[The following article appears in the May 1994 edition of
_Public_Sector_Quality_Report_, pages 3-4.]

                     TALKING TEAMS ON THE INTERNET  

     PSQR overheard an electronic conversation recently which
included some sage advice on the formation and management of
quality improvement teams. This particular chat took place on the
TQM Conference, an ongoing electronic forum created and
administered by Tom Glenn, a former director of quality at the
National Security Agency who writes, speaks, and consults
frequently on management, leadership, and quality management
issues.  

     The chat began with a message from Roger Winters, records
and research manager for the King County, WA, Department of
Judicial Administration. The crux of Winters' message was an
invitation to other TQM Conference correspondents to offer advice
and criticism of his office's nascent TQM effort.  

     As Winters' message explained, the King County Superior
Court Clerk's office is responsible for managing more than 2
million case files in Washington's most populous county. Office
employees have just formed their first two quality improvement
teams -- one 12-member team aimed at improving the records access
process (including retrieval/filing and microfilming), and
another 10-member team focused on public counter services.  

     Winters explained that supervisors will be facilitating each
team, and that team members are just beginning training in TQM
concepts and methods. With that, he opened the floor to advice
and ideas, both regarding the initial steps his office had taken,
and the future course it might pursue.  

     He probably got more than he expected more quickly than
expected when Glenn replied with a list of team do's and don'ts
based on his experience in working with government clients. With
Glenn's permission, his reply to Winters appears below:  

                              **********  

     Why do some quality improvement teams succeed brilliantly,
while others flop?  

     One agency I worked with had more than 100 quality
improvement teams during the first year and a half of its quality
journey. One team saved $2.5 million by reducing the penalties
the agency was paying for late payment of bills. Another cut in
half the time it takes to install computer terminals. Another
saved 6,000 manhours by automating the visuals in the agency's
many conference rooms.  

     On the other hand, another team spun its wheels for thirteen
weeks and then was dissolved, having achieved nothing.  

     What's the difference? For teams to be successful, they need
to:  

-- Consist of five to eight people (can be more but is less
effective). Fewer than five-- tendency to pair. More than eight--
too hard to reach consensus.  

-- Be cross-functional. In the beginning, the biggest quality
problems are between organizations rather than internal to a
single organization: Sam tends to throw his finished work over
the wall to Harry, thinking to himself it's now Harry's problem.
We need to bring Sam and Harry together to solve their mutual
quality problems.  

-- Be made up of people who do the work. Not the managers, the
planners, the experts, the system designers, or the
trouble-shooters. The people who do the work. They know it best.  

-- Know their boundaries. Examples of boundaries: no more money,
no more people, no more space.  

-- Be trained at least in TOM principles and practices
(awareness!. interpersonal dynamics (teamwork), and problem
solving methodology and statistical tools. Failure to train the
team in these minimum skills invites the team to fail! Awareness
and tools, obvious. But why teamwork? Japanese aren't trained in
teamwork. Different culture. Almost 23 times as many lawyers per
capita (in U.S. as compared with Japan). John Wayne as a model of
the lone wolf hero is not the model of TQM.  

-- Have brief problem statement and mission statement, both in
principle quantifiable. Travel voucher example: Problem
statement--"Takes six weeks to process travel vouchers; too
long." Mission statement-- "Cut that by 50 percent."  

-- Implement their own solutions. Implementation is the genius of
quality improvement teams. Some manager say, "Let them study it,
I'll implement." Not if you want first-class results. If members
of the team cannot because of their position, implement, then you
have the wrong people on the team.

-- Be supported by management....who give them time, help,
resources, and a pat on the back. It's called empowerment, and
it's part of leadership.  

-- Have a trained leader and an accomplished. ....who must work
together. The leader is deeply) involved in the team's mission.
He/she holds the torch to light the way that the team wants to
go. The facilitator remains neutral and somewhat aloof. He/she
helps the team through interpersonal bogs and offers tools and
techniques of TQM.  

-- Complete mission within six to nine months. Any longer than
that and people begin to lose heart (in the beginning, anyway).  

-- Meet no more than two to six hours per week. Otherwise,
managers and supervisors are hesitant to let people work on
teams. They'll give you the people they can afford, people who
aren't producing anyway.  

-- Work on a process, not a plan, moral dilemma, or policy.
That's the genius of quality improvement teams-- improving
processes. Other kinds of teams take on things like planning.  

     In specifically addressing Winters' case, Glenn cautioned
against using a supervisor as team facilitator, noting that the
best facilitators often are those unfamiliar with, and thus
disinterested in, the process at hand. A supervisor might
intimidate some team members, preventing them from voicing
disagreement or from critically evaluating the status quo. A
supervisor also might be too quick to guide a team to an "old"
solution for what he or she sees an "old" problem.  

     To subscribe to the TQM Conference, send an e-mail message
to: tqm.list@tqm.permanet.org.  

     And by the way, if you have advice to share with Winters
about improving systems and processes within a court clerk's
office, see the contact information below.  

 CONTACT: Tom Glenn (301) 565-8882. TQM BBS, (301) 585-1164.
Roger Winters, Records and Research Manager, King County
Department of Judicial Administration, (206) 296-7838, or e-mail 
rwinters@connected.com.

[For further information about PSQR or to subscribe, contact:
Public Sector Quality Report
17733 Kingsway Path
Lakeville, MN 55044-5209
Phone: (612) 898-5058
Fax: (612) 892-7710
e-mail: 74363.3644@compuserve.com.]