(unspoken)

Spoken

Perform

ance

ExcitementQuality(unspoken)

Adapted from Kano et al (1984)

THE KANO MODEL OF QUALITY

CustomerSatisfaction

Degree of Achievement

Basic Quality(unspoken)

Spoken

Perform

ance

ExcitementQuality(unspoken)

Adapted from Kano et al (1984)

Please mark where is your

organization on this model.

Reinforce your understanding !

Questiona. Make a list of all the standard things you would want when

you book a holiday. You should list what you would expect from a good holiday organization.

b. Now make a list of all the things that would delight you when you book a holiday. This list should assume that your standard requirements have been met.

QUALITY PHILOSOPHIES

Inspection [1950’s] Quality Control [1960’s]

Quality Assurance [1970’s]Total Quality [1980’s]

Continuous Improvement [1990’s]

Knowledge Management [2000’s]

INSPECTION

After-the-fact screening Expensive Fallible Internal and introspective

Rework

BusinessProcess Inspector CUSTOMER

Good

Bad

Scrap

INSPECTION

After-the-fact screening Expensive Fallible Internal and introspective

Rework

BusinessProcess Inspector CUSTOMER

Good

Bad

Scrap

Do you do this in your organization?

To what extent?

Problems with the Inspection Model

Too late 100% routine inspection

doesn’t work Expensive

Inspector Scrap, rework, unhappy

customers Creates a barrier

between the operator and the customer

Rework

BusinessProcess

Inspector CUSTOMERGood

Bad

Scrap

Alternatives to 100% Inspection

What is worse than 100% routine inspection?

Alternatives to 100% Inspection What is worse than 100% routine inspection? 200% routine inspection!

Alternatives to 100% Inspection Application of Statistical Process Control Developed from 1924 by Dr Walter Shewhart, Bell

Telephone Laboratories, U.S.A. Book “Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured

Product” published in 1931

QUALITY CONTROL

Self-inspection Greater process control Drawing control systems Product testing

BusinessProcess CUSTOMER

SPC

Good Product

QUALITY CONTROL

Self-inspection Greater process control Drawing control systems Product testing

BusinessProcess CUSTOMER

SPC

Good Product

In Process Quality Control

How to do this ?

GLOBAL QUALITY EXPERIENCE

Japan – Quality (1950’s) Japan – Total Quality (1960’s) USA – Pacific Basin …Europe (1980’s) Developing Countries (1990’s)

QUALITY GURUS – The American

DEMING JURAN FEIGENBAUM

1909 – 1993‘The Statistician’

JUSEPDCA

14 PointsDeadly Diseases

Action PlanSystem of Profound

Knowledge

1904 –‘The Other Samurai’

JUSEQuality Trilogy

10 StepsRecipe for Action

‘A History of Managing for

Quality’

1916 –‘The Implementer’

ASQCMBNQA

Total Quality Control9 M’s

Quality-Related Costs

10 Benchmarks

DEMING’S DEADLY DISEASES

A lack of constancy of purpose Emphasis on short-term profits Evaluation of performance, merit-rating, or annual

preview Mobility of management Management by use only of visible figures, with

little or no consideration of unknown or unknowable figures

“Hope for instant pudding”“Our QC department takes care of all quality problems”

CROSBY’S FOUR ABSOLUTES Quality is defined as conformance to

requirements, not as ‘goodness’ The system for causing quality is

prevention, not appraisal The performance standard is Zero

Defects, not ‘that’s close enough’ The measurement of quality is the

Price of Non-conformance, not indices

QUALITY GURUS - THE JAPANESE

ISHIKAWA SHINGO TAGUCHI

1915 – 1989‘The Practitioner’Fishbone Diagram

Company-wide Quality

Quality Circles7 Tools

1909 –1990‘The Consultant’

Practical PreventionPoka-Yoke

Zero Quality ControlJIT / SMED

1924 –‘The Professor’

Quality LossSystem, Parameter

and Tolerance Design

Orthogonal Arrays

WHY ZERO DEFECTS?

Ask yourself! Is it necessary to go for ZERO defects?Why isn’t 99.9% good enough? It is impossible to be 100% defect free!

BUT IS IT?

Here are some examples of what life would be like if 99.9% were good enough.

WHY ZERO DEFECTS? Five minutes of unsafe drinking water every month! Two unsafe landings per week at world major airports! Twenty thousand incorrect drug prescriptions every year! Fifty newborn babies dropped at birth by doctors/nurses

every months! Twenty-two thousand checques deducted from wrong bank

accounts each day! Five hundred incorrect surgical operations each month! Thirty-two thousand missed heartbeats per person every

year!

WHY ZERO DEFECTS? Five minutes of unsafe drinking water every month! Two unsafe landings per week at world major airports! Twenty thousand incorrect drug prescriptions every year! Fifty newborn babies dropped at birth by doctors/nurses

every months! Twenty-two thousand checques deducted from wrong bank

accounts each day! Five hundred incorrect surgical operations each month! Thirty-two thousand missed heartbeats per person every

year!

Can you share with us any

similar experience !

WHY ZERO DEFECTS?

Suddenly the quest for ZEROZERO defects makes a lot more

sense!

Thank YouThank You