It301 Unit 5
Jason Combs Unit 5: Comparison of Quality Philosophies IT301: Project Management I Professor Cyntia Glenn Cotton October 23, 2012 Unit 5: Comparison of Quality Philosophies Philosophy Matrix Dimension| Deming| Juran| Crosby| PMI|
Quality Definition| Needs of customers| Fitness for use| Comply to the requirements| Conformance to requirements| Quality System| 14-pt Philosphy-A recipe for total quality| Trilogy-Optimize the process| Plan the quality| Prevention| Performance Standard| PDCA/PDSA Deming Wheel| SuccessFormula| Quality assurance| Zero Defects| Quality Measurement| Kaizen| Excellence to Process Perato Principles| Cost of quality| Cost of non-conformance| Role of Top Management| Consistently improve quality| Speaks in the language of dollars| Leadership| Leadership and participation| Role of the Worker| Self improvement| Speak in the language of things| Participation| High level involvement| In the world of quality, there are three great contributors that helped revolutionize and evolve the quality movement. These three gentlemen were W. Edwards Deming, Joseph Juran, and Philip Bayard Crosby.
All three of them concentrated on quality in the manufacturing and industrial businesses, yet each of their philosophies are dissimilar.
Their contributions to the quality movement can also be applied to other business sectors, such as the information technology field. In order to discuss quality, we will need to explore each of their philosophies and how they relate to one another and additionally, how they contrast with one another. While there are indeed three great contributors, this paper will focus primarily on Philip B. Crosby’s philosophies, and thus, be biased towards him. Quality Defined One of the contributors, Joseph Juran, wrote a publication called Quality Control Handbook. Juran’s definition of quality is “fitness for purpose” (Juran, 2010). Fit for purpose means every service and/or product from a company must satisfy the customer’s need with little to no failure.
Juran’s vision on quality was based on the concept of implementing quality initiatives and quality management being defined by the consumer. This philosophy is similar to W. Edwards Deming’s point of view as organizational “transformation” for quality. This process led to Juran dividing this concept into two categories: Product features that meet customer needs and freedom from deficiencies, which defines quality as reducing costs and improving standards. Therefore, Juran defines quality by implementing continuous improvement workers need to have training in proper methods of a regular basis, being understood from the perspective of the customer.
Similar to Juran, Deming emphasized on prevention rather than fixing as the key to quality. Quality System Similar the philosophies of Juran and Deming, Philip B. Crosby utilized a principle he called DIRTFT (Doing It Right The First Time). Just like Juran and Deming’s prevention philosophies, DIRTFT prevented problems by simply doing it right to begin with. Crosby defined quality as conformance to requirements (which are both the product requirements and the customer’s requirements). This was a part of the quality system that Crosby developed, which had four parts. The first part is described above, which is how he defined quality. The second part is that the system of quality is prevention.
The third part is that the performance standard is zero defects, as is related to the requirements. The fourth and last part is the measurement of quality is the price of nonconformance. Crosby’s belief was that a business that had a quality system in place would see savings returns that paid off the cost of the system itself, or more simply, “quality is free. ” The system that Juran came up with consisted of the Quality Trilogy, which involved three main parts. These parts are quality planning, quality control, and quality improvement. In these three areas, the system involved identifying, developing and optimizing, and demonstrating continuous improvements.
Deming, on the other hand, had a system he established using a fourteen point formula which recognized the purpose toward improvement, leadership, and training, as well as taking actions to ensure a successful process improvement. Standards of Performance Crosby’s performance standard consisted of having a zero defect approach, which meant everyone involved (supplier and customer included) must understand. Crosby defined zero defect as not being a literal zero defect (as that is not always possible), but rather producing goods or services within agreed upon tolerances and requirements for quality and costs. Juran had a four step formula when it came to performance standards: establish goals to be reached, establish plans for these goals, meet the goals, and rewards based on results achieved.
Deming had a process called the Deming Wheel, which was an adaptation of the PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, and Act) Problem Solving Cycle. To break it down, Plan involved designing components to improve results, Do employed the plan, Check evaluated the measurements, and Act made decisions based on the changes needed to improve the process. Quality Measurements Juran’s perspective on quality was based on five general measures, the measures being the cost of poor quality, defects, product/process features, customer needs, and customer behavior. Deming’s measurements were based on the Kaizen approach, which involved the evaluation of each operation including performance, the raw materials used, processes (manual and machine) and the output(s).
Kaizen is an objective to attain improvement continuously. Cosby’s philosophy of do it right the first time enforces consumers to spend more money on preventing failure and less on fixing failures. His quality measurements are based on the Cost of Quality, which has just two components: the cost of good quality versus the cost of poor quality. While it costs money to achieve quality, it costs even more money when that quality is not achieved. Management’s Role Juran viewed the role of management to encompass all processes, especially in services versus products. His focus on quality improvement was in three parts, the first being a program to address random problems.
The second part was a program to address chronic or reoccurring issues, and the third part was an emphasis on annual quality programs. Deming’s philosophy was that all employees within a business are responsible for quality management and improvements. The management must adapt to quality, and lead the company towards improvement as well as be involved in all aspects of the quality improvement processes. Crosby, meanwhile, viewed the role of management at the top, and had a strong emphasis on increasing profits through quality improvement. His concept reflected in his fourteen step quality improvement program, which begins with Step One: Management Commitment. Therefore, management must be commited towards quality from the top down. Workers’ Role
Juran believes that the role of the workforce is to be involved in quality improvement teams. Deming believes that all workers need to be educated on quality techniques, and they need to have responsibility to prevent defects. Crosby’s concept in the workers’ role deals with just a small amount of responsibility. However, workers should take pride in having quality workmanship and still assume responsibility for their quality. Conclusion Juran’s quality philosophy falls in line with the Project Management Institute, which involves similar actions in regards to planning, assurance, and control (PMBOK, 2008). Deming emphasizes quality through statistical process control.
Crosby’s model of quality was always directed at creating a zero defect mentality which establishes an atmosphere of pride in workmanship while assuming responsibility for quality. References Institute, P. M. (2008). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. (4th edition). Newtown Square: Project Management Institute Project Management Institute. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge(PMBOK-Guide)– Fourth Edition (2008). Juran, Defeo “Quality Control Handbook. ” (2010). Retrieved 10/23/2012 from http://books. google. com/books? id=JPCz0LoMnLsC&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=joseph+M+Juran+-+%22fit+for+use%22&source=bl&ots=968XivvXtO&sig=eNbFuq-Ztkn8ULZwK7bfJw5y7aM&hl=en&ei=ubul