Stratgic Vision

Leadership Vision and Strategic DirectionBy Don Brecken

FORUMFORUMA Pe e r - R e v i e w e d P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e Q u a l i t y M a n a g e m e n t D i v i s i o n o f t h e A m e r i c a n S o c i e t y f o r Q u a l i t y

Winter 2004V o l u m e 3 0 , N u m b e r 1T h e Q u a l i t y M a n a g e m e n t

Articles published in The Quality Management Forummay not be reproduced without

consent of the author(s).

Creating a compelling vision and developinga strategy to achieve it, is one of leadership’sprimary functions. Historically, only top leadersunderstood the vision well enough to organizehuman and material resources to achieve it. Today,however, leaders at every level of the organizationmust understand the vision.

This article provides an overview of theleader’s role in creating the organization’sfuture. It examines leadership vision, theunderlying themes common to effective vision,and how vision works on many levels. It willalso examine how leaders formulate vision andstrategy. Finally, this article will discuss theleader’s contribution to achieving the vision.

Strategic Leadership

Excellence in organizational performance doesnot come about by accident. It is a consciouschoice made by organizational leaders. Top leadersknow their organization’s environment, have afive- or ten-year vision for the organization, andset believable plans to achieve their vision. However,in this complex and ever-changing world, anticipat-ing the future can be very difficult. The authorsof “Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge,”Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus, agree and addthat the “...problems of organizations are increas-ingly complex. There are too many ironies,polarities, dichotomies, dualities, ambivalence,paradoxes, confusions, contradictions, contraries,and messes for any organization to understandand deal with.”1 This complexity explains whymany leaders are more comfortable focusing onclear, short-term goals than on uncertain, long-term visions.

But what will the future hold for those whofail to consider it? Failing to anticipate yourcustomer’s future needs, for instance, could putyou at risk of losing business to competitors whodo anticipate these needs and are able to fulfillthem. This means leaders must anticipate theirfuture needs and position their organizationproperly to fulfill those needs. It is the respon-sibility of organizational strategic leadership toconsider the external and internal business environ-ment and make sense of complexity when creatingthe organization’s vision, mission and strategies,and planning their implementation.

Leadership Vision

Organizational leaders must create a com-pelling vision that will inspire and motivatetheir employees. A vision is more than just adream. “It is an ambitious view of the futurethat everyone in the organization can believein, one that can realistically be achieved, yetoffers a future that is better in important waysthan what now exists.”2 Vision is what guides

INSIDE THIS ISSUE

From the Chairman . . . . . . . 2

Leadership Characteristics for Quality Performance . . . . 3

Why certify? . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Quality Leadership, Situational Style . . . . . . . . . 8

The Physics of Change Leadership. . . . . . . 12

The Whole Leader: TwoApproaches to Integrity . . . 16

www.asq-qmd.org

The password

for the members only section on the ASQ-QMD Web site is:

w04frm

(LEADERSHIP VISION, continued on page 6)

SPECIAL ISSUE: Focus on Leadership

WINTER 20042

F r o m t h e C h a i r m a n

I’m writing this message shortly after returning from ASQHeadquarters in Milwaukee. In May and November each year, theASQ Division Affairs Council and Section Affairs Council meet todiscuss the latest initiatives and proposals for the operation of theAmerican Society for Quality. As your Division Chair, I representthe QMD members at these meetings. The following are a few ofthe more important items that were discussed:

1. ASQ Branding Initiative — You’re probably aware by nowthat ASQ has a new logo. This new logo is part of an initiative to betterdefine and identify the role of ASQ in the world marketplace. I’ll talkfurther about this subject as more information becomes available.

2. Community Good Works Initiative — The role of communityadvocate is one that ASQ takes very seriously. To highlight the potentialof quality to benefit humanity, ASQ has launched the CommunityGood Works Program, providing matching grants and knowledgetransfer to improve local communities and create a body of evidencethat documents the efficacy of quality.

Candidates for matching grants include not-for-profit, community-based or community-serving organizations with 501(c)(3) tax-exemptstatus. Local government agencies are also acceptable.

Additional information on grant eligibility and pilot projects isavailable at the ASQ members-only Web site.

3. Stakeholder Dialogues Initiative — In short, this is a processwhere one of the senior ASQ members (Chair, Chair-Elect, ExecutiveDirector) holds a 3 – 4 hour formal ASQ/Quality briefing for a groupin any location requested by a company, ASQ Section/Division orcommunity group. Almost any group can ask for one of the briefings,all they have to do is provide the venue and do the local promotion.This seems to be working very well and looks to me like a great oppor-tunity to promote ASQ and Quality. Contact ASQ Headquarters at1-800-248-1946 if you’re interested in sponsoring one of these briefings.

4. New ASQ Membership Model — The ASQ Board of Directorshas authorized development of a new member model. This model willbe designed to support ASQ’s vision in making ASQ “the communityof choice for everyone in the world who seeks quality technology,concepts or tools to improve themselves and their community.”The model is to be flexible, fluid and defined by each member. Thereis extensive information on the different categories of membershipon the ASQ members-only Web site under the subject LivingCommunity Model.

In previous issues of the QMD Forum, I briefed you on theactivities of the QMD Business Planning and ImplementationCommittees. The committees have completed their work and havemade the following observations and recommendations:

• We have declining membership as a division.

• Our market is shifting from traditional quality systems (qualityprofessionals) to process improvement (many professions and needs).

• We must be market focused (and structured), not product focused.

• We have to deliver perceived value to all customers.

• We can do this by:

1. Defining clear priorities and keeping them in front of us at alltimes (mission, objectives, strategy, tactics).

2. Constantly studying markets and measuring ourselves.

3. Broadening and deepening the organization by involving more people.

4. Developing and delivering initiatives that are market based.

5. Structuring ourselves for flexibility and market needs.

In response to the committees’ recommendations, the QMDCouncil approved a new organizational structure for the Division(see the organization chart on page 19) and an implementation planfor accomplishing the near-term tactical plans of the division.

Quality Management Conference 2004

By now, you should have received your brochure describing the16th Annual Quality Management Conference in Dallas March 1-5,2004. With a New Frontiers of Quality theme, the conference willoffer our members and other academicians, practitioners, consultantsand researchers the opportunity to participate in a variety of forumsto include pre- and post-conference tutorials, presentation sessions,keynote addresses, panels and workshops. Pre-conference tutorialswill run in half-day, full-day, two- and three-day formats Monday,March 1 – Wednesday, March 3. The conference will begin with areception the evening of Wednesday, March 3, followed by two daysof keynote speakers and conference presentations on Thursday,March 4, and Friday, March 5. The conference committee is lookingforward to offering — for the first time — a full day of post-conferencetutorials on Saturday, March 6. If you haven’t received your brochure,call ASQ headquarters at 1-800-248-1946 and request a copy.

The Ultimate Quality Management System: Part 2

In the previous issue of the Forum, I talked a little bit about myexperiences with the National Quality Program Criteria. In thisissue, I’d like to talk about the self-assessment aspects of Baldrige.

Fellow Quality ManagementDivision (QMD) MembersBy John Bauer

3

Over the past fifteen years, I’ve had theopportunity to participate in many organi-zational self-assessments using the BaldrigeCriteria and Scoring Guidelines as a basis.As the leader of my own organization’s selfassessment and examiner for state and localawards based on Baldrige, I’ve been exposedto the value of the self-assessment process.The organizations I’ve dealt with will neverapply for the National Quality Award, butthey use the criteria to improve their opera-tions by comparing themselves to a set ofworld-class business system criteria and thescoring guidelines. To learn more about thisvaluable and interesting process go to theBaldrige Web site (http://baldrige.nist.gov/)and download the pamphlet, “Getting Startedwith the Baldrige National Quality Program.”It contains a Guide to Self-Assessment andAction and a 10-step process for conductingyour own assessment.

Meet a Fellow QMD Member

Dean L. Bottorff has 25 years’ experiencein organizational development projects. Deandeveloped the OrgCulture Diagnostic Model,which studied cultural and performancefactors in over 300 organizations. Dean hasfacilitated hundreds of process improvementsin manufacturing and in transactionalapplications, such as marketing and culturedevelopment. He has presented at severaldomestic and international conferences,including the keynote address at the 2003ASQ Six Sigma Conference. Dean has alsotaught business ethics courses to many lead-ing companies, and has contracted to teachcompanies on behalf of Lehigh and IllinoisState Universities. Dean is the principal ofEthics Quality, Inc., has a BA in ManagerialEconomics from Marietta College, an MBAfrom Robert Morris College, is a CQE andCSQE, the founder of the Pittsburgh SixSigma Focus Group, a Past Chair of theASQ Pittsburgh Section, and serves on the Board of the ASQ Quality ManagementDivision. Reach Dean at (412) 262-9050or at [email protected].

When we talk about leadership, what dowe mean? Is it big — the kind of leadershipthat moves a people or a nation to action?Or is it personal — what we do everyday tohelp others do their best? Is it the directingof operations, activities or performance? Isleadership the guiding of people on a way?Is quality leadership the same as qualitymanagement? Or is it separate?

These are interesting, if not perplexing,questions. And a clear, single definition ofleadership, although discussed and ponderedfor centuries, somehow remains beyond ourgrasp. What we do know is that leaders, includ-ing quality leaders, are identified by what theyare able to do. The Human Development andLeadership Division (HD&L) of the AmericanSociety for Quality (ASQ) has defined whatleaders do through the development of“competencies” contained in the Division’sBody of Knowledge (BoK). Based on the primer,“A Meta-Analysis of Current Thinking onLeadership,” written in 2000, the Division’sBoK represents a consensus view of the sixcompetencies (or roles) of leadership. Wherethe primer represented a summary of morethan 50 authors’ thoughts on leadership,the BoK represents an updated view of whatthe Division considers the cornerstone forhuman development and leadership.

A leadership competency within the BoKis defined as “a cluster of knowledge, skillsand attitudes that can result in excellence inleading regardless of position, industry orgeography and that can be measured andimproved through training and development.”Leadership competencies are not dependenton position or authority, but rather comeinto play whenever we show an individual,or individuals, how to perform a task orhow to improve performance. As a result,every quality professional — from inspectorto manager — has the capacity to become aquality leader. Why six competencies andnot a single definition? Because no singledefinition seems to sufficiently capture theintricacies of what a leader needs to do.

Leadership Characteristics for Quality PerformanceBy Rudolph C. Hirzel

(LEADERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS, continued on page 4)

And a single competency by itself is insuffi-cient to make a good leader. The best leadersalways seem to exhibit an integration ofseveral roles, actions and deeds. The sixcompetencies defined by HD&L represent,when viewed together, the roles that leadersmust be able to assume to be effective. Thesix competencies for leadership as definedby the HD&L BoK include:

Navigator — creates shared meaningand provides direction towards a vision,mission, goal or end-result. This competencymay entail risk taking and requires constantevaluation of the operating environment toensure progress in the appropriate directionis achieved.

Communicator — effectively listens andarticulates messages to provide shared meaning.This competency involves the creation of anenvironment that reduces barriers and fostersopen, honest and honorable communication.

Mentor — provides others with a roleto guide their actions. This competencyrequires the development of personal rela-tionships that help others develop trust,integrity and ethical decision-making.

Learner — continuously develops personal knowledge, skills and abilitiesthrough formal study, experience, reflectionand recreation.

Builder — shapes processes and structuresto allow for the achievement of goals andoutcomes. This competency also entailsassuming responsibility for ensuring necessaryresources are available and the evaluation ofprocesses to ensure effective resource use.

Motivator — influences others to takeaction in a desirable manner. This compe-tency also includes the evaluation of people’sactions to ensure they are performing consis-tently with the mission, goal or end-result.

T H E Q U A L I T Y M A N A G E M E N T F O R U M


4

of the quality requirements when needed,spend time learning what others in theorganization do to affect quality, and takeresponsibility for quality outcomes.

To demonstrate courage, the qualityprofessional can speak out when actions aretaken that are not consistent with qualitypolicies, fight cost cuts that fail to regardhuman capital, and initiate changes toprograms that don’t work anymore.

To demonstrate humility, the qualityprofessional can use passion, not ego, tosolicit support for quality initiatives, let othersmake decisions that impact them, andprovide compliments for work well done.

To demonstrate integrity, the qualityprofessional can connect quality values withwork systems, speak up when something isbeing done that undermines quality values,and take corrective action even when underpressures not to.

To demonstrate creativity, the qualityprofessional can develop new ways ofimplementing quality programs, developtraining courses on quality principles, andalways look for ways to meet quality objectives in more cost effective ways.

To demonstrate perseverance, the qualityprofessional can continue on the path toimprovement in spite of obstacles, keep work-ing to change poor perceptions about quality,and continue to learn about quality eventhough it does not seem to be appreciated.

To demonstrate well being, the qualityprofessional can encourage a healthy workplace, organize work so stress is reduced,and work to align personal goals with thoseof the organization.

These represent just a sampling of the datacollected by HD&L. Each of the personalcharacteristics, and the competencies forthat matter, by themselves are insufficientto define what a quality leader truly needs todo. It is the integration of the competenciesand characteristics that gives leadership itscomplex nature. The path to becoming aquality leader lies in learning to implementall of the competencies and characteristicsin a balanced way. HD&L is currently

superior position, how can they work in thebest interest of those around them? Humilityis what defines the best leaders — those thatunderstand that they are merely servants ofthose that follow them.

Integrity is an ability to discern what isright from what is wrong and the ability tocommit to the path that is believed to bethe right one. Although sometimes a fineline may exist between right and wrong, itis the commitment of an individual to abetter future and the communication of thatfuture to others that causes that individualto rise to a position of leadership.

Creativity is the ability to see possibili-ties, horizons and futures that don’t existyet. It is the constant search for new solu-tions to old problems and the ability toapply these solutions to help people createshared vision, learn new tasks and under-stand the importance of taking a new path.

Perseverance is sticking to a task or pur-pose, no matter how hard or troublesome.It is the ability to continue on a path evenwhen the road gets rough and resistance ishigh. A leader needs to have perseveranceto overcome obstacles when building thestructures to achieve a goal and especially forhelping to motivate people to follow thosestructures once built.

Well Being defines a leaders ability to stayhealthy both in work and in play. Through ahealthy example and a willingness to continuelearning, the excellent leader demonstratesto their followers the importance of alwaysbeing ready to implement leadership com-petencies when called upon.

The seven personal characteristics, like thesix leadership competencies, are integratedand work in conjunction with each other.The above summaries represent just a briefglimpse of how the characteristics can impacteach individual’s ability to become an effectiveleader. Further surveys conducted by HD&Lwithin the ASQ community provide someinsight into how the personal characteristicscan be applied to quality. A summary of theresults is as follows:

To demonstrate accountability, thequality professional can provide explanations

Even as the Division was discussingthese “roles” of leadership, however, therewas awareness that there existed anotheraspect of leadership that was not encom-passed by what leaders do. This is evidencedby an exploration of the Navigator’s role. Thisrole, as assumed by a quality professional, isdistinguished by the creation of a qualitystatement for the organization. The abilityto capture the quality mission and vision iscertainly an important part of leadershipexcellence, but we often apply moral judge-ment to the role also. For instance, qualityleaders have to be able to envision a futurefor their departments or companies thatwill show their co-workers a new level ofquality performance. But there are thoseleaders that seem to corrupt quality values andthose that support them. So what distinguishes“good” leadership from “bad” leadership?Within the BoK committee, it was discoveredthat a collection of personal characteristicsunderlie the six competencies. These personalleadership characteristics provide the foun-dation for leaders to implement, or apply,the competencies described above. Theseven personal leadership foundationalcharacteristics are as follows:

Accountability is taking responsibilityfor the organization, community or self thatthe leader serves. It means not being afraidto measure performance and not shying awayfrom those times when performance is belowpar. Accountability serves as the touchstonefor obtaining honest, informed feedback onhow well the leader is implementing theleadership competencies.

Courage comes from the heart. It is themental or moral strength to venture, persevereand withstand danger, fear or difficulty witha firmness of mind and will. Courage is thecharacteristic that allows the navigator toventure into the unknown. It is what givesthe leader the ability to take a risk, to buildnew structures and work to build new fol-lower skills, to help someone improve with-out thought of reward or compensation.

Humility is what gives excellent leaderstheir ability to mentor, communicate andlearn. If leaders already think they knowall the answers or believe they lead from a

(LEADERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS, continued from page 3)


5

(LEADERSHIP CHARACTERISTICS, continued from page 4)

working to develop training programs andtools to assist with this learning. For moreinformation on the efforts of HD&L or tocomment on this article, please contactRudy Hirzel at [email protected].

Rudolph Hirzel is the immediate past Chairof the Human Development and LeadershipDivision and the current HD&L EducationCommittee Chair. He is also the GeneralManager of IdeaWorks, a consulting firm

specializing in performance improvement toolsand techniques, team facilitation, and leadershiptraining, and teaches math and science forVincennes University.

Why certify?“Information is not knowledge. Let’s not confuse the two.” W. Edwards Deming

As the world becomes more complicated,our success increasingly depends onour ability to use a wide variety ofinformation; to define, plan, organize,control and complete a variety of com-plex, interdependent tasks using afinite set of data and resources. Toenhance our value, we must developthe critical knowledge, interpersonalskills, technical tools and managementtechniques needed in today’s evolvingworkplace environment.

The business case for ongoing trainingand certification is compelling. Indeed,the value of certification has neverbeen higher than it is today. Many seniorexecutives realize that employee certi-fication can improve their company’sbottom line and enhance businessprocesses due to increased efficiency,less down time and higher qualitydecisions. With the application of trainingfrom one of ASQ’s Certification ExamBodies of Knowledge, you learn how toprioritize and plan to do the right things,and you learn the best techniques todo the right things right.

WHAT’S SPECIAL ABOUT AN ASQCERTIFIED EMPLOYEE?

The exams are focused on soft skills aswell as technical tools. The interactionsbetween your role and the diverse func-tions within your company are empha-sized. You are equipped to see the “BigPicture” in terms of quality or reliability,thus enhancing your career growth. In fact,ASQ’s salary survey shows that employeeswith a job-related certification oftenearned an average 10 percent highersalary than those without the certification.ASQ members have also listed the followingbenefits of certification:

• improving performance on the job

• contributing to attaining a promotion

• increasing personal development and pride

• providing documented peer recognition

• contributing to securing a new job

• providing confidence and peace of mind

Everyone can benefit from learning andapplying knowledge from one or more ofthe certifications listed below.

• Quality Manager

• Quality Engineer

• Mechanical Inspector

• Quality Improvement Associate

• Quality Technician

• Reliability Engineer

• Quality Auditor

• Software Quality Engineer

• Calibration Technician

• Six Sigma Black Belt

A broad range of quality, leadershipand technical tools are covered by theexams, and the test questions focuson real-life process management,problem solving and measurementtechniques.

Indeed, as Deming said, information is not knowledge. We are bombardedwith information, data and opinions.The task of preparing for an ASQCertification Exam can ensure that you have the skill to turn informationinto knowledge and make your organization successful.

That’s why an exam certifies knowledgeuseful in any type of organization. It’sall about the fundamental skills thatdrive performance excellence, whetheryour company is small or large, orsupplying products or services.

If you enjoy the prestige that comesfrom being the best in your field, thenyou’ll appreciate the professionaladvantages derived from becoming an ASQ certified professional.

• Enhance your professional image.

• Increase your value to your organization.

• Affirm your commitment to excellence.

• Advance your career.

Get Certified

To learn more, go to www.asq.organd read about how to prepare andapply for an exam.


6

everyone in an organization down the samepath and at the same pace. When a vision isclearly articulated and followed “... everydaydecisions and actions throughout theorganization respond to current problemsand challenges in ways that move theorganization toward the future rather thanmaintain the status quo.”2 An organization’svision must link the present to the future,energize people and garner commitment,give meaning to work and establish a stan-dard of excellence.

Vision links the present to the future ...Vision is about getting from here to there;from what’s going on today to what musthappen tomorrow. The trouble with today’sorganizations is that managers spend mostof their time dealing with current problemsand relatively little time contemplating,visualizing and preparing for the future.Successful leaders are those who handle thedaily challenge of obtaining short-termgoals and focus on the future as well.

Vision energizes people and garnerscommitment ... A powerful vision willchallenge people to give their best effort.“Vision needs to transcend the bottom linebecause people are willing, and even eager,to commit to something truly worthwhile,something that makes life better for othersor improves their communities.”2

Vision gives meaning to work ...Employees need to know their work hasmeaning. Work is more than just a pay-check for many. People love having a largerpurpose for what they do and they want tofeel pride in their work. A good vision cangive larger meaning to work by clarifyingits purpose, its interrelationship with otherwork and its impact on the organization asa whole.

Vision establishes a standard of excellence ... Vision provides measures bywhich contributions to the organization aregauged. “A good vision brings out the bestby speaking to the hearts of employees, lettingthem be a part of something bigger thanthemselves.”2 A good vision clarifies an imageof an organization’s future, lets employeessee how they can contribute, and enablesemployees to reach higher-levels of excellence.

Is there a standard “how to” book forcreating leadership vision? Not according toMax DePree, author and chairman and CEOof Herman Miller, Inc., who writes, “Leadershipis an art, something to be learned over time,not simply by reading books. Leadership ismore tribal than scientific, more a weavingof relationships than an amassing of infor-mation,”3 Powerful and effective visions,however, have five common themes: “theyhave broad, widely shared appeal; they helporganizations deal with change; they encouragefaith and hope for the future; they reflect highideals; and they define both the organization’sdestination and the basic rules to get there.”2

Mission Statements

Organizations with powerful and effectivevisions will likely have a mission statement.“The mission is the organization’s core broadpurpose and reason for existence. It definesthe company’s core values and reason forbeing, and it provides a basis for creatingthe vision.”2 An organization’s mission shouldcommunicate what the company is about.As such, it should be persistent and not changetoo often. Typically, a mission has two parts:the core values and core purpose. The core valuesare what guide the organization. The purpose“...captures people’s idealistic motivationsfor why the organization exists.”2

Some companies choose to combinetheir vision and mission statements. Whatis important to remember about the two isthat the vision continually evolves, whilethe mission remains relatively constant. Themission should endure to lend stability to theorganization in times of change and guidestrategic choice and decisions about the future.

Strategy Formulation

Strong, powerful organizations requiremore than just vision and mission statementsto be effective. They need to formulate strate-gies to translate vision, values and purposeinto action. This is called strategic manage-ment. “Strategic management is the set ofdecisions and actions used to formulate andimplement specific strategies that will achievecompetitively superior fit between the organi-zation and its environment so as to achieveorganizational goals.”2 The strategic leadermust find this fit and translate it into action.The leader must develop strategies. Strategiesare the general plans of action that considerthe allocation of resources and other activitiesthat help the organization meet its goals.

“To remain competitive, leaders developcompany strategies that focus on three qualities:core competencies, developing synergy andcreating value for the customer.”2 Core com-petence is what the organization does well.Synergy occurs when two or more elementsof the organization combine to producesomething greater than the sum of the indi-vidual parts. Value creation is the basic valuea customer receives from the purchase and useof a product or service. Failing to formulatestrategies that translate vision, values andpurpose into action will be wasteful of anorganization’s resources and not provide value.

Strategic leaders find ways to create valuefor customers by formulating strategies thatfocus on core competence and attainmentof synergy. Richard Hays, author of “InternalService Excellence,” hints at this synergywhen he writes, “The value provided to[the] final customer is created through thecontribution of a sequence of separateincremental actions, each a link in a ‘chainof value’ that produces final customer needsatisfaction.”4 These separate incrementalactions described by Hays are the result ofstrategy formulation.

(LEADERSHIP VISION, continued from page 1)


7

Strategy in Action

Transforming an organization’s vision,mission and core competence into strategiesis not enough to achieve organizationalexcellence. Leaders must also ensure thesestrategies are implemented. This is the mostimportant and the most difficult part ofstrategic management. Strategy implemen-tation involves using several tools to turnstrategy into action. Strong leadership is themost important tool for strategy implemen-tation. Leaders need to ensure the new strategyis resourced properly, understood andimplemented, and people are motivated toadopt the new strategy. Authors Bennis andNanus contribute by adding, “Leadership is‘causative,’ meaning that leadership can inventand create institutions that can empoweremployees to satisfy their needs.”1 Therefore,leaders are responsible for making decisionsabout changes in structure, systems andpolicies to support their organization’sstrategic direction.

The Leader’s Contribution

Leaders can make a significant differencein their organizations. “One of the mostcritical jobs of the leader is deciding thevision for the future and linking the futurewith strategic actions.”2 Although today’ssuccessful organizations depend on theactive involvement of all employees, leadersare still ultimately responsible for establish-ing organizational direction through visionand strategy. When leaders fail to fulfillthese responsibilities, their organizationsstruggle. When leaders succeed in fulfillingthese responsibilities, they can make a bigimpact on their organization’s future.

Leaders decide the direction for theirorganizations based on facts, rational analysis,intuition, personal experience and imagination.Consequently, a leader’s contribution andimpact can be measured by the extent towhich they are able to:2

• articulate the vision, mission and strategies

• allocate the resources required for theirimplementation

• inspire those who must embrace andachieve the organizational goals

• provide rewards appropriate to those whocontribute to achieving the vision

Finally, strategic leadership is aboutgaining control over the direction an organ-ization is heading. It’s also about change —transforming the organization from its pres-ent state to a more meaningful future state.Tom Peters, author of “Thriving on Chaos,”calls this a paradox. “The core paradox,”writes Peters, “...that all leaders at all levelsmust contend with is fostering (creating)internal stability in order to encourage thepursuit of constant change.”5 A successfulleadership vision will consider this paradoxand establish a strategic direction that man-ages the organization’s transformation toachieve its vision.

Don Brecken earned his Masters of BusinessAdministration degree in Strategic Managementfrom Davenport University’s Sneden GraduateSchool. He also has a Bachelor of BusinessAdministration in General Business, aBachelor of Science in Human ResourceManagement and a Bachelor of Science inManagement with a Technical Specialty inQuality Leadership.

Don is an ASQ Certified Quality Manager,RAB Certified Quality Management SystemLead Auditor, and Membership Chair for theAmerican Society for Quality — Section1001 of Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Don is currently employed at Steelcase Inc. inGrand Rapids. He is also Adjunct FacultyInstructor of management courses forDavenport University and Contract QualityAuditor for Perry Johnson Registrars and SQAServices Inc.

Don can be reached via phone at (616) 247-3239 (work) or (616) 554-3675(home), or e-mail at [email protected].

REFERENCES

1 Bennis, Warren, and Burt Nanus, “Leaders: The Strategiesfor Taking Charge,” New York: Harper & Row, 1985.

2 Daft, Richard L., “Leadership: Theory and Practice,” Orlando:Dryden Press, 1999. (122-151).

3 DePree, Max, “Leadership is an Art,” New York: Doubleday,1989.

4 Hays, Richard, “Internal Service Excellence,” Sarasota:Summit Executive Press, 1996.

5 Peters, Tom, “Thriving on Chaos: Handbook for aManagement Revolutions,” New York: Harper & Row, 1987.

BIOGRAPHY

Okes, Duke, and Russell T. Westcott, “The Certified QualityManager Handbook,” Milwaukee: ASQ Quality Press, 2001.

Group and its tenuous position at a criticalpoint in the war above the European continent.For the first time, Allied Forces were takingon Nazi Germany’s industrial infrastructure,and the results were falling short of customerexpectations. The real world implications atthe point in time the movie depicts can betraced to British Prime Minister Sir WinstonChurchill’s growing frustration with the lackof results in slowing down the German supplychain via this new and unproven Americanprocess. Churchill wasn’t particularly soldon the “cost-benefit analysis,” while theactual commander of the 918th, LieutenantIra Eaker, was attempting to prove thatlow-altitude, precision, daylight bombingwas a potential catalyst (i.e., root cause) inturning the tide of the war.

Watching this film while being exposedto Hersey and Blanchard’s model and in anAir Force officer-development program wasone of those “ah-ha” moments. Some sixmonths earlier, I had read Deming’s Out ofthe Crisis as part of my “advanced topics inproduction management” course during mysenior year in college. While I can point toDeming as the person who most influencedmy initial foray into the world of quality, itwas the Situational Leadership Model thatreally made continuous process improvementpossible in my various supervisory roles thatfollowed. Successful projects and operationswere the outcome of appropriate leadershipstyles, and when I didn’t get it right, the rootcause was a result of guessing wrong on theability or willingness of the team or individualI was working with.

Since the purpose of this paper isn’t to“teach” the reader the “Situational LeadershipModel,” I will dispense with a serious reviewof the concepts. However, for discussion pur-poses, the framework is presented in Figure 1(right). This model offers a relatively simplethesis. Success as a supervisor depends on thewillingness and ability to work within thewillingness and ability confines of each subor-dinate. Development drives supervisoryapproaches, and those managers who adapttheir style to others instead of forcing it theother way will be more successful. Thatdevelopmental scale is comprised of two sub-


8

As someone who has worked for pay,both as a subordinate and a supervisor, inparts of the past four decades, I can say thatthere is a difference between management andleadership. From my experiences, both arecritical for organizations to succeed. Fromeach boss fate placed in my path, I learnedsomething about overseeing activities andleading the people who carry out those activities.As the old adage goes, “everyone can be anexample, even a bad one!”

Even before I got into the quality busi-ness, process has always been more interestingto me than outcomes. In my estimation,there’s no chicken or egg paradox between thetwo. Process drives results and leadershiptrumps management when it comes to engag-ing people in their day-to-day activities.Unlike other disciplines, such as engineeringand mathematics, where due diligence canallow the investigator to derive a single, sup-ported methodology, organizational studiesare a messier affair. For every theory, there isan equal and opposing point of view.Unfortunately, systems and the people whowork inside them cannot be boiled down tofirst and second derivatives. So how did thefield of quality, with much of its original his-tory tied up in statistical methods, get itselfinto the position where practitioners are moreconfounded by the ambiguity of people-related issues than measuring conformance tospecification? The journey has been interestingto say the least. Basically, it’s all situational.

Reviewing the Bidding

America can trace it roots in the modernquality movement to 1980, with the airingthe NBC special, “If Japan Can, Why Can’tWe,” focusing on W. Edwards Deming’sefforts to revitalize the Japanese economy andthe remarkable improvements in the automo-bile and electronics industries. Since then, thevarious forms of quality programs — most ofwhich were (and are) adaptations of theShewhart Cycle and its focus on continuousimprovement through the use of discreteproblem solving tools — have struggledmightily to reign in process variation, theenemy of precision. Over the past 20 years,a wide range of initiatives have come and

gone, and while overall quality has improved,the gains don’t reflect the amount of time andresources that went into the effort. Basically,organizations and senior leaders are lookingfor the magic elixir that will make everyonetruly inspired to create a quality experiencefor every customer.

This is not going to be another treatise onwhy things didn’t work out as planned. Whenthe Total Quality Management (TQM)approach came out of Deming’s re-emergenceinto U.S. quality, many organizations did notpay attention to the most critical of the“deadly diseases” and “14 obligations.”Deming wasn’t so much concerned with theability of the firm to manage by fact as he wasthat it lead by the right example. Tools areeasy to use, but leadership is difficult to do.After nearly a quarter century of trying to getpeople to reduce process variation in environ-ments where baselines change constantly, maybethe answer lies in acknowledging the fact thatmost workers want to do the right things, butdon’t know how to drive out the fear.

What is really needed is a rational alterna-tive, one that requires continuous action onpeople, not continuous improvement ofprocesses. Six Sigma, while requiring moreactive leadership at the senior levels and incor-porating organizational change readinessstrategies, doesn’t prescribe the one-on-oneinteractions between supervisor and subordi-nate at the third and fourth process levels.And instead of managers and supervisorsbeing frustrated by front-line employees notadapting to the newest quality program andthe new and improved process, take a chapterout of Peter Hersey and Ken Blanchard’sbook — adapt the approach to the develop-ment of the subordinate.

Situational Leadership Revisited

My first introduction to the situationalleadership approach to organizational devel-opment and improvement came via the late1940s film starring Gregory Peck, “12O’Clock High.” Partially drawing on the realexperiences of the U.S. Army Air Corps, thismovie focused on the fictional 918th Bomb

Quality Leadership, Situational Style By Mike Ensby


factors. Ability — the aptitude for perform-ing one or more tasks — is something thatcan be learned through teaching. Willingnessdepends on two distinct, but equally impor-tant criteria. Not only must there be a confi-dence on the part of the subordinate, butthat person must also be able to harness aninternal drive. That confidence has a directbearing on the subsequent level of motiva-tion, but doesn’t guarantee it. As wasdemonstrated in viewing the movie while fol-lowing along with the model, when theleader employs the wrong style, despitewhat the follower development is showing,the results are less than optimal.

A quick review of the situational approachto supervision includes the following truths.First, for those in supervisory roles, thereare four general styles of leadership —directing, coaching, participating and delegating. Most of us find that one of thestyles comes more naturally than others.However, deployment of a leadership styleshould not be driven by personal preference,but rather by the development and readinessof the group or person being supervised.Therefore, the most critical function of thesupervising leader is to ascertain where the“target” is in terms of their ability and will-ingness to carry out the task(s). Typically,

issues around ability are fairly straightforward.The behaviors and corresponding results arereadily apparent and measurable against somestandard of performance (e.g., specific workprocedure or job description.) Someone eitherhas the aptitude for the task or they don’t. Setthe standard, explain the actions necessary,train for specific skills, observe, offer feedbackon gaps, retrain to overcome weak areas, andvalidate the individual’s capability to sustainthe performance and/or handle increasinglymore difficult tasks that pertain to a particularwork package.

The more difficult component of the sub-ordinate development equation is identifying

the willingness to carry out the action plan.You must answer two fundamental questions.First, is the group/person confident in theirability to meet the standard? This may or maynot correlate to the second question, which is,“how internally motivated is the person I’mdealing with?” Someone who is new and sin-cerely interested in doing good work andmoving ahead in their career, but is tentativein their approach to the job must be handleddifferently than the long-term employee whois confident in their ability to get the tasks athand accomplished, but lacks any enthusiasmfor the work itself. The root causes of gaps inwillingness are not always readily apparent

and requires time and energy to determine.Unfortunately, being able to assess both abili-ty and willingness factors are the key to super-visory success.

With a new subordinate who has little tono ability and lacks the confidence and com-mitment to carry out his/her duties, thesupervisor must become a micro-manager,providing continuous oversight in a “telling”mode. The goal of supervision isn’t to makethe supervisor feel good about doing thework, it’s about ensuring the work turns outwell and the subordinate learns how to do thetask efficiently and effectively, leaving littleroom for discussion of the “why fors.” As fol-lower development evolves, supervisor stylechanges to meet the current situational vari-ables. It’s easy to delegate to willing and ablesubordinates, but first you have to work withthem through directive and coaching behav-iors while they are still in the formative stages.

“Qualitizing” the Model

Going back to the discussion of Deming’s“obligations” and “deadly diseases,” the tie-into the situational mode is this, “constancy ofpurpose.” Yes, the original intent was organi-zational constancy of purpose, but it onlyhappens when leaders create the environmentwhere everyone is moving toward the samegoals and objectives. It’s one thing for thefirm to develop an overarching corporatestrategy that provides a long-term purpose.However, translating broad goals into the day-to-day work of the average employee is amore challenging proposition. Frankly, mostworkers aren’t focused on the mission state-ment. Rather, the work is what makes themission to the average person, but the goodnews is that most people want to do a goodjob and would even do better if they had twothings: (1) clear direction and (2) the rightmix of skills, knowledge and ability.

A comprehensive training program withable, energetic and knowledgeable facilitatorsseems like an effective approach to meetingthose aims. Many of these classes, especially inthe Six Sigma realm with an emphasis on

(QUALITY LEADERSHIP, continued on page 10)

9

Supporting/Participating Coaching

DirectingDelegating

S3&D3 S2&D2

S1&D1S4&D4

Directive Behavior

Able & Willing

Able but Unwilling Unable but Willing

Unable & Unwilling

HighLow

High

Low

Su

pp

ort

ive

Beh

avio

r

Figure 1 — Situational Leadership Model Source: P. Hersey, Center for Leadership Studies, Inc.


1 0

applying the tools of quality to a real worldproject, do pretty well in a couple of areas.Specifically, attendees learn the lingo, or asDeming called it, “operational definitions.” Ifquality is to become part of the culture, thenatives must first learn the language.However, not everyone responds equally tothe words. Constancy is difficult when theability and willingness is unequal to beginwith. So what’s the answer? The reality is thatnothing beats hard work like hard work. Thebest one can ask for are some coping strate-gies. What follows is an approach with astrong fundamental principle. The originalSituational Leadership Model takes a gener-ic look at the workplace. It provides aframework for the supervisor to select astyle based on the developmental maturityof the subordinate. This approach focuseson bringing constancy of purpose throughthe application of a quality tool.

The Scenario

Assume that you’re the manager of aprecision machining operation in a state-of-the-art manufacturing facility. Your firm hascapitalized on new technology, invested heavilyin modern equipment, recruited well anddeveloped capable processes to turn out high-quality baseplates for printed circuit boards.Your entire career you’ve been waiting for anopportunity to work in a superior facility;now is your chance. Because of the precision-based nature of the work, your subordinatesare recently degreed engineers, mostly eager,but without previous quality training. Priorto starting work in the new facility, everyonereceived two weeks of Six Sigma trainingfrom a reputable consulting company.Now, it’s time to go to work.

Assuming “Gainer” Leadership Style

Using Figure 2 (above) as a guide, yourfirst assignment is to capitalize on the oppor-tunity to paint on a new canvas. Given thenature of your audience, begin with a fairlyrobust tool, the control chart. In the supervi-sory role, you must respond to the prepared-ness of the audience. While formally educatedand having just had a good overview intoquality, the subordinates are full of potential,but they lack context. A good manager will

avoid the tendency to jump into the “coach-ing” role and focus on the real need. Thenewly hired, whether they are “new economy”professional roles or traditional line employeesneed to focus on the basics. The appropriaterole is that of “gainer.” You’re dealing withskeptics. They can be won or lost dependingon how they are developed from the outset.Mess it up and you have a group of youngcynics on your hands!

The way to avoid that is to keep it simple.Instead of introducing the whole controlchart, start with the checksheet. As a way ofexplaining the various aspects of the produc-tion system, identify the in-process measuresthat impact performance, productivity andefficiency. Data is the key to meaningfulinformation. Capturing the right measuresensures a systematic hunt for root cause andcontinuous process improvement. That muchis true regardless of quality system employed.At this juncture, the emphasis is in gainingthe subordinate’s compliance to workingwithin a system. The goal in this particularexample is to show them what data to collect,how often to collect it, and instruct whichvariables go into which file, in order to createthe corresponding control chart. Multipleemployees doing the same types of activitiesincreases the potential effects of variance, notjust regarding special cause variation, but alsoin relation to common cause. At the outset, amanager must assume nothing about employ-ees working in new task environments. Thefundamental constitutional principle that all

people are created equal applies here — thereis little subordinate proficiency (ability) andenthusiasm should not be confused for will-ingness. This is a mostly one-way relationship,with the manager telling and the worker doing.

At the point where one or more of thenewbies begins to show consistency in collecting and presenting the data in properform, it’s time to shift style, but not foreveryone — just those who are ready forthe change. While you will still need tomaintain a “gaining” style with those stillin the Gainer quadrant (see Figure 2 above),it is important to begin grooming the “will-ing novices” for increased expectations andresponsibility. This is where the trainingfunction really begins. When people beginto understand why they are doing whatthey are doing, they begin to make valuejudgments about the work. Left unchecked(the supervisor not responding to thechanges in subordinate development in atimely manner), the attachment to thework will break down. At this stage of the model, subordinates arestill enthusiastic, eager to learn, and becomingconfident in their ability to meet the outputstandards. However, their real ability is usuallysomewhat lower than they perceive it to be.

(QUALITY LEADERSHIP, continued from page 9)

Monitor/Coach Trainer

GainerQuality Leader

S3&D3 S2&D2

S1&D1S4&D4

Teaching Intensity

No Limits on Tools; Make the Rules

Challenging Tools w/ Input on Rules Simple Tools w/ Fewer Rules

Simple Tools w/ Many Rules

HighLow

High

Low

Rei

nfo

rcin

gB

ehav

ior

Figure 2 — Situational Quality Development


1 1

Shifting to “Training” Leadership Style

Continuing on with our previous example,these educated young professionals will not becontent with data mining alone, especially astheir familiarity with the process(es) and envi-ronment grows. This becomes an opportunityfor the leader to take the role of an educational“trainer.” A way of improving the control chartprocess started in the gainer quadrant is toincorporate the output standards (specificationlimits) within the confines of the control limits.This not only adds complexity to the measures,but it also becomes the venue for explainingthe “big picture” to employees who havedemonstrated an initial commitment to makinga positive impact. The impact can be moresignificant if they know some of the “whys” ofwhat they are doing. As the responsibility forquality is being pushed lower and lower in theorganization and traditional control mechanisms(and the associated human resources) arebeing removed, then those doing the tasksneed to understand “cause and effect” beforethey can identify it. The primary goal inthe “trainer” quadrant is not to do problemsolving; it is to help subordinates to becomeprocess thinkers. Data is much more powerfulif it becomes information. A control chartwith both specification and control limitsinforms process users of what the system isdoing in relation to customer needs.

Moving to “Coaching/Mentoring”Leadership Style

The transition from the “training” to“coaching/mentoring” role is critical for futuresuccess. By this time, you’ve made your“cuts.” Those that haven’t been able to over-come the fear of failure and/or develop a minimal level of skill proficiency should bemoved out. While still maintaining thechameleon-like ability to move in and out ofthe “gainer” and “trainer” roles for those stillin those development areas, the focus in thethird quadrant is to get the problem solversup and running. In my many years of workingwith supervisors (experienced and inexperienced)I have heard them state that they like to lettheir folks take care of the work and sit backand wait to provide guidance when they havequestions. This is passive style of trusting sub-ordinates to do the right things right is com-

mendable, but can set both sides up for failurewhen the process begins to break down which,according to the sag principle from Kaizen,occurs over time. A proactive approach witha goal of systematically increasing task anddecision-making autonomy works better atthis point. Workers in the third quadrant areunquestionably able and most likely confident,but the real question is whether or not eachone is internally driven to problem solve.Believe it or not, not everyone lives to work.Those that are working to live are not typi-cally driven to do more than what it takes tocontinue drawing a paycheck. They’re justnot fully engaged in the system or process.The key to managerial success here is toplace folks in the correct sub-grouping atthis level of development. The “enthusiasticcommitteds” need mentoring, and you cancontinue to coach from the sidelines thosewho are “participating ables.”

Using the control chart example, continuecoaching the “ables” on the importance ofmonitoring their process variables andreducing variation. However, save your energyfor the “committeds.” The regular controlcharts now can be conversation starters forthe problem solving process. In the instanceswhere there is noticeable process variation,set up relatively broad parameters for theseemployees to investigate the system. Suggestother quality tools that will aid them intheir search for root cause(s) of the processinconsistency. What they have now thatthey didn’t have during the initial awarenesstraining is context. Regular reviews of theirprogress toward establishing the root causeis a better approach than letting individualsor teams get to the point where they arerecommending potential solutions as the firstreporting “gate.” The biggest risk in quadrantthree is having to tell someone they are wrongafter they have invested significant effortchasing after a “red herring.” The role of thementor is to monitor, monitor, monitor.Review the selection and use of tools at eachstep of the problem solving process. Giveprecise and concise feedback on what you seeas beneficial application of “tools to rules” andoffer suggestions on what needs additionalwork. Just as bosses don’t like surprises,neither do subordinates.

By the time you reach the final stage, youwill have less of a crowd than you startedwith, but as long as you have compartmen-talized well up to this point, you get to seethe payoff. You have developed knowledgeworkers. They no longer need your brain.As a matter of fact, you’ve gained yourselfadditional intellectual capital. Good thing,because it will be required to sustain thequality system. The two and three sigmasystems are now operating in the mid-fourrange. Systems problem solving is actuallybecoming systematic, but the gains are slowingdown. There is a natural tendency for com-placency to settle in and to let one’s guarddown a bit. Of course, that’s when zap canoccur — a sudden shift in technology, competi-tor encroachment, a change in customerexpectations, whatever.

The wise leader will always be thinkingahead to the day when the system will berealigned. As a matter of fact, the true leaderwill look to those in the fold who are morethan prepared and equally ready for a chal-lenge, and ask them to “break the system.”While the control chart may still be an integralpart of the “toolbox,” what you’re askingthis select group to do is to begin paintingon their own clean canvas, just like you didat the beginning of the developmentprocess. Together, agree on a vision of whatthe change needs to accomplish, then letyour “A-team” loose. This is the real mean-ing of empowerment, but it is not givenlightly. Only those who have earned it getto operate with the freedom and creativitythat makes work truly meaningful.

Summing Up

A very wise boss once told me that thekey to supervisory success is the ability toconnect with each person on an individualbasis. His operational definition of constancyof purpose was predicated on the “masscustomization” principle. Start out with abasic framework, present it to the group, andthen go to work in a series of one-on-ones.The constancy is achieved by the sum ofwhat each person gains through individualgrowth, not sameness but an amalgamationof the best each has to offer. In “12 O’Clock

(QUALITY LEADERSHIP, continued on page 18)


1 2

As leaders in the quality profession, weare often the instigators of an odd paradox.We diligently fight variation to try to stabilizeour processes, systems and organizations togenerate a consistent and predictable environ-ment. At the same time, we are charged withpositioning the organization to respond toever-shifting customer needs and requirementsby shifting our processes, systems and organi-zations. Therein lies our paradox.

If we fail to resolve this change/don’tchange dilemma, we will appear to the outsideworld to be continually oscillating our focusand direction. As a result, the very people weare trying to lead often see us as a little crazy,wondering where we are headed next. Manyof us grow frustrated by the ever-increasinglevels of effort it requires to get and maintainexternal support and contributions for ourinitiatives. All too often we reach a pointwhere we are unable to sustain the energy tosupport our effort and our initiatives witherand die. Moreover, when things don’t workout the way we had hoped, we frequentlyblame it on resistance to change.

Is it possible that we as leaders of changecreate the very resistance that we complainabout? Is there something that we are missingin the way that we typically go about intro-ducing change? If so, what can we or shouldwe do differently? I believe that the answer tothe first two questions is yes and that there issomething we can do about it. I also believethat the insight we need to address our problemlies in the science of physics.

The physics of change.

Margaret Wheatley1 provides an excellenttreatise on the comparison of physics, specifi-cally chaos theory, to organizational leadershipand management. In the world of physics, astable, balanced or unchanging environmentis associated with the word equilibrium.Equilibrium is defined as a condition in whichthe resultant of all acting forces is zero. This isdepicted graphically in Figure 1 (above), wherethe irregular shape represents a system and thearrows depict the various forces at play withinthe system. If we think about the arrows as avector dynamics problem we see two unavoid-able results, the net movement of the system

is virtually zero and the internal stress is highas the forces are pulling in opposite directions.For this system to simply survive requirestremendous expenditures of energy to keep itfrom pulling itself apart. This energy mustcome from outside the system and/or be

generated within. If sufficient energy can’tbe acquired or produced then the systemmoves toward entropy and eventually fails.

If we want the system to move, we mustprovide and sustain sufficient additional energyto not only support the movement, but also tofocus it in the direction in which we want thesystem to move, as depicted in Figure 2 (below).We must also be sure that the system doesn’treact in some opposing way to our injectionof energy, as that will require more energyto offset the resistance. If this occurs, it islikely to set off a negative feedback loop in

which ever increasing additions of directedforce generate ever increasing levels ofresistance until again, we can no longer sus-tain the levels of energy needed or the systemself destructs.

How does this tie to our systemsand organizations?

Our organizations are like the irregularshape in Figure 1. Some parts of the systeminteract often with the outside world whileothers are relatively isolated from it. The forcesat play are people’s expenditures of effort andconsumption of resources to achieve someobjective and/or succeed in some performancemeasurement. When the objectives are unclearor interpreted differently, or the measurementscause conflict between what is best for theparts of the organization versus what is bestfor the organization as a whole, the magnitudeof the forces vary. The direction of the forcesalso varies, resulting in a greatly reducedmovement of the organization towards itsgoals and even, at times, a net movement ofzero or even a negative movement along withconsiderable internal competition and stress.

The energy and resources we are expendingare finite and are provided, in one way oranother, by money that is also in limited supply.When our efforts are not correctly focused,parts of the organization end up competingwith other parts for these limited resourcescausing considerable amounts of our limitedenergies to be wasted, increasing the rate atwhich the system approaches entropy. Someaspects of this phenomenon were verbalizedin Eli Goldratt’s2 book, The Goal, when heclearly showed that having all of the pieces ofan organization busy all of the time in aneffort to maximize system efficiency results ina very inefficient system filled with waste. Thishigh level of waste makes it difficult for thesystem to generate and sustain the additionallevels of directed energy necessary to initiateand sustain the change effort. Even in anorganization that has minimal stress, intro-ducing change still requires additional directedenergy. In either circumstance, the leader ofthe change effort must be careful not to createresistance to change as it will require even higherlevels of energy to be expended which can quick-ly lead to the demise of the change initiative.

The Physics of Change LeadershipBy Dr. Russell L. Johnson

Forces at work to maintain equilibrium in the system

Forces at work to maintain equilibrium in the system

Direction and magnitude of change energy

Figure 1 — A system at equilibrium in thesystem: High stress – Zero movement

Figure 2 — A system receiving change energy


1 3

What causes resistance to change?

First, let’s agree on some assumptions:

1. Any improvement requires a change, but not all change constitutes an improvement.

2. People are not resistant to change; they are resistant to uncertainty and perceived risk.

As leaders in the quality profession, weare faced with providing the answer to threefundamental questions:3

1. What to change — What is it aboutthe realities of the current system that areundesirable and/or no longer meet our needs(the symptoms) and what are their cause(s),the disease?

Our Core Problem(s)

2. What to change to — What new ele-ment(s), if introduced into our current system,would spur the new reality that we desirewithout creating new undesirable effects?

Our Solution

3. How to cause the change — Whatactions must be taken to create the newreality that addresses key issues and overcomesobstacles, and in what order must they betaken to ensure that we arrive at our desiredoutcomes without creating new obstacles —specifically, resistance to change.

Our implementation plan.

Any proposed change has four aspects toit. There is both a positive and negative aspectof the status quo as well as a positive andnegative aspect of the new environment. If anyof these four aspects are not satisfactorilyidentified and addressed in the proposal, peoplewill become uncertain and perceive risk. Theless clarity and validity with which the fouraspects of change are addressed, the moreuncertainty and perceived risk and the morereactive energy the system will create to opposethe change. The impact of this resistance to changeis depicted graphically in Figure 3 (above).

When we present the solution, it isnecessary to address all four aspects, (+/- of

the current and the +/- of the future) of thechange. These four aspects are discussed indetail below, including an analogy.

We must verify and get agreement that thenegatives of business as usual are real not justto the organization, but also to each individualin it. What the danger is and how it will affecteach person must be determined and explained.In our analogy, an alligator represents thenegative of not changing. Each person mustbelieve that the alligator is real and that theyare on the menu if they don’t change. Failureto address this issue satisfactorily results inresistance to change in the form of “what doI care, it doesn’t effect me.” Initially, thisapathy may result in no positive or negativeenergies, but the mood is contagious causingus to loose energy from others who mighthave been more likely to support our effort.

We must determine the positives of thecurrent situation and attempt to retain them orprove that they will be replaced with somethingas good or better in the new operational envi-ronment. This can be a very difficult task asthe positives about the current situation areoften simply that people have learned skillsand behaviors that allow them to survive in avery difficult environment. The difficulty liesin the fact that the behaviors, if admitted,would be considered undesirable. For example,we push for resources to be busy everywherein our organization in an effort to maximizeour return on investment, assuming that peo-ple and equipment being busy equals beingproductive. In reality, most of our resourcesare actually unable to be productive highpercentages of their time, because they aredependent upon other, slower resources inthe system. It becomes necessary for these

individuals to find some way to be busy atall times, which often translates to lookingbusy. If they can find other work that appearslegitimate they will do it, making themtemporarily unavailable when productivework again becomes available. If other busywork can’t be found they will stretch out thelegitimate work to fill the available time. Thefear is that management’s discovery of thesepractices would not be favorable even thoughthe workers have exhibited high problemsolving capabilities in creating the solutionto their circumstances. For the purposes ofour analogy, let’s say that the positives ofthe status quo are represented by a genie.It’s a nice thing to have, but we are afraid itwill be taken away if it is discovered. Failureto address this aspect of the change resultsin resistance in the form of “I don’t like thecurrent situation, but at least I understandhow to survive in it.” Resistive energy isgenerated to keep us where we are.

Just as we must validate the existence anddanger of the negative of the status quo, wemust also be able to validate that the positive(s)of the new environment being proposed arereal and that they are accessible to all. For thepurpose of our analogy, let’s say this is repre-sented by a pot of gold on a higher floorwhere no one can currently see or reach it.We must be able to convince everyone that ourplan will create the pot of gold, that there willbe enough for everyone, that they can all sharein it, and that the plan includes a ladder forthem to climb to get to the upper floor.Failure to successfully address this aspect ofchange means that we may not be able toinject sufficient additional energy into thesystem to initiate and maintain the changeeffort whether resistance is created or not.

The negative of our proposed change is inthe form of concern about the implementationportion of the plan. Everyone agrees that theproblem exists and that the plan will createthe desired outcomes, but they are concernedthat the implementation portion is insuffi-cient to get us there and/or may create otherundesirable side effects. An example of this

Positive Energy for change

Resistance energy

Energy from the negative aspect of change

Energy from the negative aspect of the status quo

Energy from the positive aspect of the status quo

(THE PHYSICS OF CHANGE, continued on page 14)

Figure 3 — A system reacting negatively to change


1 4

might be an organization that has averaged20 percent overtime per week for the lastthree years and is now going to implementlean techniques. The change is anticipated toyield a 40 percent increase in productive capacity.The workers are going to realize that not onlywill this result in no overtime in the future,but it will also likely result in a reduction inworkforce. Without some aspect of the planacknowledging this reality, the workers arelikely to resist implementation, as they areworried about losing their job. And even ifthey are still with the company, they wonderhow they will be able to pay bills that wereincurred based on their current pay withoutthe overtime hours.

As the instigator of the plan and thechange leader, we are our own worst enemyregarding this aspect of change. We tend toget excited about the plan and what we believeit will do and regard those raising reservationsabout “our plan” as nay-sayers who are alwaysblocking progress. When we refuse to listen tothese people, we often discover that they hada legitimate concern when we crash headlonginto it during the implementation. When theseindividuals have been ignored too much,they quit trying to tell us of the problem andin extreme cases become active saboteurs ofthe effort. In our analogy, the implementationplan is synonymous with the ladder thateveryone must not only climb to get to thepot of gold, but also be able to climb it withtheir genie slung over their shoulder. Becauseof our focus on the positives of the plan, weoften build a ladder that is pretty rickety, hasmissing rungs, is too short, or doesn’t appearstrong enough to hold the climber and theirgenie at the same time. Successfully address-ing the other three aspects of the change andfailing on this one can create some of thegreatest resistance to change. In our analogyit would be as if we have convinced everyonethat the pot of gold and alligator is real andthat the alligator is right on their heels. Wehave acknowledged the value of the genie andthey are carrying it over their shoulder. Theyknow that they must climb the ladder or theyare going to be alligator lunch. The problemis they know the ladder is so poorly built thatthey are going to fall trying to climb it, breaktheir leg and kill the genie in the fall, andhave no way to escape the alligator. The more

uncertain people are about the plan, the morethey will imagine the worst-case scenario andthe more negative reactive energy to the planthey will generate.

So what do we do?

Our solution should never be presentedwithout first having:

1. Identified the problem(s) — Theundesirable effects (negatives) of the statusquo being experienced under the currentenvironment.

2. Identified the desirable effects (posi-tives) of the new environment that wouldreplace the current undesirable effects.

3. Identified the desirable effects (posi-tives) of the current environment.

If these issues are not clearly identified andtheir logical causalities within the system notunderstood, it is impossible to formulate andtest proposed solutions for eliminating unde-sirable effects and creating desired effects. It isalso impossible to ensure that the proposedactions will not create new undesirable effects(the negatives of change) or nullify existingpositive effects (the positives of the status quo).

There is at least one documented andproven technique and tool set for achievingthe above process, the logical problem solvingtools of the Theory of Constraints as appliedto resistance to change. While these tools andconcepts are published in many sources, anexcellent white paper on the subject titled,“Theory of Constraints and its ThinkingProcesses — A Brief Introduction,” is avail-able at the following Web site: http://www.goldratt.com/toctpwp1.htm

If our process of injecting change energiesinto the system triggers negative reactions, wewill only succeed in accelerating our system’srush towards entropy and eventual death.Instead of being a change leader, we will likelyexperience a change of leadership with us in thelead. If, on the other hand, we can successfullyinject our change(s) into the existing systemwithout triggering reactionary energies, thenour system will evolve to a new level and beginto again seek equilibrium resulting in theopportunity to be an ongoing leader of change.

Dr. Russell L. Johnson is a visiting professorwith the Management Department atMetropolitan State College of Denver inDenver, Colorado. He is certified as a Jonahin the Thinking Processes tools of the Theoryof Constraints. His teaching and researchinterests lie in improving manufacturing andservice operations management and projectmanagement with an emphasis in constraintsmanagement. Dr Johnson can be contacted atMetropolitan State College of Denver at(303)352-4350 or electronically at [email protected].

REFERENCES

1. Margaret J. Wheatley, Leadership and the New Science:Learning About Organization from an Orderly Universe, San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., 1994.

2. Eliyahu M. Goldratt and Jeff Cox, The Goal, second revisededition, New York, NY: North River Press, Inc. 1992.

3. The Goldratt Institute, “Theory of Constraints and Its Thinking Processes — A Brief Introduction,” New Haven, CT: http://www.goldratt.com/toctpwp1.htm.

Bibliography

Goldratt, Eliyahu M., It’s Not Luck, NewYork, NY: North River Press, Inc. 1994.

Goldratt, Eliyahu M. and Jeff Cox, TheGoal, second revised edition, New York, NY:North River Press, Inc. 1992.

Goldratt, Eliyahu M., The HaystackSyndrome: Sifting Information Out of theData Ocean, New York, NY: North RiverPress, Inc. 1990.

Goldratt, Eliyahu M., What Is This ThingCalled Theory of Constraints and HowShould It Be Implemented?, New York, NY:North River Press, Inc. 1990.

The Goldratt Institute, Theory ofConstraints and its Thinking Processes — A Brief Introduction, New Haven, CT:http://www.goldratt.com/toctpwp1.htm.

Johnson, Russell L., Quality and the BottomLine: A Theory of Constraints Perspective,Quality Management Forum, Winter 2000.

Lepre, Domenico, and Cohen, Oded,Deming and Goldratt: The Theory ofConstraints and the System of ProfoundKnowledge, New York, NY: North RiverPress, Inc.1999.

(THE PHYSICS OF CHANGE, continued on page 18)

(THE PHYSICS OF CHANGE, continued from page 13)


1 5

Keynote Speakers• Harry S. Hertz, Director of

Baldrige National Quality Program

• Gregory H. Watson, Past President & Chair, ASQ

• Flip Flippen, The Flippen Group

• Patrice L. Spath, Brown-Spath & Associates

Many Learning Opportunities

Learn from leading practitioners in a variety of forums.

• Preconference tutorials with half-day, full-day, two- andthree-day formats March 1 - 3.

• Two-day conference with keynote speakers and conference sessions March 4 - 5.

• For the first time, post-conference tutorials March 6.

In keeping with the conference theme, there will be many

topics and issues that progressive quality professionals

want to hear more about:

• Advanced Manufacturing (Lean)

• Supply Chain Management

• Knowledge Management

• Strategic Quality Planning

• Six Sigma

• ISO/QS/AS 9000/14000

• Organizational Learning and Development

• International Quality

• Quality Management in Health Care

• Quality Management in Government

Formats will vary from straight presentations to

discussions, and from case studies to workshops.

Certification Examinations

Certified Quality Manager, Certified Quality Auditor,

Certified Quality Engineer, and Certified Quality

Improvement Associate examinations will be held on

Saturday, March 6.

Exhibitor Opportunities

This event draws leaders and decision-makers from all over

North America and other locations. Reserve your space as

an exhibitor or become a sponsor by contacting Sam Maloof,

Conference Exhibits Chair at (407) 356-5100 or by email at

[email protected]. At National ASQ, contact Phil

Edmunds at 1-800-248-1946 or email [email protected].

We will rush you Exhibitor Information and be happy to

answer any questions you may have, including information

about sponsorships and other opportunities.

One-Stop Information Location: www.asq-qmd.org

At the Quality Management Division Web site you can:

• View the course and session descriptions

• Apply for certification examinations

• Register for the conference and courses

• Obtain exhibitor information

• Download conference specials

• Obtain hotel, travel and Dallas-area information

16th Annual Quality Management Conference“New Frontiers of Quality”March 2004, Dallas, Texas


1 6

Integrity is a leadership characteristic,not a management action. Being honest,sincere, straightforward, compassionate andrespectful are important characteristics ofintegrity leadership. Integrity is a worthyend in itself, but it also plays a role in suchcore organizational outcomes as risk-taking,creativity and effective communication.

In rapid-paced environments where thespeed of change and thought complicatedecision-making, integrity is often placed ata lower priority than meeting short-term goals.There is little doubt that as complexityincreases, the resulting dilemmas test a leader’sintegrity. However, when integrity is a toppriority, and leaders are self-aware, they willintuitively use it to guide their actions.

Effective leaders are concerned with twodefinitions of integrity. One is the strongadherence to a code of morals or values.The other is the quality or state of beingcomplete or undivided. This paper commentson both of these characteristics as theyapply to an effective leader.

Being One Within Yourself

We must lead ourselves before we cansuccessfully lead others. Wholeness impliesnot being fragmented, exhibiting inner andouter congruence. Being congruent meansthat leaders live and lead consistent withtheir values. Values are what we believe in —those principles that guide our behavior.Building congruence and conscience is aboutdeveloping balance and harmony betweenthe inner core and external behavior. Theremust be no disconnect between core valuesand actions. This balance and harmony iswholeness. When leaders are whole they dowhat they say. A current business term forthis concept is “walking the talk.”

John Zenger and Joseph Folkman identifyfive fatal flaws related to our sense of whole-ness as a leader.i

1. Not learning from our mistakes

Incomplete leaders repeat failing actionsbecause the policies or procedures say weshould do it that way. Times and situationschange. We must be aware of the rapidchange of the organization and the worldaround us. It is critical for a leader to havethe self-confidence to openly say this iswrong, and take a different approach.Hiding mistakes rather than admittingthem and moving on is a symptom of aleader wishing to save his or her job ratherthan help the organization move ahead.

2. Poor core interpersonal skillsand competencies

“My way or the highway” behavior isinappropriate in today’s team environment.Organizations need different views in orderto assess the best options for improvement.Stephen Covey recently revisited his SevenHabits and reminds us to “Seek first tounderstand, then to be understood.”ii

Behaviors such as abrasiveness, browbeating,arrogance and bullying are a common downfallof rising leaders. No combination of intelligence,administrative skills or hard work can over-come the lack of interpersonal skills.

When you talk to people, look them inthe eye. Learn to listen, not just hear what

others are saying. Encourage openness inothers by being open yourself. It takes agood self-image to accept criticism fromothers. Most of us find others interestingwhen the other person is interested in us.We can use this piece of human nature toinitiate healthy relationships with others.

3. Being closed to new ordifferent ideas

“Not invented here” is a death knell.We must remain willing to learn from others.We should listen to others before we shareour own ideas. When we insist on our ownposition simply because it is ours, we comeacross as threatened by the creativity andinnovation of others. Our employees and peerswill quickly lose trust in us if we consistentlydismiss the ideas, experience and creativityof others.

Essential to our success is making it safefor people to talk, involving all people in thesolution and including them in somethingthey already have a stake in, but don’t feelpart of. It takes extra effort to involve oth-ers in new ideas. It is more comfortable formany of us to develop new ideas in private,away from the criticism and suggestions ofothers. Few of us are pleased when some-one calls our idea ugly.

The Whole Leader: Two Approaches to IntegrityBy Grace L. Duffy

Figure 1 — The Five Fatal Flaws to Leader Wholeness

5. Lack of initiative

4. No personal accountability3. Being closed to new

or different ideas

2. Poor core interpersonal skills and competencies

1. Not learning from our mistakes

Five Fatal Flaws to

Wholeness


1 7

• Ability to deal with pressure, not hidingfrom competition or conflict.

Initiating decision-making and movingforward in spite of uncertainty requires courage.Many leaders spend so much time fightingtheir own situation and avoiding their keyresponsibilities that they never lead.

Figure 2 (below) is a summary of themajor competencies that identify personalwholeness. These five areas encompass theideas of self-worth, skills, communicationand results so essential in today’s complexbusiness environment.

Our Moral Code

The second definition of integrity is lesstangible. Leaders are susceptible to moralinconsistencies during periods of transition.When our personal and business environmentsare changing, so are our relationships. We mayfeel pressure to meet the high expectationsof others. Good management is based on goodmechanics — such as procedures, techniques,models and policies. Good leadership, on theother hand, requires more creativity, andarticulating and bringing forth a vision.Leaders add legitimacy to their positions bytheir acceptance, trust and belief.

Conscious leaders know what is right andproper. Their awareness comes from an internalmoral compass. Leadership emerges from asense of self, not from policy, procedures,techniques and systems. During times ofturmoil and change, leaders must adopt newbehaviors. Often these new behaviors have notyet been tested against our existing moral code.

Although companies with formal ethi-cal standards perform better, standardsalone are not an ethical lifeline for the indi-vidual leader. True success in today’s com-plex environment lies within the fabric ofthe values-based culture. Integrity mustdefine the structure of everything the leaderdoes. For integrity to work, we need to

know what it is, how it works, and where itfits into our business lives.

Guidelines, rules and policies do not, inand of themselves, give us integrity. Guidelinesmark the pathway we should follow withinthe company, but they are only guidelines.Our internal moral code influences our dailydecisions and relationships with others.Ethical decision-making must be an activeand dynamic process.

Identifying and being honest to ourmoral code is a prerequisite to effective leadership. This is where the two definitions

of integrity come together. When we arewhole and secure within ourselves, we havethe courage to act upon our internal valueseven when external pressures encourage usto subjugate our personal code.

When the organization is changingrapidly, every individual needs the same setof values guiding their daily decision-making.It is up to senior management within theorganization to make public their culturalapproach to integrity. Once that standard hasbeen set, each leader must search internallyto find the congruence or discord with thatstandard.iv Cultural differences affect behavior.It is imperative that the individual leader istrue to themselves or they will not maintaintruthfulness and trust within the organization.There must be congruence between internaland external standards.

Living Our Values

Every leader must periodically check-inand assess where they stand with integrity.This assessment begins with an internalcheck of core values and purpose. Thisassessment is not just of our internal moralground, but of the external manifestationsof how we respond, live and work.

Competency IndicatorCharacter Ethical standards, positive self presence and authenticity.

Personal capability Intellectual, emotional and skill makeup. Lifelong learning.

A focus on results The ability to have an impact and get things accomplished.

Interpersonal skills Communication approach and its impact on other people.

Change leadership The ability to produce positive change.

Figure 2 — Core competencies for the Whole Leader

In leadership, our success often hingeson doing things we are not yet good at.Leaders may not have all the answers, butwe must be adept at finding the answersand then move forward with courage.

4. No personal accountability

Accountability is defined as the willing-ness to personally care for the well being ofthe institution first, and of our unit and self,second. We accept responsibility for our actionsand represent the organization to our employees.We refrain from “blaming up” or acting asa victim of upper management. Success inthis arena is acknowledging the way things areand engaging in a full and frank discussionof what is happening without blame. Tellingthe truth in clear and concise observations isa large part of being complete within ourselves.

There are many opportunities to beaccountable in the workplace including,but not limited to:

• Performance measures• Operational goals• Communication• Personal development and growth• Management of employees• Required paperwork• Timeliness• Subjectivity and effort

5. Lack of initiative

Covey states that most people spend atleast 25 percent of their time and energy indysfunctional activities — interpersonal conflict,interdepartmental rivalry, finger pointing,blaming, kissing up, political game playingand other forms of protective and defensivecommunication.iii Part of wholeness is takingaction, following through with commitmentsand responsibilities. Some examples of action:

• Maintaining our physical abilities, includ-ing strength and flexibility. Movementover indecision.

• Enhancing our mind-body connection.Being congruent between internal andexternal behaviors.

• Exhibiting a strong work ethic. Beingwilling to work hard.

• Showing a love and passion for what wedo. “Just doing it.”

• Staying on the competitive edge.Continuously improving our personal best. (THE WHOLE LEADER, continued on page 18)


1 8

High,” the Gregory Peck character “checksout” at the end of the movie. At first glanceit may appear that he suffers from the samesymptom of his predecessor, “over identifica-tion with his men.” But let me offer this:maybe he checks himself out on purpose,because he is confident in the ability and willingness of those he leaves behind.

Mike Ensby is the Director of the UndergraduateInterdisciplinary Engineering and Managementprogram at Clarkson University in Potsdam,NY. He teaches quality systems, organizationalbehavior, and project management courses atboth the graduate and undergraduate levels andis a Certified Quality Manager and recentlypassed the Project Management Professionalcertification from the Project ManagementInstitute. For more information, contact Mikeat (315) 268-6571 or [email protected].

REFERENCES

Blanchard, Kenneth H., and Paul Hersey, Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources,Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1988.

Deming, W. Edwards, Out of the Crisis, Massachusetts Instituteof Technology, Center for Advanced Engineering Study,Cambridge, Mass., 1986.

Fiedler, F.E., “How Do You Make Leaders More Effective? New Answers to an Old Puzzle.” Organizational Dynamics, 1, 2 (1972), 3-18.

House, R.J., and T.R. Mitchell, “Path-Goal Theory ofLeadership.” Journal of Contemporary Business, (Autumn1974), 81-97.

Latzko, William J., and David M. Saunders, Four Days withDeming: A Strategy for Modern Methods of Management,Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1995.

Muczyk, Jan P., and Bernard C., Reimann, “The Case forDirective Leadership.” Academy of Management Executive, 1,4 (1987), 301-11.

“12 O’Clock High.” Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation, (1949).

Scheinkopf, Lisa J., Thinking for a Change:Putting the TOC Thinking Processes to Use,Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press LLC, 1999.

Walton, Mary, The Deming ManagementMethod, New York, NY: The PutnamPublishing Group, 1986.

Wheatley, Margaret J., Leadership and theNew Science: Learning About Organizationfrom an Orderly Universe, San Francisco,CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., 1994.

Figure 3 (above) contains a list of ques-tions from Diane Dixon, a frequent con-tributor to the Web site, HR.com.v

Work from Your Strengths

Each of us must develop our own lead-ership integrity strategy. Once we haveidentified what we stand for, we can compareourselves to this standard. Many of us builtour personal strategy as a young career pro-fessional. How many of us have revisited thisstatement in recent years? Our statementshould answer the following three questions:

1. What is my core purpose or missionas it relates to leadership?

2. What goals will make me better indelivering my mission or purpose?

3. What strategies will ensure that I ammore effective this time next year?

We have a challenge as leaders to lookfor people with a track record of honesty andintegrity in all their dealings; those who speakup, especially when it comes to matters ofprinciple. It takes courage to stand up forour personal values in the face of externalpressures. How we confront work issues andhow we manage our professional developmentspeaks volumes about our courage quotientand sets a leadership example for others inthe organization.

Leaders with integrity have the courageto state their goals and then work backwards

to find ways to achieve them. They developnew models when old models don’t work.They move forward and upward, never quit,and take risks to reinvent themselves.vi

Take time for daily reflection to evaluatethe congruence of your integrity versus theneeds of the organization. Speak freely whenyou see unethical behavior in the workplace.Talk and listen openly to others to under-stand the pressures within our complexenvironment. Assist others and yourself tobe honest and personally whole within yourdaily activities. You owe it to your organization.More importantly, you owe it to yourself.

Grace Duffy is President of Management andPerformance Systems, specializing in organi-zational improvement, communication, qualityand leadership. She is on the ASQ Board ofDirectors and is immediate Past-Chair of theQuality Management Division. Grace is aCertified Six Sigma Master Black Belt andASQ Certified Quality Manager. She can bereached at [email protected].

REFERENCES

i Zenger, John H. and Folkman, Joseph, “The LeadershipTent,” Executive Excellence, February 2003.

ii Covey, Stephen, “Seven Habits Revisited,” ExecutiveExcellence, May 2003.

iii Ibid.

iv Kotter, John P., “Leading Change,” Chapter 10; HarvardBusiness School Press, 1996.

v Dixon, Diane, Ed.D, “Leading with Integrity - Have WeForgotten What It Means?,” HR.com, 2003.

vi Walston, Sandra Ford, “Courage Leadership,” Training andDevelopment, August 2003.

(QUALITY LEADERSHIP, continued from page 11)

(THE PHYSICS OF CHANGE, continued from page 14)

(THE WHOLE LEADER, continued from page 17)

Assessing our state of integrity: Yes NoAre my core values present and active?*

Am I intently aware of what I am doing?

i.e., do I know the impact of my behavior on

people and the organization?*

Can I hear my conscience when it asks

if I am doing the right thing?*

Do I use my conscience to strategize with integrity?*

Am I saying one thing and doing another?

Am I misrepresenting the facts?

Am I concealing the truth?

Am I deliberately not disclosing vital information?

Am I failing to take appropriate action?

* For any “NO” answer, write out an action plan

and goals for resolution. Seek assistance from

a mentor or other trusted individual, if desired.

Figure 3 — A Personal Integrity Assessment


1 9


Chair

John Bauer

QC/QA Pittsburgh

PO Box 13192, Pittsburgh, PA 15243

Office Phone: (412) 276-2492

Home Phone: (412) 276-2492

Office Fax: (412) 429-1702

E-Mail: [email protected]

Chair Elect

Dennis Beecroft, PEng, President

G. Dennis Beecroft, Inc.

254 Brookview Court

Ancaster, Ontario, Canada L9G 1J8

Office Phone: (905) 304-3313

Home Phone: (905) 648-2146

Office Fax: (905) 304-4075


Past Chair

Grace Duffy

Management and Performance Systems

3203 Antigua Bay Lane, Tavares, FL 32778

Office Phone: (352) 343-9267


To see a QMD organization chart and completeroster of QMD officers, committee chairs, andvolunteers go to the QMD Organization pageson the QMD Web site at www.asq-qmd.org.

QMD Officers

SECRETARYJoan Alliger

TREASURERDean Bottorff

QMD CHAIRJohn Bauer

CHAIR ELECTG. Dennis Beecroft

VICE CHAIRPEOPLE

Ron Bane

VICE CHAIRe-BASED

INITIATIVES

Open

VICE CHAIRPRINT

INITIATIVES

Fred Walker

VICE CHAIRFACE-TO-FACEINITIATIVES

Art Trepanier

VICE CHAIRMARKET &STRATEGIC

INITIATIVES

Open

VICE CHAIROPERATIONS

HeatherMcCain

VICE CHAIRTECHINICALCOMMITTEES

Bill Denney

PAST CHAIRGrace Duffy

Principles of Quality Costs:Interactive CD-ROMASQ Quality Costs Committee

This simple, self-paced CD-ROM provides thoseinterested in knowing more about poor quality costswith a primer in what quality costs is about and howto get started. The CD-ROM provides both a pre-and post-test to provide self evaluation, as well as asimple quality cost calculator that can be used tosimulate the financial impact of improved quality inorganizations. Material includes key data from the well-known Principles of Quality Costs book (item H1013), aswell as materials from the ASQ Quality Cost Committee’stwo-day workshop into quality cost implementation.

Content also includes short video clips, narrativematerials, and basic quality cost concepts. Buyerswill also receive a number of template examples ofdata collection forms and reports in PDF format thatcan be used to get started.

System Requirements:

PC: Intel Pentium III 500 MHz or faster, Windows98SE/ME/2000/XP, 128 MB RAM, 16X CD-ROM drive

Mac: OS X or higher, 128 MB RAM, 16X CD-ROMdrive, QuickTime 5 or higher

CD-ROM. 2003. Item: SW1108 Price: $99.00

To Order:Call ASQ Customer Care Toll Free in theU.S. and Canada: 1-800-248-1946 x7229 International: +1 (414) 272-8575, Fax: (414) 220-8808 600 N. Plankinton Ave. Milwaukee, WI 53203http://www.asq.org/

Quality Management Division Print Initiatives ChairH. Fred Walker, Ph.D.

Quality Management Forum EditorH. Fred Walker, Ph.D.

Editorial ReviewRoger Berger, Ph.D.

Editorial Review BoardHank Campbell, Illinois State University

Eleanor Chilson, American GreetingsVanessa Constande, Lockheed Martin

William Denney, Examination Management Services, Inc.Robert Desatnick, Creative Human Resource Consultant

Denis Leonard, Rayovac

The Quality Management Forum is a peer-reviewedpublication of the Quality Management Division ofthe American Society for Quality. Published quarterly,it is QMD’s primary channel for communicatingquality management information and Division news toQuality Management Division members. The QualityManagement Division of ASQ does not necessarilyendorse opinions expressed in The QualityManagement Forum. Articles, letters and advertisementsare chosen for their general interest to Division members,but conclusions are those of the individual writers.

Address all communications regarding The QualityManagement Forum, including article submissions, to:

H. Fred Walker, Ph.D.Department of Technology 100 Mitchell CenterUniversity of Southern Maine Gorham, ME 04038Office: (207) 780-5425Fax: (207) 780-5129E-Mail: [email protected]

Address all communications regarding the QualityManagement Division of ASQ to:

John BauerQC/QA PittsburghPO Box 13192, Pittsburgh, PA 15243Office: (412) 276-2492Home: (412) 276-2492Fax: (412) 429-1702E-Mail: [email protected]

Address all communications regarding QMD membership including change of address to:

American Society for QualityCustomer Service CenterPO Box 3005Milwaukee, WI 53201-30051-800-248-1946 or (414) 272-8575

For more information on how to submit articles oradvertise in The Quality Management Forum see theQuality Management Division Web site at www.asq-qmd.org. Articles must be received ten weeksprior to the publication date to be considered for thatissue. Publication dates are the first week in January,April, July and October of each year.

The cut off dates for upcoming issues:Summer submissions is April 27, 2004

Contact the ASQ Customer Service Center at 1-800-248-1946 or (414) 272-8575 to replace issueslost or damaged in the mail.

Non-ProfitOrganizationU.S. Postage

PAIDGrand Jct, COPermit No. 134

American Society for Quality, Inc.Customer Service CenterPO Box 3005Milwaukee, WI 53201-3005

FORUMFORUMT h e Q u a l i t y M a n a g e m e n t Advertise in

The Quality Management Forum

If you provide products

or services to the

quality profession,

The Quality Management Forum

will help you reach

your target market.

Every quarter, the Forum can convey your advertising message to nearly 20,000Quality Management Division members. These members include many of ASQ’s

quality executives, managers, supervisors, and team and project managers. Most aredecision makers or influencers for products and services such as:

√ Consulting √ Training Publications √ ISO Registration√ Conferences √ Business Shows √ Software ... and more

For information on advertising in the Forum, contact Project Design Strategy, Inc., 1408 Wazee Street, Suite 100, Denver, CO 80202.

Phone 720-946-0165; Fax 720-946-0168 or E-mail [email protected].

Documents

Stratgic Vision