Continual improvement within the Quality management systems Neustále Zlepšovanie v Systémoch manažérstva kvality Jiří Plura Continual improvement is an important principle of total quality management and also new quality management principle involved to the revised ISO 9000 family of standards, which were officially released on 15th December 2000. It is an important part of the achievement and keeping of organization competitiveness and should be a permanent objective of the organization. Practical experience show that many companies are going out of business simply because they are not able to improve as quickly as their competitors. According to the definition continual improvement is recurring activity to increase the ability to fulfil requirements. Its base is quality improvement, which is defined as part of quality management, focused on increasing the ability to fulfil quality requirements (ISO/FDIS 9000, 2000). Improvement activities are very similar to the problem solving activities. The main difference is that improvement activities are planned and usually organized as part of larger program, whilst problem solving is usually more reactive and unplanned. The principle of continual improvement underlies in the lots of requirements and recommendations of the ISO 9000 family of standards. Let us introduce some of them.
Process for continual improvement, which should be used in organization, is described in the annex of ISO/FDIS 9004 standard (ISO/FDIS 9004, 2000). Continual improvement process should involve following steps:
Given continual improvement process is in detail developed Deming cycle PDCA (Plan – Do – Check – Act). Even though continual improvement process description is very brief, detailed analysis shows that individual steps are practically the same as the steps of the known Quality Journal method (Kume, 1988; Nenadál et al.; Plura, 1998, 1999) (see Table 1). Some differences are only in the second and seventh steps where the evaluations of the effectiveness and efficiency of existing and improved processes are emphasized. As aid to understanding of continual improvement the WV model is used (Shiba et al.,1993) (see Fig. 1). This model regards improvement process as problem-solving process and distinguishes three types of improvement: process control, reactive improvement and proactive improvement. It also conveys the idea of moving systematically back and forth between abstract though and empirical data during the process of solving a problem. For instance to sense a problem and then collect data on where it might be, to choose a specific improvement activity and then collect data on exactly what is wrong and to plan a solution and then collect data to be sure it works and then standardize the new solution. This process fully correspond to another basic quality management principle ”Factual approach to decision making”. Implicit in the WV model is the idea of iterative improvement – the cycling back to work on the next problem or to continued improvement of an already improved process. Table 1 The comparison of the steps of continual improvement process described in ISO/FDIS 9004 standard with Quality Journal Method
Process control is based on the monitoring the process to make sure that it is working as intended e.g. by using control chart. If the process produces results that are out of its control limits, the worker takes correction, which eliminates the defect in the process. This cycle is assigned as SDCA cycle (Have a standard – Use/do standard – Evaluate/Check effects – Act to return to standard). Process control is not proper improvement, because its result is that process comes back to the standard. Figure 1 WV model of continual improvement (Shiba et al.,1993) Reactive improvement is focused to the improvement of a weak process. It follows when a level of the process outputs is insufficient and workers corrections of the process according to the process manual are not efficient. In the case of the reactive improvement it is necessary to collect data, analyse them, find the root causes of the problem and implement appropriate countermeasures. The quality improvement methodology e.g. Quality Journal Method is used for this case (see Table 1). Proactive improvement deals with situations in which companies choose a direction of an improvement activity. At first it is only general awareness that something is a problem (sense problem). After it the situation is broadly explored and problem is formulated. Next steps can usually continue in accordance with the steps of the reactive improvement. Proactive improvement activities involve preventive actions, which eliminate the causes of potential non-conformities in order to prevent their occurrence. However they are understood much wider, because furthermore they involve many of other activities, which are a part of quality planning. They are two fundamental ways to conduct continual improvement: breakthrough improvement and incremental improvement. These ways are essential for two approaches to the improvement, which are called as Reengineering and Kaizen. These two ways are also introduced in the ISO/FDIS 9004 (ISO/FDIS 9004, 2000):
Optimum results can be achieved by the suitable joining of the both approaches. As example of this a comparison of the Japanese TQM approach and Western approach to the improvement can be introduced (see Fig. 2) (Shiba et al.,1993). Japanese TQM approach was characterized by the using of both breakthrough improvement and incremental improvement, western approach (U.S. approach) was characterised by the using of breakthrough improvement only. As shown in the Fig. 2, if the two approaches start at the same level over time the Japanese approach results in a significant advantage.
Optimum ratio of the application of these two approaches depends on the concrete situation and on the organization level. Reengineering approach is suitable especially for organizations lagging behind (if they are able to make it from financial point of view), while Kaizen approach is suitable when organizations are on the enhanced level (Zgodavová, 1998). The course of the curves in Fig. 2 indicates that in case of using incremental improvement only the results will be worse than in case of using breakthrough improvement only. In the other work (Leach, 1996) is contradicted that implementing many small changes can add up to create a greater overall effect than implementing a single large change. This statement is probably based on the calculation only, where the overall effect of 100 1% improvements is compared with the effect of one 100% improvement, but it is possible to agree with the statement that most organizations are easily able to adapt many of 1% changes then one radical 100% change. The success and effectiveness of the continual improvement activities can be considerably increased by using of suitable methods and tools. The analysis of the suitability of selected basic methods and tools in the individual phases of continual improvement was performed with using of matrix diagram (Plura, 1999, 2000) (see Fig. 3). These methods and tools which are especially suitable for using in the individual phases are highlighted. Detailed description of selected methods can be found e.g. in the works (Plura, 1997, 1998a, Nenadál et al., 1998). In the connection with the release of revised ISO 9000 family of standards the organizations must implement continual improvement principle to their quality management systems. Submitted paper deals with basic aspects of this task; with continual improvement process, ways of its realization and with suitable methods and tools. The paper extent does not make possible to deal with all aspects in some detail. However, it results to the conclusion that organizations must build up suitable conditions for continual improvement implementation. The very important part of these conditions is people training in both continual improvement methodology and suitable methods and tools applications.
Figure 3 Matrix diagram of the selected methods and tools suitability in the individual phases of continual improvement AA – Tool is especially suitable for use in the given phase A - Tool is suitable for use in the given phase
References ISO/FDIS 9000 (2000). Quality Management Systems – Fundamentals and Vocabulary.ISO ISO/FDIS 9001 (2000). Quality Management Systems – Requirements. ISO ISO/FDIS 9004 (2000). Quality Management Systems – Guidelines for Performance Improvements. ISO Nenadál, J., Noskievičová, D., Petříková, R., Plura, J., Tošenovský, J. (1998), Moderní systémy řízení jakosti/Quality Management . Management Press, Praha, 283p.Kume, H. (1988), Statistical Methods for Quality Improvement. AOTS, Tokyo, 231 p. Leach, L. P. (1996), TQM, Reengineering, and the Edge of Chaos, Quality Progress, February, p. 85 - 90 Plura, J. (1997), Sedm nových nástrojů managementu jakosti a jejich aplikace. In: Jakost 97, Ostrava, 1997,Plura, J. (1998a), Metody a nástroje řízení jakosti. Sedm základních nástrojů. Svět jakosti, č. 3, p. 17-22Plura, J. (1998b), Quality Improvement by the Quality Journal Method – Case Study. Project “The University - Enterprise Partnership for TQM, Leonardo da Vinci, B/96/2/0415/PI/II.1.1.c./CONT , VŠB-TU Ostrava, 13 p. Plura, J. (1999), Systematický přístup ke zlepšování jakosti. In: Quality Primacy ´99, Technical University of Košice, Slovak Union for Quality Inovation and Design Q-Impulse. Košice, p. 66-72Plura, j. (2000), Nástroje a metody managementu jakosti . In: Riadenie kvality v energetike, Častá - Papiernička, Slovenská spoločnosť pre kvalitu a j., p.1 – 8Shiba,S., Graham a., Walden, D. (1993), A New American TQM. Four Practical Revolutions in Management. Productivity Press, Portland, Oregon Zgodavová, K. (1998), Simulačné projektovanie systémov riadenia kvality. Q-Project Plus ABOUT THE AUTHOR Doc. Ing. Jiří Plura, CSc. works as associate professor on the Department of Quality Management at VSB – Technical University Ostrava. He participated in the Quality Management branch of study development and is guaranteeing subjects Quality Planning, Quality Management and Computer Aided Quality. His research activities are focused especially to the development and practical applications of methods and tools of quality planning and quality improvement. He collaborates with many industrial enterprises and educational institutions. He is author or co-author of one book and more than a hundred papers in journals and conference proceedings. Address: Doc. Ing. Jiří Plura, CSc., Department of Quality Management, Faculty of Metallurgy and Material Engineering, VSB – Technical University Ostrava, |