[This file contains all messages posted in the TQM (Internet) Conference on the TQM BBS during May 1994 with the words Team Charters contained in the text or the subject line.] Message #5247 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-03-94 22:56 From: Tom Glenn To: Roger Winters Subject: Internet Message Replies: #5246 <- Roger, my compliments on your message and your humility in asking for suggestions. > Each person participating in one of these groups will be > given > "The TEAM Handbook" by Peter D. Scholtes and others, and each > will > participate in training sessions focused on the techniques > pre- > sented there. Following the training period, the teams will > begin > to function in fulfilling their respective missions. We > expect > that the missions will be defined by the end of the training > session, as their advisory groups are formed. The Scholtes book is probably the best work on the subject. But just giving them the book isn't enough. The chartering group for the teams (do you have a quality council or steering group?) should specify in the charter what rules the teams are expected to follow. You're right, the team size is possibly too large. Quality improvement teams should ideally be five to eight people. Making the team larger than that invites inability to find consensus. > What > pitfalls should we be aware of? What techniques should we > particularly cultivate? What, beyond "The TEAM Handbook" > should > guide us in carrying out this project? I take the liberty of quoting below my own brief guidelines for managing teams: Quality Improvement Teams: Do's and Don't's by Tom Glenn (Notes for presentation at the ASPA/PCMI Conference, July 1992) Why do some quality improvement teams succeed brilliantly while others flop? One agency I worked with had more that 100 quality improve- ment 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. Yet another reduced the time it takes to process incoming shipments from 10 days to three days, reduced the number of people doing this work by 19 percent, and saved 13,000 hours of overtime. Still another one reduced the average time it takes to get correspondence out of the plans and programs organization from 13 days to one day. On the other hand, another team spun its wheels for thirteen weeks and then was dissolved, having achieved nothing. What's the difference? The agency studied the teams that were successful and those that weren't and in the process came up with rules they now apply throughout the agency when a team is formed. What the agency found is that 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 then eight: too hard to reach consensus. Be cross-functional In the beginning (where we are), the biggest quality problems are between organizations rather than internal to a single organiza- tion: 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 the people who do the work in the process Not the managers, the planners, the experts, the system design- ers, 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, but you can change the operating rules: we made 'em, we can change 'em. Be trained at least in: Total Quality Management principles and practices (awareness) Interpersonal dynamics (teamwork) 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 team work? Japanese aren't trained in team work. Different culture. Almost 23 times as many lawyers per capita. John Wayne as a model of the lone wolf hero is not the model of Total Quality Management. 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. So managers 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 facilitator ...who must work together. The leader is deeply involved in the team's mission. He/she hold the torch to light the way that the teams wants to go. The facilitator remains neutral and somewhat aloof: he/she helps the team through interpersonal bogs and offers tools and techniques of Total Quality Management. 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 af- ford 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 pro- cesses. Other kinds of teams take on things like planning. We have invented or borrowed other kinds of teams, but we have found that the basic rules for quality improvement teams found in the text books cannot be violated if teams are to be consistently successful. It is, in other words, a reflection on management if teams fail, not on the team members. So in forming and managing teams, the same rule applies as applies to doing quality work of any kind: Do it right the first time and every time! Copyright Tom Glenn, 1992 [End quote] As you report the situation, it sounds like the teams have been formed without charters--numerical problem and mission statements. The teams should not be expected to decide their own missions. That must come from the quality council or steering group--who must have done their homework well enough to specify what the problem is and what result it wants, both expressed quantitatively. Using the supervisor as the facilitator is inviting trouble. The best facilitators I have seen are those who are actually unfamiliar with the process being worked on (and therefore completely unbiased). Using the supervisor as team leader is even questionable--he or she is likely to see the same old problems and same old solutions. Team members will tend to be afraid to disagree with the leader. A trained and experienced quality person as facilitator is essential to success in the early stages of teams. Be sure, too, that the teams train together, especially on the statistical tools and the methodology that goes with it. The Juran twelve step process is one of these. Florida Power and Light used an eight-step process. Choose any one you like, but be sure that the teams know the tools and agree to stick to the process. Team chartering, leading, and managing is a tough job. I'd appreciate comments from others in this conference. --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #7261 - TQM (Internet) Date: 05-22-94 00:50 From: Tom Glenn To: All Subject: Internet Message (2810) Sun 15 May 94 2:27a By: msolinas@netcom.com, Internet permanet.org Gateway (202/1) To: tqm list Re: Re: Team Charters St: Pvt Kill ----------------------------------------------------------------- From msolinas@netcom.com Sun May 15 02:27:28 1994 > Subject: Team Charters > > But one element bothered me. The class was taught that the first thing a > quality improvement team should do is to define its charter and decide what > it's going to do. In the class example, the Quality Council chartered a team > to "look into the travel voucher processing system. We've had complaints." > The team then proceeded to study the travel voucher processing system and > make recommendations to the council. This is what we have established - the Council keeps the tasks as general as possible. > In work I have done with organizations, I have always insisted that the > Quality Council must do its homework and know clearly what the problem is and> what it wants done. Telling a team to "study the process and find out what's > wrong" is inviting the team to spin its wheels. Instead, I have always pushed> the council to charter teams with two statements. The first, the problem > statement, is a quantified expression of what's wrong. Example: "Travel > voucher processing is taking 6.3 weeks. That's too long." The second > statement is the mission statement, a quantified expression of what the > council wants the team to do. Example: "Reduce the travel voucher processing > time by 50 percent." In many cases, much work is necessary to establish the baselines. We find that often the measurement systems do not exist. Our Quality Council is the President, and his direct reports - they aren't the right ones to be going off getting baseline data. > I'd be interested in the experience of other members of this conference. > Can teams succeed when they are given broad statements of mission? Teams can be successful - yes. I think that having the team establish measurement systems, perform their own measurements, set goals for improvement, etc is an important part of getting buy-in by the team members. Specific goals set in advance by a Council may be unatainable - a huge demotivator for the group. Our teams report to the Council regularly. Usually, there is a "mentor" for the team - someone high enough to have "pull", with good communication with the Council. Usually this is a council member. Teams report in often. With proper communication, the teams do not "spin their wheels." Personally, I think there are few things more disruptive to a team than having the goal handed to them. Even if the goal is reasonable, it takes a long time for it to change from "their goal" to "our goal." --- GIGO+ sn 10 at permanet vsn 0.99w32 --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #7262 - TQM (Internet) Date: 05-22-94 00:51 From: Tom Glenn To: All Subject: Internet Message (2788) Tue 17 May 94 10:21a By: bamf@Sunlight.Sunlight.COM, Internet permanet.org Gateway (202/1) To: tqm list Re: Re: Team Charters St: Pvt Kill ----------------------------------------------------------------- From bamf@Sunlight.Sunlight.COM Tue May 17 10:34:18 1994 On 14 May 1994, tqm list wrote: > > Message #5422 - TQM (Internet) > Date: 05-14-94 17:54 > From: Tom Glenn > To: All > Subject: Team Charters > ------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------> - > @PID: RA 2.01 80219 > @MSGID: 11:202/299 5373adf0 > My wife just completed a two-week course in facilitation. Much taught in > that course delighted me, and I was very pleased to see that a federal agency> was adopting so many TQM practices. > > But one element bothered me. The class was taught that the first thing a > quality improvement team should do is to define its charter and decide what > it's going to do. In the class example, the Quality Council chartered a team > to "look into the travel voucher processing system. We've had complaints." > The team then proceeded to study the travel voucher processing system and > make recommendations to the council. > > In work I have done with organizations, I have always insisted that the > Quality Council must do its homework and know clearly what the problem is and> what it wants done. Telling a team to "study the process and find out what's > wrong" is inviting the team to spin its wheels. Instead, I have always pushed> the council to charter teams with two statements. The first, the problem > statement, is a quantified expression of what's wrong. Example: "Travel > voucher processing is taking 6.3 weeks. That's too long." The second > statement is the mission statement, a quantified expression of what the > council wants the team to do. Example: "Reduce the travel voucher processing > time by 50 percent." > > I'd be interested in the experience of other members of this conference. > Can teams succeed when they are given broad statements of mission? It depends on the role of the Council. The Team charter might be to investigate - to do the Council's homework - and produce a recommendation with an objective definition of the problem (that is: the requirement that is not being met, the nonconformance) and a plan for eliminating the cause of the problem - which can include revising the requirement. There are lots of opportunities for creativity and real resolution of problems when the team is free to define the actual nature of the problem. For example, in your hypothetical example, part of the solution might turn out to be issuing company credit cards for airfare to reduce the load on the "travel voucher processing" function. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Bob Bamford SSQC Software Systems Quality Consulting 2269 Sunny Vista Drive Phone/Fax (408) 866-4792 San Jose, CA 95128 --- GIGO+ sn 10 at permanet vsn 0.99w32 --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #7263 - TQM (Internet) Date: 05-22-94 00:51 From: Tom Glenn To: All Subject: Internet Message Replies: -> #7271 (2789) Tue 17 May 94 11:38a By: dmcgurk@BBN.COM, Internet permanet.org Gateway (202/1) To: tqm list Re: Re: Team Charters St: Pvt Kill ----------------------------------------------------------------- From dmcgurk@BBN.COM Tue May 17 11:39:52 1994 " In work I have done with organizations, I have always insisted that the Quality Council must do its homework and know clearly what the problem is and what it wants done. Telling a team to "study the process and find out what's wrong" is inviting the team to spin its wheels. Instead, I have always pushed the council to charter teams with two statements. The first, the problem statement, is a quantified expression of what's wrong. Example: "Travel voucher processing is taking 6.3 weeks. That's too long." The second statement is the mission statement, a quantified expression of what the council wants the team to do. Example: "Reduce the travel voucher processing time by 50 percent."" Tom-- In the Seven Step Problem Solving Process that we teach, "theme selection" is the first step. Teams should be given direction by their manager or quality council, but should have the room to explore the area of weakness (perhaps using the KJ method, or through brainstorming) and identify the many problems that may be affecting that area, then select the best problem, or theme, based on urgency, estimated effect, data availability, implementation and time to complete the 7 steps (aiming at 3 - 4 month turnaround). Teams given carte blanche by their quality council are apt to flounder, but teams that are given a very specific theme to work on must at least go through a process of understanding and buying in to why that problem is important or their investment in the problem solving process and the solution will be weak. "Teams shouldn't just accept a theme from 'heaven' (upper management). Team members must collect their own data in order to understand, justify and if necessary, revise the theme." (The Seven Step Method, Center for Quality Management Document 3P, copyright 1991). An important, and perhaps obvious, element to remember is that improvement processes work best where a process already exists and is understood. If the problem is that there is no process, use appropriate methodology to define the process before attempting to do improvement work. Donna McGurk Center for Quality Management --- GIGO+ sn 10 at permanet vsn 0.99w32 --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #7264 - TQM (Internet) Date: 05-22-94 00:52 From: Tom Glenn To: All Subject: Internet Message (2806) Mon 16 May 94 2:25a By: MORLEY@sima.hnl.mrms.navy.mil, Internet permanet.org Gatewa (202/1) To: tqm list Re: Reply to Message #5422 Subj=Team Charters St: Pvt Kill ----------------------------------------------------------------- From MORLEY@sima.hnl.mrms.navy.mil Mon May 16 13:08:09 1994 In Reply & Response to: Message #5422 - TQM (Internet) Date: 05-14-94 17:54 From: Tom Glenn To: All Subject: Team Charters ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- - @PID: RA 2.01 80219 @MSGID: 11:202/299 5373adf0 ============================================================================= 1. There are many ways to begin a quality improvement operation, and each should be tailored to the needs of team. Often it's a good idea to immerse the team in a simple process study to get their 'feet wet' and give them some 'success' to build on. And thats what I suspect was being taught. 2. Each team must define it's charter and what its going to do...especially in government bureacracies. With the number and volume of regulations that we all live under...it's essential to mark your spot so to speak. 3. I would recommend getting behind you wife and support her as her team begins to study the process. She will learn by doing. 4. There isn't any perfect way to implement TQM...there are lots of ways. The important thing is that they have started. And if they have positive support from more experienced people like you then they will succeed. 5. You will help them succeed in the long run if you give them the chance to fail in the short. Aloha, Harry Morley TQM at SIMA Pearl Harbor --- GIGO+ sn 10 at permanet vsn 0.99w32 --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #7390 - TQM (Internet) Date: 05-27-94 10:23 From: Tom Glenn To: All Subject: Internet Message (3411) Thu 26 May 94 2:09p By: bamf@Sunlight.Sunlight.COM, Internet permanet.org Gateway (202/1) To: tqm list Re: Re: Team Charters St: Pvt Kill ----------------------------------------------------------------- From bamf@Sunlight.Sunlight.COM Thu May 26 14:23:08 1994 On 20 May 1994, tqm list wrote: > > Message #5492 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) > Date: 05-18-94 08:17 > From: Ned Hamson > To: Tom Glenn > Subject: Team Charters > ------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------> - > @PID: RA 2.01 80219 > @MSGID: 11:202/299 53786caa > @REPLY: 11:202/299 5375595a > > > The only problem with that, is that is assumes that senior > > > management has an idea of what needs improvement or fixing. > > > If that were true, then they would know the answer more often > > > and wouldn't have much need for a team to assist them. If I > > > am not answering your question, let me know. > > > Ned, my sense is that if senior management doesn't know > > what needs fixing, quality doesn't have a chance. That > > doesn't mean that they know the answer. That's for the team > > to find out. But they certainly need to know, in quantified > > terms, what the problem is. Once again, if you have reason to > > think I'm off the track, let me know. > > > --- > > * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) > > 585-1164 (11:202/299) > > Short reply: Tom, what I am referring to are problems that are known to be > problems to workers but seem to be too small a scale to be noticed by > management and/or the designers of the process. One example: a team of folks > at Memphis Light, Gas and Water, were very concerned about the personal > danger and just plain hassel they faced when underground utilitiy boxes they > had put in place had to be dug up and repaired after damage from heavy > equipment being used on the construction site. The had complained and noted > the problem many times but management had never responded. Once they were > able to start a quality circle, they were able to document the actual costs > to the company ($50,000-$75,000 a year) and proposed a solution that cost > less than $350 a year, they were able to solve a real problem that was unseen> by management. Similarly, at Houston Power and Light, even thought the team > processes were paying off in many small improvements and improved customer > satisfaction, some top managers discounted the efforts because the $$$$ > involved were very little when compared to what the company could make by > getting a couple of extra cents in a utility case. So many significant > problems at that utility were invisible because they didn't involve enough > money. More later, if you want. Ned In my experience with a successful Crosby-based TQM system, the team will always be in a position to see things that senior management cannot. The team puts together a business case - cost of corrective action/change versus benefit - to the best of its ability. The information is communicated to management - which is responsible for making the decision as to whether to apply company resources to the change. The corrective action system (quality circles, etc.) must have a mechanism that insures clear communication to management - and it must be based on management's commitment to listen and RESPOND - which is the most troubling fact you cited - "but management never responded". Not all suggestions will result in action - there may be a lack of resouce or higher priorities, but people will be supportive of management's decisions if they know their input was considered - and if they receive some kind of response. A black hole will do more to short-circuit employee support than a rejection. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Bob Bamford SSQC Software Systems Quality Consulting 2269 Sunny Vista Drive Phone/Fax (408) 866-4792 San Jose, CA 95128 --- GIGO+ sn 10 at permanet vsn 0.99w32 --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #7446 - TQM (Internet) Date: 06-01-94 08:34 From: Tom Glenn To: All Subject: Internet Message Replies: -> #7449 (4058) Tue 31 May 94 10:38p By: Archizoom@aol.com, Internet permanet.org Gateway (202/1) To: tqm list Re: Re: Team Charters St: Pvt Kill ----------------------------------------------------------------- From Archizoom@aol.com Wed Jun 1 00:03:38 1994 Has Donna's seven step process become available for posting? How might I obtain a copy? Thank you! --- GIGO+ sn 10 at permanet vsn 0.99w32 --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #7447 - TQM (Internet) Date: 06-01-94 08:34 From: Tom Glenn To: All Subject: Internet Message Replies: -> #7450 (4059) Tue 31 May 94 10:38p By: Archizoom@aol.com, Internet permanet.org Gateway (202/1) To: tqm list Re: Re: Team Charters St: Pvt Kill ----------------------------------------------------------------- From Archizoom@aol.com Wed Jun 1 00:03:36 1994 I would greatly appreciate a digest of the responses to this question. How may I obtain it? --- GIGO+ sn 10 at permanet vsn 0.99w32 --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #7448 - TQM (Internet) Date: 06-01-94 08:35 From: Tom Glenn To: All Subject: Internet message (4062) Wed 1 Jun 94 1:31a By: bbennett@powergrid.electriciti.com, Internet permanet.org G (202/1) To: tqm list Re: Re: Team Charters St: Pvt Kill ----------------------------------------------------------------- From bbennett@powergrid.electriciti.com Wed Jun 1 01:38:17 1994 > >Message #7390 - TQM (Internet) > Date: 05-27-94 10:23 > From: Tom Glenn > To: All >Subject: Internet Message >----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >- >@PID: RA 2.01 80219 >@MSGID: 11:202/299 538467b4 >(3411) Thu 26 May 94 2:09p >By: bamf@Sunlight.Sunlight.COM, Internet permanet.org Gateway (202/1) >To: tqm list >Re: Re: Team Charters >St: Pvt Kill >----------------------------------------------------------------- >>From bamf@Sunlight.Sunlight.COM Thu May 26 14:23:08 1994 > > > >On 20 May 1994, tqm list wrote: > >> >> Message #5492 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) >> Date: 05-18-94 08:17 >> From: Ned Hamson >> To: Tom Glenn >> Subject: Team Charters >> ------------------------------------- >----------------------------------------> - >> processes were paying off in many small improvements and improved customer >> satisfaction, some top managers discounted the efforts because the $$$$ >> involved were very little when compared to what the company could make by >> getting a couple of extra cents in a utility case. So many significant >> problems at that utility were invisible because they didn't involve enough >> money. More later, if you want. Ned > >In my experience with a successful Crosby-based TQM system, the team >will always be in a position to see things that senior management cannot. >The team puts together a business case - cost of corrective action/change >versus benefit - to the best of its ability. The information is >communicated to management - which is responsible for making the decision >as to whether to apply company resources to the change. > >The corrective action system (quality circles, etc.) must have a mechanism >that insures clear communication to management - and it must be based on >management's commitment to listen and RESPOND - which is the most >troubling fact you cited - "but management never responded". Not all >suggestions will result in action - there may be a lack of resouce or >higher priorities, but people will be supportive of management's decisions >if they know their input was considered - and if they receive some kind of >response. A black hole will do more to short-circuit employee support >than a rejection. > I do agree that management has obligations to respond to the team within a resonable time frame. If continuous improvement is going to work within an organization the team(s) must have the full support by management and top leadership within the organization. If not then the organization is doomed! Bill Bennett --- GIGO+ sn 10 at permanet vsn 0.99w32 --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) End of messages You're in the message topic area of: TQM (Internet) Press to select a Different message topic area uickScan of the message base ead messages ailbox - check for mail to you reate a message ist of BBS users djust your settings Elsewhere: iles section ulletins section pening menu ashington Deming Study Group Menu oodbye - disconnect (You have up to 978 minutes remaining today.) Please choose a selection > R (F)orward, (R)everse, (I)ndividual, (H)elp, (M)arked, (N)ew msgs, (S)elected, (Q)uit. Select: Selected read Read messages according to what criteria: (F)rom name, (T)o name, (S)ubject, (K)eyword in text, (Q)uit Select: Subject Enter subject search-string: Team Charters Message area "TQM (Internet)" contains 1005 messages. System contains messages ranging 4-7452. Enter message number to start at (Enter=First/Last): Pause after each message (Y/n)? No Message #5422 - TQM (Internet) Date: 05-14-94 17:54 From: Tom Glenn To: All Subject: Team Charters Replies: -> #5429 My wife just completed a two-week course in facilitation. Much taught in that course delighted me, and I was very pleased to see that a federal agency was adopting so many TQM practices. But one element bothered me. The class was taught that the first thing a quality improvement team should do is to define its charter and decide what it's going to do. In the class example, the Quality Council chartered a team to "look into the travel voucher processing system. We've had complaints." The team then proceeded to study the travel voucher processing system and make recommendations to the council. In work I have done with organizations, I have always insisted that the Quality Council must do its homework and know clearly what the problem is and what it wants done. Telling a team to "study the process and find out what's wrong" is inviting the team to spin its wheels. Instead, I have always pushed the council to charter teams with two statements. The first, the problem statement, is a quantified expression of what's wrong. Example: "Travel voucher processing is taking 6.3 weeks. That's too long." The second statement is the mission statement, a quantified expression of what the council wants the team to do. Example: "Reduce the travel voucher processing time by 50 percent." I'd be interested in the experience of other members of this conference. Can teams succeed when they are given broad statements of mission? --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #5429 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-15-94 14:33 From: Anthony Paulson To: Tom Glenn Subject: Team Charters Replies: #5422 <--> #5434 * In a message originally to All, Tom Glenn said: > But one element bothered me. The class was taught that > the first thing a quality improvement team should do is to > define its charter and decide what it's going to do. In the > class example, the Quality Council chartered a team to "look > into the travel voucher processing system. We've had > complaints." The team then proceeded to study the travel > voucher processing system and make recommendations to the > council. > In work I have done with organizations, I have always > insisted that the Quality Council must do its homework and > know clearly what the problem is and what it wants done. > Telling a team to "study the process and find out what's > wrong" is inviting the team to spin its wheels. Instead, I > have always pushed the council to charter teams with two > statements. The first, the problem statement, is a quantified > expression of what's wrong. Example: "Travel voucher > processing is taking 6.3 weeks. That's too long." The second > statement is the mission statement, a quantified expression > of what the council wants the team to do. Example: "Reduce > the travel voucher processing time by 50 percent." > I'd be interested in the experience of other members of > this conference. Can teams succeed when they are given broad > statements of mission? I tend to agree with you, higher level management tends to be too vague in their direction. The "study the process and find out what's wrong" does not empower to recommend solutions, only to document the problems and the root causes. And, if management has received specific complaints, they need to pass that on, and not play guessing games. Tony --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #5434 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-15-94 17:09 From: Ned Hamson To: Tom Glenn Subject: Team Charters Replies: #5429 <--> #5444 * In a message originally to All, Tom Glenn said: > My wife just completed a two-week course in facilitation. > Much taught in that course delighted me, and I was very > pleased to see that a federal agency was adopting so many TQM > practices. > But one element bothered me. The class was taught that > the first thing a quality improvement team should do is to > define its charter and decide what it's going to do. In the > class example, the Quality Council chartered a team to "look > into the travel voucher processing system. We've had > complaints." The team then proceeded to study the travel > voucher processing system and make recommendations to the > council. > In work I have done with organizations, I have always > insisted that the Quality Council must do its homework and > know clearly what the problem is and what it wants done. > Telling a team to "study the process and find out what's > wrong" is inviting the team to spin its wheels. Instead, I > have always pushed the council to charter teams with two > statements. The first, the problem statement, is a quantified > expression of what's wrong. Example: "Travel voucher > processing is taking 6.3 weeks. That's too long." The second > statement is the mission statement, a quantified expression > of what the council wants the team to do. Example: "Reduce > the travel voucher processing time by 50 percent." > I'd be interested in the experience of other members of > this conference. Can teams succeed when they are given broad > statements of mission? > --- > * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) > 585-1164 (11:202/299) Tom: The process that you are used to sounds more mangement led and one designed for cross-functional teams. There are literally thousands of organizations that have held on to what they learned from their earlier experiences with quality circles. In fact, many simply don't have any problem is still referring to them as quality circles. Don't forget that the now accepted wisdom says 2/3's of the quality circles failed never goes on and asks what happened to the 1/3 that didn't fail. Well they were successful and still are. In many organization they are now called continuous improvement teams or some other such name. I think you are referring to process improvement teams. And in a limited sense, you are right. It is exceedingly helpful if the sponsors or overseers of the process improvement team give the team a pretty specific charter and/or mission. The only problem with that, is that is assumes that senior management has an idea of what needs improvement or fixing. If that were true, then they would know the answer more often and wouldn't have much need for a team to assist them. If I am not answering your question, let me know. --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #5444 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-16-94 00:18 From: Tom Glenn To: Ned Hamson Subject: Team Charters Replies: #5434 <--> #5454 > The only problem with that, is that is assumes that senior > management has an idea of what needs improvement or fixing. > If that were true, then they would know the answer more often > and wouldn't have much need for a team to assist them. If I > am not answering your question, let me know. Ned, my sense is that if senior management doesn't know what needs fixing, quality doesn't have a chance. That doesn't mean that they know the answer. That's for the team to find out. But they certainly need to know, in quantified terms, what the problem is. Once again, if you have reason to think I'm off the track, let me know. --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #5454 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-16-94 13:34 From: Gary Vangelder To: Tom Glenn Subject: Team Charters Replies: #5444 <--> #5456 In message #5422 to all on 05-14-94 Tom Glen wrote: > My wife just completed a two-week course in facilitation. Much >taught in that course delighted me, and I was very pleased to see >that a federal agency was adopting so many TQM practices. > But one element bothered me. The class was taught that the first >thing a quality improvement team should do is to define its charter >and decide what it's going to do. In the class example, the Quality >Council chartered a team to "look into the travel voucher processing >system. We've had complaints." The team then proceeded to study the >travel voucher processing system and make recommendations to the >council. > In work I have done with organizations, I have always insisted >that the Quality Council must do its homework and know clearly what >the problem is and what it wants done. Telling a team to "study the >process and find out what's wrong" is inviting the team to spin its >wheels. Instead, I have always pushed the council to charter teams >with two statements. The first, the problem statement, is a >quantified expression of what's wrong. Example: "Travel voucher >processing is taking 6.3 weeks. That's too long." The second >statement is the mission statement, a quantified expression of what >the council wants the team to do. Example: "Reduce the travel voucher >processing time by 50 percent." > I'd be interested in the experience of other members of this >conference. Can teams succeed when they are given broad statements of >mission? I agree that a specific problem and goal is needed for an action team to have a good chance of success. However, the makeup of the Quality Council for an organization generally consists of only a few high level managers. Even though this council should have a firm grasp on the problems at hand, they rarely have enough first hand knowledge of all the details to establish appropriate charters for the action team. This creates the need for informational teams in order to "do the homework". The key here is these informational teams are used only to define probable root causes and solutions. With the information obtained, the Quality Council can better set a constructive agenda for the action team. The information also helps to select appropriate members of the team who will most likely be the ones which the solutions affect. Based on personal experience, there is often a large gap in perception of problems and solutions between management and those at the front lines. It is rather difficult for one side to see the barriers and obstacles of the other unless a they can put in some significant job reversal time. This is not often realistic, so the next best option is to obtain the information as directly as possible. A standing cross-functional information team has worked well for this purpose in our company. It consists of a representative from each discrete worker grouping (non-managerial when possible) and a few top managers. Meetings are held on a regularly scheduled basis. This team also serves as an conduit for communications flow in addition to the normal channels. This additional communications channel, in itself, has allowed many problems to be solved without having to assign an action team. It has also been able to illuminate problems in a different perspective than would be otherwise possible. My viewpoint is that a quality program needs both kinds of teams to function well. Action teams with clearly defined parameters as needed and Informational teams with much more latitude. --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #5456 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-16-94 15:42 From: Tom Glenn To: Gary Vangelder Subject: Team Charters Replies: #5454 <--> #5492 > . . . the makeup of the > Quality Council for an organization generally consists of > only a few > high level managers. Even though this council should have a > firm grasp > on the problems at hand, they rarely have enough first hand > knowledge > of all the details to establish appropriate charters for the > action > team. That's exactly the problem. Unless the top folks in the organization have established systems of process measurement and have a clear vision--and, therefore, clear goals--they are in no position to charter teams to improve processes. > This creates the need for informational teams in order > to "do > the homework". The key here is these informational teams are > used only > to define probable root causes and solutions. With the > information > obtained, the Quality Council can better set a constructive > agenda for > the action team. The information also helps to select > appropriate > members of the team who will most likely be the ones which > the > solutions affect. The establishment of teams to ferret out the problems is a good one, one I would support. But it is still not the best way to do one's business. Each component of the organization needs to establish its own measuring system, based on the expectations of its customers and the gap between those expectations and the service, knowledge, or product delivered. I agree that you can't do everything at once, and sometimes you have to start with a less than perfect way of getting going in TQM. But over time, my sense is that the information gathering teams should be phased out as components in the organization bring on line process measures. I often recommend to the quality council that it start with just one part of the organization or perhaps one process that extends over the whole of the organization--something presumably simple, like delivery of internal mail--and learn from that experience before moving on to the next step. The other reservation I have about information gathering teams is that they tend to be resented. Organizations don't like a delegation from higher management snooping around and measuring processes internal to the organization. The best answer I have found to the problem of diagnosing the problems in an organization is for the leader(s) to hold quality audits demanding quantifiable answers to questions implicit in some kind of a format--often based on the Baldrige criteria, for example. When lower level managers are forced to measure their processes so that they can report on them in a quantifiable way, they frequently turn up problems they didn't know they had. --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #5492 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-18-94 08:17 From: Ned Hamson To: Tom Glenn Subject: Team Charters Replies: #5456 <--> #5494 > > The only problem with that, is that is assumes that senior > > management has an idea of what needs improvement or fixing. > > If that were true, then they would know the answer more often > > and wouldn't have much need for a team to assist them. If I > > am not answering your question, let me know. > Ned, my sense is that if senior management doesn't know > what needs fixing, quality doesn't have a chance. That > doesn't mean that they know the answer. That's for the team > to find out. But they certainly need to know, in quantified > terms, what the problem is. Once again, if you have reason to > think I'm off the track, let me know. > --- > * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) > 585-1164 (11:202/299) Short reply: Tom, what I am referring to are problems that are known to be problems to workers but seem to be too small a scale to be noticed by management and/or the designers of the process. One example: a team of folks at Memphis Light, Gas and Water, were very concerned about the personal danger and just plain hassel they faced when underground utilitiy boxes they had put in place had to be dug up and repaired after damage from heavy equipment being used on the construction site. The had complained and noted the problem many times but management had never responded. Once they were able to start a quality circle, they were able to document the actual costs to the company ($50,000-$75,000 a year) and proposed a solution that cost less than $350 a year, they were able to solve a real problem that was unseen by management. Similarly, at Houston Power and Light, even thought the team processes were paying off in many small improvements and improved customer satisfaction, some top managers discounted the efforts because the $$$$ involved were very little when compared to what the company could make by getting a couple of extra cents in a utility case. So many significant problems at that utility were invisible because they didn't involve enough money. More later, if you want. Ned --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #5494 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-18-94 11:18 From: Tom Glenn To: Ned Hamson Subject: Team Charters Replies: #5492 <--> #5546 > Short reply: Tom, what I am referring to are problems that > are known to be problems to workers but seem to be too small > a scale to be noticed by management and/or the designers of > the process. Valid point, Ned. Thanks. I guess my focus is on organizations that are still in the start-up stage. The tendency for management is to "not want to bothered with the detail" and to delegate quality to lower-ranking members while they do not change themselves. That doesn't work. Nor does it work to delegate to others discovering what the principal problems of the organization are. My feeling is that in the examples you gave, the organizations were somewhat advanced in the quality journey--to the point that people in the workforce felt empowered to find problems and want to solve them. In my work I've counseled managers to hold off on voluntary teams at the beginning. My advice has been to wait until (a) people are trained in the tools, principles and practices, and teamwork and (b) the quality culture has begun to take hold. Some of the greatest success stories from places like Motorola and Corning are stories about workers finding problems and solving them. But that didn't happen at the beginning. --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #5546 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-21-94 07:19 From: Ned Hamson To: Tom Glenn Subject: Team Charters Replies: #5494 <--> #5551 > > Short reply: Tom, what I am referring to are problems that > > are known to be problems to workers but seem to be too small > > a scale to be noticed by management and/or the designers of > > the process. > Valid point, Ned. Thanks. I guess my focus is on > organizations that are > still in the start-up stage. The tendency for management is > to "not want to bothered with the detail" and to delegate > quality to lower-ranking members while they do not change > themselves. That doesn't work. Nor does it work to delegate > to others discovering what the principal problems of the > organization are. > My feeling is that in the examples you gave, the > organizations were somewhat advanced in the quality > journey--to the point that people in the workforce felt > empowered to find problems and want to solve them. In my work > I've counseled managers to hold off on voluntary teams at the > beginning. My advice has been to wait until (a) people are > trained in the tools, principles and practices, and teamwork > and (b) the quality culture has begun to take hold. Some of > the greatest success stories from places like Motorola and > Corning are stories about workers finding problems and > solving them. But that didn't happen at the beginning. > --- > * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) > 585-1164 (11:202/299) I am pretty much a stickler on this point, I guess. But the example from Memphis Gas... came when they were in their second year of all voluntary quality circles. They still use that process. Later they moved team problem solving "up" in the organization and later introduced process improvement across departments. What is going to work is what the culture will accept and stand. In the case of the Memphis firm, the workers has a history of working on their own with little direct supervision and that supported their problem solving processes. --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #5551 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-21-94 12:32 From: Tom Glenn To: Ned Hamson Subject: Team Charters Replies: #5546 <--> #7399 > What is going to work is what the culture > will accept and stand. Once again, I stand corrected. You are quite right. And, indeed, that is the key point. I guess it tells you something about organizations I have worked with that I sensed voluntary teams wouldn't work for them in the beginning. Nearly always, at the start of the quality journey, I found myself dealing with an autocratic leadership, constrained workers, and adversarial relations between management and workers--in which fear and resentment were the major corporate emotions. To broaden the discussion a little: I think Freud was right that the two most important things in life are love and work. We have done ourselves untold damage by removing both from the modern American workplace. TQM, high performance systems, and two or three other management philosophies are trying to restore them. Their success should speak for itself. --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #7399 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-27-94 16:56 From: Ned Hamson To: Tom Glenn Subject: Team Charters Replies: #5551 <--> #7402 > > What is going to work is what the culture > > will accept and stand. > Once again, I stand corrected. You are quite right. And, > indeed, that is the key point. I guess it tells you something > about organizations I have worked with that I sensed > voluntary teams wouldn't work for them in the beginning. > Nearly always, at the start of the quality journey, I found > myself dealing with an autocratic leadership, constrained > workers, and adversarial relations between management and > workers--in which fear and resentment were the major > corporate emotions. > To broaden the discussion a little: I think Freud was > right that the two most important things in life are love and > work. We have done ourselves untold damage by removing both > from the modern American workplace. TQM, high performance > systems, and two or three other management philosophies are > trying to restore them. Their success should speak for > itself. > --- > * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) > 585-1164 (11:202/299) Wait until you read Schwatrz's article until we rely on Freud too much. According to Howard's article, work and love get all mixed up with trying to return to the nurturing womb. At the end of this message, I'll try to upload my message to Schwartz from this afternoon. I can agree that love is one of the most important things in life. It depends on how you define work, as to whether I'll accept it as the other most important thing. Anyway, I think most would add children to the list. As for me, I live by the following short vision statement: I am a child of God/the universe (plug in what fits for you). Love is my only function. And that is why I am here. Comes from a writer and lecturer/teacher Allan Cohen. It easier to understand terms, it means that my task is to express love in my own unique way in everything I think and do. Let me know if I am treading on your patience and/or values here and I'll not go on with this line. Anyway. My contribution or understanding is that the most interesting thing about love and its many manifestations is that it contains within it an irresistable desire/urge to express itself in new ways. That is why the world and our understanding of it keeps evolving and why we will never run out of ways to express what we are. I agree and am glad that you have the insight that TQM or this quality and involvement stuff is a key to introducing love and meaning into the workplace -- a major part of our lives. The other guiding statement for me is this: One world, one peace, one person, peace begins with me. Since I began leading a peace study and meditation group in 1985, I and my friends have been pursuing individual and world peace as inseparable journeys. We have seen great progress. If I had known you in 1985 and had told you that within ten years the cold war will end and the Israeli's and Palestinians would be at peace, you would have either thought me crazy or had someone check me for drugs. --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #7402 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-27-94 17:01 From: Ned Hamson To: Tom Glenn Subject: Team Charters Replies: #7399 <--> #7403 I'll get use to this sometime. Anyhow, I see my work for peace and planetary peace, and creating humane, safe, effective and efficient workplaces through the use of quality and participation processes as one piece of work -- my best way of fulfilling my vision. Talk to you soon. You did say you wanted to broaden things a bit. If I went too far, let me know, I can reel myself back in a bit. When I get a chance, I think I should upload my short article on quality and participation trends. You might find it useful and it might spark further insights for both of us. Ned --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #7403 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-27-94 17:59 From: Tom Glenn To: Ned Hamson Subject: Team Charters Replies: #7402 <--> #7404 First, at the risk of irritating some of the more quantitative folks, I am pleased that someone besides me sees quality in the way you do. Implicit and unspoken in the principles and practices of quality are all the points you made in your message. We don't disagree. I mean love in the agape since, defined by Hannah Arendt as wanting another to be. I'd add taking joy in another's existence. That's why I didn't mention children. We can also love our work and fulfill ourselves in our work. And that's what I mean by work. I'm reminded of Maslow's description of good work as being indistinguishable from play. --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299) Message #7404 - TQM (Internet) (Rcvd) Date: 05-27-94 18:02 From: Tom Glenn To: Ned Hamson Subject: Team Charters Replies: #7403 <- > If I went too far, let me know, I can reel myself back > in a bit. Not by my lights. It is a real pleasure for me to hear an expert in quality see quality as I do. > When I get a chance, I think I should upload my > short article on quality and participation trends. Please do. I'll look forward to it. --- * Origin: TQM BBS - Total Quality Management - (301) 585-1164 (11:202/299)