This document contains the text of the articles in the Fall 1994 ASQC Public Sector Network News. PSN newsletters are available electronically through the TQM computer Bulletin Board and Clemson University. The newsletters are named PSNNews1.zip, PSNNews2.zip... You can access the TQM BBS using your computer modem at (301) 340-0325. You can access Clemson University thought internet: anonymous ftp to deming.eng.clemson.edu or gopher to deming.eng.clemson.edu:70/1 or mosaic to http://deming.eng.clemson.edu/ The PSN began in 1987 as an informal network of state and local government employees. When we joined ASQC, in 1993, our membership had grown to over 1,300 people in State, Local and Federal government. Our mission: To help government leaders increase the capacity of the public sector to deliver services that delight the citizenry through accelerating the development, application and documentation of total quality management. To advance a systems approach to the public sector that will foster collaboration between federal, state, and local government. You can join the ASQC PSN by calling ASQC at (800) 248-1946 and telling them you want to join the Public Sector Network. Please forward any comments or questions on the electronic availability of PSN News to John Hunter, secretary of the PSN, at jaohunter@aol.com. ------The Public Sector Network News-------Fall 1994-------- Articles listed in the order they appear. 1) Quality in Government Andrea Lewis 2) Service Delivery, Feedback, and Continuous Improvement A. Keith Smith 3) Office of Excellence in Government Tim Boncoskey 4) Dept. of CA Parks and Recreation: Investing in Training for Quality Future Denzil Verardo, PhD 5) Quality Through Participation 6) California's Quality Partnership Caren Rubin 7) Arkansas Develops Quality Team Database Melanie Kennedy 8) The Oregon Benchmarks in Action: Vision, Measurement, and Implementation Howard Schussler and Tamara Sloper 9) TQM and Improvement of a Prison Industry Laundry Rich Obando 10) Mission, Vision, and Values- Touchstones for the Quality Journey Brian Marson 11) TQM- the most asked questions 12) Quality in Cyberspace John Hunter Quality in Government Andrea Lewis The Report of the National Performances Review (NPR), detailing numerous recommendations to improve our federal government system, cites the following principles to "reinvent" our governmental bureaucracies: cut unnecessary spending, service customers, empower employees, help communities solve their own problems, and foster excellence. The NPR stipulates that in order for these objectives to be met, the federal government must fundamentally change its way of doing business. Among the listing of "how to's" include the delegation of authority and responsibility, replacing regulations with incentives, measuring success by customer satisfaction, and exposing federal operations to competition. Although the NPR is geared specifically to the federal government, the concepts are easily transferable to any governmental entity. We may be tempted to brush this off as something easier said than done, especially for government. It's likely you have heard of remarked about the following: * Government agencies won't change because they don't have the threat of competitors taking business away from them. * Quality is a long-term journey that requires the commitment of top leaders, yet a high turn over rate exists among government leaders, each of whom might have different agendas. * Although the top managers in governmental organizations might be committed to quality, how can they ensure that the vast number of middle managers and employees buy in to the quality effort? * How can Government organizations meet the differing needs of their customers?- How can government organizations track their progress when quality's effect on the bottom line is hard to measure? In an article entitled "Trailblazers in Reinventing Government" (Quality Progress--December 1993), three organizations are highlighted who dispel the myth that quality can only work effectively in the private sector because governments "different". Examples of how the Naval Air Systems Command, Air Force Logistics Command, and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Ogden Service Center prosper, within a quality environment using quality tools and techniques, earned each of these organization The Presidential Award for Quality. Created in 1988, this award "recognizes organizations that have implemented total quality management (TQM) in an exemplary manner, resulting in high quality products and services and the effective use of taxpayer dollars...". This award is akin to the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award for private industry. Bringing quality improvement to government does pose unique challenges; the blueprint for quality in the private sector cannot be uniformly applied to the public sector. However, we know the principles can be applied with convincing results - the examples of success continue to mount. Suggestions as to how quality can be most effectively implemented boiled down to nine main the themes when a group of federal employees attended the Sixth Annual National Conference on Federal Quality less than one year ago. The bottom line was "walk the talk", with specific recommendations: * Cascade quality management from top to the bottom. Without key government executives knowledgeable about quality and the need for their support, efforts will founder. * Make employee training and development a priority. * Move away from a bureaucratic, non customer oriented government that has an inwardly focused hierarchy concerned with turf and regulations. * Use strategic plans from top to bottom to link and align the government in accomplishing a shared vision of the future. * Tie agency funding with performance achievement. * Ensure total involvement. Select and reward all personnel based on success in achieving quality and productivity improvements. * Drive out fear and strive to enable employees to take risks and make decisions to put customers first. * Support teamwork. * Communicate quality and "reinvention" as single philosophy that embraces a long-term view emphasizing teamwork, process improvement, and customer satisfaction. For more information contact: Andrea Lewis California Environmental Protection Agency 555 Capital Mall, Suite 235 Sacramento, Ca. 95814 Phone (916) 324-7316 Fax (916) 322-6005 Service Delivery, feedback and Continuous Improvement A. Keith Smith The first edition of the Public Sector Network News was distributed to over 2000 public sector quality practitioners. Our mailing list is growing daily. News of efforts to improve the public sector are coming in from across the nation (and from our colleagues in Canada) .PSN is on the move! Our hope is that our first product fills the need to share information with others embarking upon the same quality and customer service journey. We in the public sector have been under assault for a number of years. One thing we do very badly is to publicly celebrate and record the many things we do that work, and work well, for our customers the taxpayers. This newsletter gives you the chance to celebrate those successes to a broader audience. Your improvement processes are of great interest to hundreds, if not thousands, of others who labor in the same fields across the country. Please help them to provide better service to their customers by sharing your methods and your successes. We are all responsible for rebuilding the reputation of the public sector as an effective deliverer of vital services. One of the core tenets of quality is that customer feedback on product or service is essential if needs are to be met and services improved. I would like to hear from you with your own implementation story, your successes or lessons learned. I would also like to hear from you about the types of information you would like to see in this publication and any other commentary. The PSN board has plans for further networking opportunities. First and foremost we are looking for people to help expand this endeavor. We would like to have board members from Federal, State and Local Government and from all parts of the country. We are setting up a network of regional counselors to serve as the primary referral and contact source for answering questions about PSN and its services in the region. Counselors will also help to build the organizational base and serve as liaison to the ASQC sections in the region. Please let me know if you are interested in becoming an active participant in the network, my address and phone number are listed below. A. Keith Smith, Chief Field Operations Division Bureau of Automotive Repair 10240 Systems Parkway Sacramento, CA 95827 Phone: (916) 255-1340 Fax: (916) 255-1369 Office for Excellence in Government Tim Boncoskey The Office for Excellence in Government has the responsibility for providing leadership in the quality movement in Arizona State Government. Governor Symington believes that the key difference between the creation of this Office and previous attempts to cut the costs of government and improve service delivery, is that its efforts will be on-going and totally integrated into the processes of government. The cultural environment of state government will be changed for the benefit of all customers. The Statewide Long-term Improved Management Project-Project SLIM, was the State's initial step toward providing quality governmental services. This program began in September of 1991. Initially, the state used a steering committee of private sector executives to monitor the progress of professional consultants and state employees in a diagnostic review of the 12 largest cabinet agencies and four special study areas. The project focused on improving processes and enhancing the quality of services while at the same time reducing the cost of government. On October 22, 1992, Governor Symington created the Office for Excellence in Government, through Executive Order 92-32, to institutionalize the concepts of Total Quality Management in state government. The Office For Excellence In Government is continuing the quality effort with innovative and cutting edge programs which include the Institute for Excellence, the development of a model total quality process, the Governor's Award Program, "A Spirit of Excellence" and overseeing the ongoing activities of Project SLIM. The success of Governor Symington's initiatives have been nationally recognized. The National Governor's Association and the National Association of State Budget Officers have recognized Arizona as a leader in the governmental quality effort. The Office for Excellence's Project SLIM has received the 1992 Exemplary State and Local Award in recognition of the significant innovations and achievements of the Project. This award, sponsored by the National Center for Public Productivity at Rutgers University, acknowledges exceptional cost savings, measurable increases in quality and productivity, and improvements in the quality and effectiveness of government services. Quality Efforts and Operational Efficiencies As of May 20, 1994 Project SLIM efforts, combined with agency quality and productivity initiatives, have resulted in $51.8 million dollars in documented savings in agency budgets, $13.7 million in cost avoidances, and over $12.0 million in realized revenues, without increased taxes. Right sizing activities have resulted in the elimination of over 1,250 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions. The State's quality effort has led to redeployment or voluntary separation from state service, of all those who have had their positions eliminated. The redeployment program has provided positions, with no decrease in salary, for those employees who have chosen to remain in state service. For more information call: Tim Boncoskey Office for Excellence in Government 1700 West Washington, Suite 300 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Phone (602) 542-7546 Fax (602) 542-1220 California Park Service: Investing in Training for Quality Future Denzil Verardo, PhD Background During 1992/93 the California Department of Parks and Recreation (California Park Service) restructured, eliminating an entire layer of its bureaucracy. While many governmental agencies were complaining about budget reductions in the face of California's stagnant economy, the Department Parks and Recreation decided to take a pro-active approach to the problem. The budget crisis was seen as an opportunity to reengineer a dated organizational structure, while beginning the implementation of Total Quality Management throughout the organization -- true reinventing of the Department. As a result of a cross-functional team's recommendations (the team was symbolically called the Phoenix committee after the mythical bird that rose from its own ashes), the original 55 park districts were consolidated to 23, and the regions to which they reported were eliminated completely. The new districts now reported directly to a streamlined headquarters operation. District superintendents and departmental managers were given broader authority to manage their units as much of the old regional oversight functions were now delegated to them. This consolidation and reorganization saved the department (and our taxpayer customers) $10 annually, and positioned the Department for both the implementation of Total Quality Management, and the employee empowerment which could result from effective quality initiatives. The Training Investment It was acknowledged early in the implementation process that investing in employee TQM training, at every level of the organization, would provide long term dividends. In November and December of 1992, "Empowerment" orientation sessions were held for District Superintendents, managers, and trainers. The trainers, two from each District and headquarters unit in the Department, returned to their respective work locations and conducted orientation sessions for every employee in the California Park Service. The day-long sessions included details on the heritage of the Department; the reasons and need to change and restructure; discussions of the concepts of empowerment and "customer" service; and discussions of expectations for the future of the Department and its employees, and what the future might hold. Once the orientation training and Departmental reorganization was complete, planing for more detailed Total Quality Management training was begun. The goal was to implement TQM beyond the "jargon" stage and to actually utilize the tools, data collection methods, and service concepts inherent in quality management. Included in this goal was to successfully adapt TQM to the California Park Service, not to adopt particular structured approach. In-house expertise was utilized to develop the curricula to be presented. It was determined that the management program would consist of four modules of "just in time" training whereby a module would be taught, then practiced in the field prior to the next module. The first module was 36 hours of TQM "Basics" such as systems thinking; the foundations of the quality movement and what is quality; the meaning, collection and use of data, and application of TQM within the Department. The second module was 24 hours of TQM "Team Skills," consisting of team dynamics and enhancing team effectiveness. The third section focused on TQM "Tools" (28 hours) and their application to problem solving, error identification and cycle time efficiency. The fourth and final portion of the Park Quality Management Program consisted of 28 hours of training on strategic planning. Attending the second and third modules with their respective manager were trainers (facilitators) from each district and headquarters unit. This allowed cross functional training in team, tools and problem solving, and provided an immediate support staff at each level of the organization. Besides managerial training, first level supervisors received week-long training consisting of "Basics" and "Tools" components. Care was taken to review numerous consultants and various certificate programs prior to selecting a presenter(s) for the courses. Those that showed the most promise in their ability to present the materials successfully to Departmental managers and supervisors, as well as their ability to fit into the curricula sequencing, were interviewed. several sessions were planned with the selected consultant to introduce him to the Department, orient him as to our structure, and enable him to develop his materials based on the expectations from different levels within the California Park Service. The resultant Park Quality Management (PQM) training program which began in the Fall of 1993, has exceeded our expectations. Implementation of the processes, techniques and skills learned through training has begun at every level of the organization. The next training cycle (Fall, 1994) will include PQM for supervisors, annual planning for managers, and a "refresher" for trainers. Rank and file training will occur continuously throughout the year, conducted by trainers, at their respective units. Trainers (facilitators) will also work with problem solving teams to ensure appropriate application and use of TQM tools and techniques. It needs to be mentioned that the "skills" training normally conducted at the departmental training center continue during the PQM program, with each one having a TQM component. Training alone does not ensure organizational success with Total Quality Management, but without it there is no hope of achieving any goals toward reinventing government. The Department of Parks and Recreation is committed to quality management. reinventing government, and the true employee empowerment which should result from the quality journey of the California Park Service. For more information Contact: Denzil Verardo, Ph.D. Assistant Director for Quality Management Department of Parks and Recreation 1416 9th Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone (916) 653-6160 Quality through Participation Quality through Participation (or "QtP") is a major initiative to implement "total quality management" in New York State government. QtP is a vehicle to cut red tape, focus on taxpayer needs, and reinvent ways of delivering government service. Modeled after an approach proven successful throughout the world, QtP uses the entire work force within an agency to reshape operations and continually improve service to the public. On the Statewide level, QtP seeks to break down bureaucratic approaches blocking change by encouraging agency leadership and unions to reform personnel, fiscal and workplace rules and procedures. QtP is an evolving initiative. Program implementation has been gradual, with planning and start-up activities beginning in 1990-91. Starting with six prototype agencies in 1991, that number has now grown to eleven, which together encompass about 60% of the State work force. An Executive Order, issued to all agencies in 1992, describes a new vision for State government and identifies QtP as a major means of reaching it. A new vision for New York State government The vision embodies in QtP is that of a government that leads the nation in pleasing its citizens with the quality of its public programs and services. Consistent with New York State's motto, "Excelsior", confidence in government's effectiveness will be growing each year. Four cornerstones support this vision: * Customer-oriented public service to focus on taxpayer needs, * Using "best-processes" to get the job done right the first time. * Empowered employees to break through bureaucracy and introduce new ideas, * Continuous improvement to evaluate, reform and reinvent how government operates. Gubernatorial Support - The QtP initiative is fully endorsed and supported by the Governor and the Lieutenant Governor. The Governor described his vision for QtP in an Executive Order and established a structure for driving it. Prototype Agencies - Eleven State agencies are formally involved in this initiative as prototypes for the implementation of QtP. With assistance from the Governor's Office of Employee Relations, these agencies are engaged in intensive, long-term efforts to plan for, and make, the required changes in organizational culture, structure, and function to produce a change in the way government works. Unions - Understanding that the cooperation of organized labor is critical to the long-term success of QtP, the State is undertaking this effort in partnership with its employee unions. Labor has an important role to play in helping to implement quality in ways that benefit the State's customers and employees alike. Policy Direction and Coordination - A QtP Steering Committee, comprised of the top official from each prototype agency, as well as several key administrative agencies, has been providing policy direction for QtP since its inception. Recently, the presidents of the three unions whose members are represented in the prototype agencies, have become Steering Committee members. A larger interagency QtP Coordinating Group, comprised of the "Quality Executives" from the prototype agencies and their associates, representatives from the administrative agencies, as well as representatives from the unions, is the task group supporting the Steering Committee. Within this framework, policy and products associated with the QtP initiative are developed in collaboration with the participating agencies rather than unilaterally by a single administrative agency. Partnerships - An important component of the QtP initiative is the public-private partnership with several major corporations. Senior vice presidents for quality from eight major corporations have been paired with individual agency heads for one-on-one consultation in leading a quality implementation effort. In addition, the contribution of corporate expertise and resources is coordinated through a committee of corporations providing the QtP agencies and the Statewide effort with the best of what the corporations have to offer. Training - An interagency task group, assisted by several corporate partners, has assembled a core training curriculum for use by State agencies moving towards quality management. Each agency uses this core curriculum and adapts it as needed. A one-day Employee Introduction to Quality curriculum, a two-day Skills for Working Effectively in Teams program, and a four-day course in Quality Processes are now being delivered to groups of State employees according to roll-out strategies defined by individual agencies. Train-the trainer components are available for all three programs. It is intended that all employees will eventually participate in these three programs, thereby building common language, concepts, and approaches to quality improvement. For more information call: QtP Team Governor's Office of Employee Relations 2 Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223 Phone (518) 474-5255 California's Quality Partnership Caren Rubin In June 1993, Governor Wilson signed an Executive Order which encourages state departments, boards, and commissions to adopt quality management philosophies and practices. The Executive Order also mandates the establishment of a Governor's Quality Task Force and pioneer (pilot) projects from volunteer departments. "Quality" means giving the greatest emphasis to customer services and redesigning work systems to make them more responsive to customer needs. Most practitioners have found that the best ideas for improving work systems come from the employees themselves, so quality efforts empower line personnel, giving them more discretion over how they do their jobs if they increase customer satisfaction. Quality also eschews fads; organizations must commit to continuous improvement, changing their culture and systems to encourage constant innovations. The first Pioneer Project applications were issued in August 1993. Pioneer projects are small teams formed within or across departments to analyze and make measurable improvements to work processes important to the department's core business. The pioneer projects selected were those judged to have a good chance of achieving results-reducing backlogs or response times, cutting errors and rework needs, or improving customer satisfaction -- applications were assured pro bono training and mentoring, courtesy of corporate volunteers representing over 40 organizations. Pioneer Projects were also permitted to request modifications of existing regulations within legal limits, form the Departments of Finance, Personnel Administration, and General Services, to obtain flexibility necessary to accomplish innovations contemplated under the pioneer project. Pioneer projects have been directed to avoid any infringement on the provisions in current collective bargaining contracts. In November and December 1993, the Governor's quality staff and volunteers selected 27 pioneer projects out of over 40 applicants. The pioneers represent a wide variety of departments, boards, and commission. Each has been matched with a mentor, training has been provided to Departmental Management, and in depth process improvement and story board training to the pioneer project teams. Results are to be reported to the Quality Task Force in fall of 1994. For more information contact: Caren Rubin, Quality Coordinator Governors Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone (916) 322-2318 Fax (916) 322-3785 Arkansas Develops Quality Team Database Melanie Kennedy How can your organization get the most leverage from the efforts of its quality teams? How can you be sure Team W in Department X isn't gathering the same data or studying the same problem that Team Y in Department Z did just three months ago? A management system aimed at preventing this sort of duplication and "team redundancy" has been developed. It is called the Quality Management Information System (QMIS), and is a statewide database of both past and current quality team activity and results, accessible via computer by virtually anyone in Arkansas state government. The system also will be a tool for the state's Quality Management (QM) coordinator and senior-level managers to track team activity, progress, and results. The system is a proactive step to prevent quality teams from "reinventing the wheel". For example, the issue of lighting (energy efficiency, ergonomics, morale) is just one example where several teams wound up looking at essentially the same issue and could have benefited from the research of earlier teams, given a means to access such information. Arkansas spent the past year designing the system, drawing on the expertise of the state's Department of Computer Services (DCS). The database resides on a DCS computer and is accessible by any employee who can tap into the computer via a terminal. The system came on-line October 15, 1993. As teams are formed to study service-and quality-related issues, each team's composition, purpose, and progress is recorded on the database. QM coordinators in each state agency will input and update basic team information, progress reports, and results. While virtually any employee can access the system (much like a library's computerized periodicals index), only certain people (the agency QM coordinators, the state QM coordinator) will be allowed to add, delete, or otherwise modify the database. The State developed a standard form to capture such data as team name, team members' names and phone numbers, agencies/divisions involved, the problem identification and team mission statement, the team's suggested process or service improvements, implementation plans, etc. In order that the information can be cross-indexed and referenced, each team's work is grouped under subject headings and categories (e.g, personnel, communications, travel, financial, purchasing, automation, vehicles, administrative, energy, facilities, organization). For more information contact: Melanie Kennedy Arkansas State Quality Coordinator Phone (501) 682-352 Fax (501) 324-9070 The Oregon Benchmarks in Action: Visions, Measurement, and Implementation By: Howard Schussler, Benton County Quality & Leadership Coordinator & Tamara J. Sloper, Benton County Community Relations Coordinator Corvallis, Oregon Twenty groups of citizens are clustered in the main meeting room of the Corvallis/Benton County Public Library, their noise exceeding the normal whispered library conversation. Some groups are laughing, others are intent as they listen to a person's view. Their mission is the same. They are creating a vision of a different way of systematically serving kids and families. And, their efforts tie directly into the Oregon Benchmarks. The Oregon Benchmarks are measurements of how our state is doing, whether it's education, quality of life, or economic development. Just as blood pressure and heart rate are indicators of a person's health, benchmarks represent society's vital signs and include parameters to guide improvement of the overall health of the state. The benchmarks started in 1990 with a shared vision of where our state wants to go, supplying the information to develop performance measurements and targets, and providing the opportunity for communities to join together to reach those targets. Benchmarks measure the overall health and well being of a community. They let us know if our efforts are really resulting in the achievement of our goals. They are inclusive of all members of our diverse communities, levels of government, and public and private sectors. They were developed by asking people what they wanted their communities and state to be like. This has encouraged us to form partnerships to work towards fulfilling those visions. The meeting in the library was a direct effect of Oregon House Bill 2004 which mandated the creation of local Commissions on Children and Families. The Commissions are made up of representatives from local county government, state government, and a majority of lay citizen volunteers from the community. One significant responsibility of these groups is comprehensive planning that produces actions that focus on the benchmarks. The day long workshop in the library produced a document called Yes For Kids!, which is meant to inspire and move the community to take a collective responsibility for improving the lives of children and families. Here is how the Yes For Kids! effort reflects the benchmark efforts: The Yes For Kids! steering committee then developed a set of goals as a road map for achieving their vision. Some of the goals include: * Develop a system of services/supports that promote wellness of children from birth. * Increase the level of community involvement/ownership and responsibility. Diverse elements from the community are encouraged to work together. Public health and health industry organizations that may compete at times are working together to achieve these goals. School systems, traditionally independent of local and state government, are working with them to achieve goals that encompass more than any one player can individually accomplish. These goals are supported by a series of community outcomes which mirror, support, and complement the state benchmarks. Some of these outcomes are: * Show good judgment for their own health and well being. * Be physically fit - able to participate as fully in life as they desire. * Demonstrate high standards for personal conduct. The attainment of these outcomes can be measured by using several different benchmarks. Some of the community outcomes from Yes For Kids! even tie this program to a similar community based criminal justice effort. The Willamette Criminal Justice Council (WCJC) developed a long-range vision for public safety and identified long and short-term priorities for action. The outcomes have community measures for success available in the state benchmarks and require the support of schools, state, and local health and human services, non-profit agencies, local law enforcement, and the court system. Examples of these benchmarks are: WCJC Long-range Vision: Oregon Benchmarks: Engage in a variety of healthy, Reported crimes against people beneficial social activities and or property motivated by belong to positive social groups. prejudice per 100,000 Oregonians Be free of addictive behaviors. Percentage of teens free from involvement with alcohol, illicit drugs, and tobacco in the previous month. Children and families have been identified as atop priority in the state. With this in mind, support for Yes For Kids! is a stated priority for the Willamette Criminal Justice Council and is supported by a series of goals. Improving the effectiveness of public agency response to child abuse, adequate sanctions to appropriately discipline and rehabilitate juvenile law violators, and increasing public involvement in crime prevention and reporting are interactive with the goals of Yes For Kids! and the Oregon Benchmarks. Add to that the interaction between the Willamette Criminal Justice Council, Yes For Kids!, and the public at large to connect with another benchmark: * The number of communities involved in a community-based strategic plan for law enforcement. Once a community begins using benchmarks as a measurement of program effectiveness, the relationships between various public and private groups and organizations become cooperative, with a shared vision and realization that all of the players must work together to affect change. Barriers between groups that traditionally compete for revenues and budget dollars are disappearing. It's too soon to tell how far the current level of cooperation can go in this community, but one thing is certain. For the first time, public and private sector, human services and criminal justice are working together to improve the community, and the benchmarks are providing the vision and focus. Yes For Kids! Vision Statements Oregon Benchmarks Children will feel committed to Number of children abused or and supported by their families. neglected per 1,000 persons under the age of 18 =1990 - 10.5 1995 - 9.0 2000 - 6.0 Girls won't have babies when Pregnancy rate per 1,000 they are still children themselves. females age 10 - 17 =1992 - 19.3 1995 - 9.8 2000 - 8.0 Children will feel safe in our Public Safety: Willful murder, community. aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft, arson per 1,000 Oregonians =1992 - 57.8 1995 - 44 2000 - 28 Children will receive Student Skills: Percentage of students education and training so who achieve established skill levels. they can support themselves. For more information contact: Yes For Kids! Barbara Schatz Director, Commission on Children and Families 180 NW 5th Street Corvallis, OR 97330 Phone: (503) 757-6751 Fax: (503) 757-6893 Willamette Criminal Justice Council Peter Sandrock, District Attorney 180 NW 5th Street Corvallis, OR 97330 Phone: (503) 757-6815 Howard Schussler Quality and Leadership Coordinator 180 NW 5th Street Corvallis, OR 97330 Phone: (503) 757-6800 Fax: (503) 757-6753 TQM and Improvement of a Prison Industry Laundry Rich Obando On April 5, 1993 at the Sheraton Hotel in Sacramento, the State of California conduced a three day seminar on Total Quality Management. Along with some very distinguished speakers there was a showing of TQM story boards from different departments within the State. Prison Industry Authority was invited to participate and showed off their Coffee Roasting and the Laundry Service. Total Quality Management is traditionally used in manufacturing, but the story boards showed service departments can also use TQM for improvements. It is the goal of the prison laundries throughout the state to supply our customers with the best quality product we can produce. So, eighteen months ago a committee was formed with the Superintendents from three prisons, Assistant Administrators from two State Development Centers, and the Laundry Coordinator and Training Officer from Prison Industry Authority's Central Office. The object was to find ways to improve our product. At the first meeting there was a lot of discussion to see if TQM could even be used for a service department like the laundry. How did TQM really work? Could we be effective in improving the product? Could this committee come up with the data required to set a statistical baseline for a comparison with future results? Who were our customers? There were more questions than answers and when the meeting was adjourned there was a feeling of, "this is a big problem, can it be solved?" At the second meeting, the committee agreed to the name "Dirt Busters", we were on our way. The questions had to be broken down and prioritized. It became apparent that what was on all of our minds was, just how white was our product? Clean and white are relative terms so first there had to be a consensus on what the terms meant. During the next few meetings, through brainstorming and research, a box with a light meter was used at each of the represented prison laundries to set the base line for whiteness, The decision was made to concentrate on the prison sheets because if improvement could be documented by this product, the rest of the linens would have to show improvement. Twenty sheets a day were to be pulled at random from each of the housing units and their whiteness measured. The readings were then plotted on a graph. At Pelican Bay the sheets were pulled from A and B Facility for fifteen days starting in January, 1993. To be truthful, the results were not what we really wanted to see. We knew the sheets were not the whitest, but the results indicated they were not white at all. Something had to be done and fast. It was agreed that the wash chemicals should be looked at. A consultant came to PBSP and did tests on the water, wash chemicals, and checked the wash formulas. PBSP was picked because the water is not consistent in its chemical properties. The water comes from the Smith River and the hardness varies during the year due to the amount of water in the river. Each time the hardness varies, the wash formulas need to be changed so the quality of the product remains consistent. If a chemical could work here, it could work in any other institution. Most of the other institutions have water softeners. PBSP can not soften its water because increasing the amount of salt discharged would not be environmentally prudent. Under TQM everyone is involved, management, workers, customers, and any one else related to the product. At PBSP the person in charge of the clothing rooms was contacted and new linen procedures were proposed. The Laundry Inmate Employees were brought into the problem and their input was requested and received. When all of this came together, the laundry employees were informed and the new procedures were instituted. The wash chemicals were improved and delivered to the institutions in early February of 1993. Sheets were retested at the end of March and the results showed improvement. It wasn't that the sheets were getting whiter, but the old dingy sheets were being pulled from service and the new sheets were retaining their whiteness. The conclusion was that if the sheets stayed white, then the rest of the whites are also showing improvement. For the Dirty Busters, it meant if the prison whites are showing improvement, the hospital linens are also improving. There are a number of interrelated reasons why the linens get dingy. How the linens are used and abused comes into play. Are they washed on a weekly basis? What kind of body lotions and oils are being used? Are the linens being used properly or are they used for floor coverings, floor mops or wall hangings? Are the bags being properly loaded and the closures being placed near the top of the bag? Ground in dirt and lime from the concrete floors will stain the linens, they will not retain the whiteness. What is our next project? A questionnaire has been sent to all the hospitals asking for their input on our service. From that input the next project will be picked. The quality and whiteness of our product will always be important. The wash chemicals are, again, being looked at to see what improvements can still be made. We can never be satisfied with our quality. It was an honor to be recognized for our accomplishments by being asked to participate at the exhibit on April 5th. Our display was very well received, and we, at Pelican Bay, are proud to be a part of this process. As stated before, it is the goal of the Prison Industry Authority Laundry's to give our customers the best quality service and product, possible. For more information contact: Rich Obando PIA-PBSP P.O. Box 7000 Crescent City, CA 95531 Phone (707) 465-1000 ext. 7676 Fax (707) 465-9002 Mission , Vision and Values--Touchstones for the Quality Journey Brain Marsh Three Models of Mission, Vision and Values The United States of America is arguably the most successful country the world has ever known. Its journey since birth has been guided by a an articulated mission, vision and values. These are found in the Declaration of Independence, in the United States Constitution and in the Bill of Rights. They are the touchstones for the country's journey as a quality nation striving for continuing success in an ever changing world. Why have the mission, vision and values of the United States of America been such a powerful guiding force for the nation? - because they are widely accepted throughout American society: The American people have ownership over the Constitution, and the laws of the country. Moreover, once established, the citizens have the power and the mechanisms to ensure that the country is true to its vision and is true to its values. Compare this situation to the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. It, too, had a constitution that promised democracy and human rights to its people. But everyone, inside and out, knew that the constitution did not reflect the real truth of Soviet society. The difference between the U.S. and Soviet constitutions? - America lived its vision and values; the former Soviet Union did not. Then we have a country like Somalia. Here we see a country that has no constitution, no bill of rights, no vision, no articulated values for the nation. No sense of where it is going; no uniting dream for the people; no sense of the values to guide its journey as a nation. Perhaps you are asking what do the constitutions of countries have to do with vision mission and values of organizations? I would argue that there are many parallels and lessons to learn. I would argue that there are many parallels and lessons to learn. I would suggest that we have three types of organizations when it comes to mission vision and values. We have the Somalia Model, the Soviet Model and the American Model. Which model describes your own organization? Does your organization have a statement of mission, vision and values? Do people really subscribe to the mission, vision and values, or is it just a piece of paper on the wall? Or are you fortunate, and live in an organization with the American Model where the organization lives, eats and breathes its mission, vision and values statement, and where staff have mechanisms to hold the organization to account for walking its talk? We all know organizations that are best described as following the Somalia Model, and even more who are best described as following the Soviet Model. But we have the most to learn from organizations that follow the American Model of mission, vision and values; those that truly use these tools as touchstones for the quality journey. The American Model: Three Key Success Factors My observation is that American Model organizations that use these tools successfully, excel in three distinct areas: 1. Development 2. Content, and 3. Application The best organizations, such as Federal Express, the British Columbia Office of the Comptroller General, and British Columbia Parks are effective at all three key stages of the American Model. They develop their Mission Vision and Values in a way that ensures staff commitment; they make sure the content is brief and clear; and they make sure that the organization walks its MVV talk. The Development Stage There are three alternative strategies used by organizational leaders to develop Mission, Vision and Values Statements: the Leader - Centered (Imperial) Approach, the Management Team Approach, and the Participative Approach. Let me compare the three approaches by offering examples form the public sector. The hard driving CAO of a county - level government in Ontario, Canada, drew up a mission and values statement one weekend, then sent it out with a covering letter to all staff. He thought he was doing the right thing- providing the organization with a clear sense of purpose and direction. After all, isn't that the leader's job? Unfortunately, in this case, the leader went over the hill without anyone behind him! He failed in one important way; he failed to secure the commitment of the organization to the new direction and the new values. Staff did not buy in. The Mission and Values statement had no practical effect on the organization. Compare this Leader-Centered approach to the Management Team Approach used by many organizations. In this model, the management team rather than the leader develops the Mission Vision and Values statements for the organization, and communicate it to the organization. The weakness of this approach is the same as for the Leader-Centered approach- that is, the organization may not buy the Mission, Vision and Values because it was not involved in developing them. A ministry of finance at the provincial level in Canada took this approach and developed an impressive Mission Statement, but because staff had not been involved in its development, it worked well for the management team, but had limited impact on the other levels of the organization. In terms of gaining organizational commitment, the most effective method for developing a Mission Vision and Values statement is to involve staff at all levels in the process. Last year, at the Canadian Center for Management Development, an MVV statement was developed using a participative process driven by a cross-organizational committee, and involving all of the staff in the organization. The result?- there is a strong commitment among staff for the MVV statement. The Department of Energy Mines and Resources of the Government of Canada used an even more extensive involvement process for its Mission and Values statement. It used an external consultant to facilitate meetings with staff groups across the entire organization to discuss the organization's purpose and its desired values. This process resulted in a consensus first draft which was then used to develop the final product through a second round of consultation. In short, the way in which an organization goes about developing its MVV Statement will largely determine how effective the statement is in aligning the organization towards a common purpose, and towards a set of shared values. The Content of the MVV Statement A Mission Statement answers the question: what business are we in? A Vision Statement creates a picture of what the organization would like to become. A Values Statement outlines the values that will guide the organization during its journey towards the Vision. The content of an MVV Statement should meet three test: 1. It effectively answers the three questions: what business are we in?; what do we want the organization to become?; and what are the core values that will guide us? 2. It is short enough for people in the organization to be able to remember and quote the answers to these three questions. 3. It is reviewed by the organization on a regular basis to make sure it is still a valid statement which will guide the organization towards its destination. In other words, an MVV statement must be complete, concise, and current (the "three c's" of MVV statements). The Values Statement of the British Columbia Parks, when first developed by the staff through a consensus building process, contained nine principles. After several accidents within the parks system the organization responded by adding a tenth principle, on safety. Here is an example of the need for the MVV Statement to be seen as a living document that is revisited and revised from time to time to meet the changing realities of the organization. The summary, the content of MVV statements must be complete, concise, and current. Moreover they must be written sharply enough to be guides for action and behavior by staff within organizations. What are the greatest failings of MVV Statements in the public and private sectors? - they are too long, and too unfocused. Organizations must make sure that their guiding star is clear and sharp enough to be a navigation guide on the quality journey. Applying MVV Statement Within Organizations: Walking the Talk The poet T.S. Eliot once wrote: "between the thinking and the doing lies the shadow". In his poem, "The Hollow Men", Eliot suggested that the greatest human weakness is that we seldom realize our dreams. How many organizations do we see that suffer from the Soviet model Syndrome? They have wonderful intentions, as outlined in their MVV Statements, but they don't walk their own talk. The difference between these organizations, and American Model organizations such as Federal Express and British Columbia Parks is that American Model organizations put mechanisms in place to ensure that the organization holds true to its mission and values. Imagine for a moment where America would be as a country if it had a fine Constitution and Bill of Rights, but had no elected Congress and no legal system to hold its leaders and its citizens to account for their actions. If a citizen could not seek redress from the courts when his or her rights were violated, would America's values have any real meaning? Organizations that live the American Model of Mission, Vision and Values have management systems that link the mission and vision to the ongoing strategic and operational planning of the organization. They also have mechanisms for ensuring that the organization. They also have mechanisms for ensuring that the organization lives by its values. At the Canadian Center for Management Development, which is the executive development and training arm of the Government of Canada, our annual business planning exercise is built around and linked to, the Mission and Vision statement. All managers must demonstrate how their work plans support each element of the Mission and Vision of the organization. This has two salutary effects: first, it reinforces communication and understanding of the statement; secondly, it ensures that the Statement comes off the paper it is written on, and comes to life to guide the organization's quality journey. British Columbia Parks also have an effective system for ensuring that there is no "shadow" between the thinking and the doing. Each year it asks its staff to rate the organization's performance on all ten management principles. It also asks the staff to rate each one in order of importance, and to identify the top three candidates for improvement in the next fiscal year. When the results are in, each responsibility centre must develop and implement a plan for improving the organization's internal performance on the top three items identified by staff for improvement. These monitoring and continuous improvement systems are crucial to maintaining the credibility of the organization in the eyes of its staff, and to ensuring that values statements are indeed touchstones for the quality journey. For more information contact: Brian Marson, Vice-Principal Canadian Centre for Management Development P.O. Box 420 Station A Ottawa, K1N8V4 Canada Phone: (819) 997-8735 Fax: (819) 953-6240 TQM - the most asked questions (1) What is TQM? A integrated approach to organizational leadership that focus on delighting customers by delivering exceptional services or products. Key elements are: * Bringing "the voice of the customer" into all aspects of organizational planning and decision making * Organizational leadership which envisions the future and identifies the services, products and practices that must be transformed or continuously improved in order to achieve the vision * An organized process to innovate and continuously improve work systems, based upon the use of statistical data, using teams of those involved in the work process * A focus on the management of the customers' "moments of truth", those occasions when the customer comes into contact with the organization and judges its performance (2) Isn't TQM just the latest in a long line of management fads? It can indeed become that if management orders others to "implement TQM" as a quick fix for an organizations performance problems. Bringing quality consciousness into an organization requires a long term commitment of resources, time and effort (particularly management's). Carefully planned and executed, it can be a catalyst for dramatic change. (3) Isn't it true that the majority of TQM implementations fail? Why is that? Yes, the data does show that, but that is also true of most other approaches to organizational change. There is no magic silver bullet for success. There are a number of reasons why failures occur: * Refusal by an organization's leadership to lead the change effort by example and involvement failure to focus process redesign and continuous improvement efforts on the key customer satisfaction issues * Viewing TQM as a separate process from the "real" work of day-to day management. TQM is the real work of management. * Viewing TQM as something that is delegated to the front line to implement, bypassing the essential involvement of all levels of management in cross functional project teams. * Viewing TQM as merely training in team problem solving rather than a change in the operating culture of the organization * Using opinion- not data- to drive decision making failure to measure results and use them to improve the process of improvement. * Failure to change the organization's operating systems (pay, promotion, recognition etc.) to reflect a quality culture. (4) Is there one right way to implement TQM? No! Your best bet is to study the literature, seek out examples and craft a version that is adaptable to the particular needs of your organization. By all means seek consultant help (beware, there are numerous recycled consultants with instant expertise in this area). (5) Should all of the organization be involved and trained as quickly as possible? If you have unlimited financial resources to invest in training, go ahead, but it makes economic sense to: a) Invest up-front in understanding your customers and their needs and wants. Decide what it is you wish to accomplish. b) Provide everyone with basic information as to what you are trying to accomplish, and how. c) Prioritize improvement projects and address them in order of importance within available resources d) Provide just in time training to those who will participate in project teams e) Develop key indicators to measure processes under improvement, their variation and the direction of change. (6) Will I be able to show quick payback for my investment? If you put in the up-front work to clearly identify those issues that are most important to customer satisfaction and dissatisfaction and work on those, your chances are better, but there are no guarantees of a quick success. Comprehensive organizational change often develops slowly. (7) Where can I turn for more help? Look for organizations in your area that have experience and learn from them. Read the literature, attend conferences and join organizations such as The American Society for Quality Control and The Public Sector Network. Quality in Cyberspace John Hunter The customer survey of PSN members showed great demand for peer to peer networking. By taking advantage of available computer communication technology, some aspects of the desire for peer contact can be met. How will your computer help you network with your peers? A number of ways are possible. This column will explore computer Bulletin Board Systems (BBSs). BBSs allow you to use your computer to call another computer which connects you to thousands of other users. The opening menu will allow you to select the services which interest you. Many BBSs are free; though if the call is long distance the phone company charges for the call. Most BBSs have a file area, a message area and an information area. The file area includes text (articles, reports, newsletters) and programs (shareware and freeware) files. You can download the file to you computer and can send files to the BBS for other users. Usually the BBS will list the files by topic area. The listing will include the title, author and a brief description of what it is. By using the message area you can send private messages to other users or post public messages for all the users to see. The public messages will be categorized by topic area. So, if you are interested in the Federal Government's National Performance Review, you can read what others think. If you have a question, you can ask it. Or, you can share your ideas. The scope of on-line communication is huge. Much too large for one article to even scratch the surface. If interest in further articles is present I will continue this column. The wide difference in experience makes it difficult to determine what level of detail to include. I will try to address that in a couple ways. First, please let me know what you want to know about. Also let me know any suggestion you have on how to present the information more effectively. Second, I have prepared a few items available through the TQM BBS or by contacting me. Currently, these include a 1 page introduction to the TQM BBS, a 5-10 page user guide based on the TQM BBS (but helpful to a new user of any BBS), and a resource guide (a more extensive list of BBS phone numbers and internet sources than is found on this page--available as a downloadable file named online3.asc from the TQM BBS (the number will increase as new updates are made). ON-LINE RESOURCES: BBSs: TQM BBS free BBS (301) 585-1164 Dedicated to discussion of quality. Has section which allows you to participate in selected internet newsgroups. This is the BBS I use most (and the one I find most useful) and you can reach me using it. OPM Mainstreet free BBS (202) 606-4800 Has section administered by the Federal Quality Institute. Also has a section to participate in selected internet newsgroups. SBA BBS free BBS (800) 697-4636 Not very strong on quality material but there is some; the 800 number makes the call free. Internet mailinglists: Regonet write: listserv@pandora.sf.ca.us in body: subscribe REGO-L yourfirstname yourlastname Quality write: quality@pucc.princeton.edu in body: subscribe Quality TQM (Glenn) write: tom.glenn@tqm.permanet.org in body: join TQM-L Learning Organizations write: majordomo@world.std.com Begin the body of the message with two lines: info learning-org end. Other CompuServe: Total Quality Bulletin Board (74124,3025) Please let me know of on-line resource which you find useful. John Hunter, Benefit Specialist United States Office of Personnel Management Mail Stop 102-268 2200 Wilson Blvd Arlington, VA 22201 Phone: (703) 528-6786 Fax: (703) 528-6786 jaohunter@aol.com