The Quality Maturity Model

(so far)

Frankie Wilson

Brunel University, UK.

Structure of this talk

• Initial premises

• Description of the research

• Results (so far)

• The emerging Quality Maturity Model

• Questions (for you)

• Open floor

Definition

• Quality = Total Quality Management, continuous improvement

• Culture = the beliefs, behaviours, norms, dominant values, rules and climate in the organisation.

• Quality culture = “The way quality gets done round here”. Influences PMs selected and attitude of library management, library staff and parent organisation to these measures.

Assumption 1: Meta-Quality

• Agile environment - shifting goalposts.

• Quality of quality processes - can they cope?

• Not an alternative to many & varied methods of quality assurance - next level of abstraction.

Assumption 2: Performance Measurement

• The most important element of any library is the people who work there …

… and people are people …… so the performance you get depends

on what you measure.• If all things talked about at this

conference are important - why not ubiquitous? Some difficult to measure

“If you don’t know where you are going, any road will do.”

Chinese proverb

“If you don’t know where you are, a map won’t help.”

Watt S. Humphrey

Aim of this research to develop a quantitative measure of this “fuzzy” (qualitative, non-evidenced) concept, and so promote wider engagement.

The research context

• PM6 - presented research on long term impact of benchmarking, to which QMM was an aside - v positive response to QMM (so it is all your fault!)

• QMM presented was closely based on Capability Maturity Model of SEI.

• QMM presented was merely a proof of concept.

The research design

• Research design = Design Science (aka Design Research, Simon,1969)– Alternative to Qualitative or Quantitative– Design; Engineering; Architecture; Information

systems (and Librarianship, at its inception)– “Wicked problems”– Iterative– Product is an artifact (“thing”)– Not assessed against ‘truth’ but by utility– Perfect paradigm to bridge research and practice

divide (but that is another story)

Research iterations

• Phase 1 - QMMa from literature

• Phase 2 - QMMb from data

• Phase 3 - QMMbeta (amalgamated)

• Test for validity and utility of QMMbeta

• QMM fully characterised

• Online self-assessment tool

Phase 1 - literature

• Atkinson• Baldridge• Crosby• Deming• EFQM• Garratt• Handy• Juran

• McKinsey 7 S• Oakland• Peters• Peters & Young• Senge• Swieringa &

Wierdsma• ……….

Phase 2

• Grounded theory (from Straus & Corbin)• Semi-structured interviews (vertical slice) and

documentary analysis• Interview Qs from Phase 1 QMM• 10 HE libraries so far (9 UK; 1 SA)• From data - categories; properties (specific or

general attributes of categories); dimensions (location of property on range).

Results (so far)

• Central construct is culture• 35 elements - group together into 7

facets• 6 facets from both literature and data (8

facets in total)• Elements stable - it is how they group

that differs

Quality Culture

• A culture of quality is:– Doing things right– Doing the right thing– Learning– Suited to the ‘business’ environment (change

seeking in an agile environment)– Explicitly and appropriately aiming to improve quality

• The culture is created by:– Strong leadership– The people of the organisation

Alignment is the glue

Management of the organisation

• Strategic plan generation

• Management alignment (achieving SP)

• Progress monitoring

• Performance measurement

• Project management processes

Environmental sensing

• Customers (bottom up)– Gathering feedback– Collation of feedback– Action as a result of feedback

• Organisation (top down)– Gathering feedback– Influencing organisation

• Wider context (inside out)– Gathering feedback– Involvement of staff in profession– Contribution to profession

Learning organisation

• Staff empowerment

• Staff involvement in change

• Nature / level of learning

• Attitude to mistakes

• Attitude to risk

• Staff encouragement to innovate

Attitude to change

• Attitude to change

• Perception of drivers for change

Attitude to quality

• Definition of quality (inc locus of control)

• Attitude to quality improvement

• Perception of responsibility for quality

• Type of quality improvement initiatives (“sexy” vs. “vanilla”)

Leadership

• Vision and value setting

• Trust

• Inspiration and motivation

Investment in staff

• Attitude to staff (as an asset)

• Training provision

• Development of staff

• Recognition of staff

Alignment

• Vertical alignment• Horizontal alignment• Consistency• Communication flow• “little cogs” - staff see where they fit• Structure• Alignment of attitude to quality• Alignment of attitude to change

The Quality Maturity Model

Ad Hoc Repeatable Defined Managed Continuous Man. of org. Env. sensing Learning org. Attitude to change Attitude to quality Leadership Invest. in staff Alignment

Research into practice

• Aim is to make tricky-to-measure concepts measurable.

• Can’t just be theoretically interesting - has to be useful to practitioners.

• Testing this utility is part of the research

… so over to you …

Questions - general

• Would you find the QMM useful?• How should I tell?

Questions - specific 1

• What would you find most useful as a measure of performance:– a single number (“3”)– An average - mean (“3.245”); mode (“3”);

median (“3”)– A profile (“management of organisation =

3; attitude to change = 4; alignment = 2” etc)

– A total out of 40 (8x5)

Questions - specific 2

• What do you think of the 8 facets?– Management of the organisation– Environmental sensing– Learning organisation– Attitude to change– Attitude to quality– Investment in staff– Leadership– Alignment

Your thoughts / comments

Thank You

for taking part in my research

frankie.wilson@brunel.ac.uk

• Any thoughts / ideas / suggestions / criticisms very gratefully received.