Conservative Optimism

In uncertain times, everyone searches for even bits of information, especially when they bring good news. The 2001 Quality Progress Salary Survey may provide such a glimmer for the quality profession.

On p. 20 the results show quality practitioners holding their own in compensation, with folks in some job titles making significant gains. True, the survey was conducted in July, back when using the word "recession" seemed speculative and multiple terrorist attacks on U.S. soil seemed downright inconceivable. If the survey were conducted today, the results might be different.

Lacking enough up-to-the-minute information to make that call, I'll guardedly surmise the results at least provide a picture of reality for earlier this year, when the economy was already suffering after a year of post-dot.com meltdown, a bearish stock market and increasing layoffs.

Besides all the survey data in this issue, you'll find more on ASQ's member Web site, www.asqnet.org. One section on the site looks at the quality infrastructure of respondents' organizations and reveals interesting changes.

For example, a set of questions addresses the average number of employees per quality department. Among U.S. respondents, the number has grown, no matter how the quality function is organized. For organizations with centralized functions, the average number is 34, up from 21 in 2000. For functions decentralized by specialty, the average number in 2001 is 54, up from 19. For functions decentralized by location, the 2001 average is 26, up from 21.

The comparisons are not apples to apples: Last year we combined U.S. and Canadian responses to these questions; this year we kept them separate. Factoring in the greater number of U.S. respondents, U.S. organizations still saw increases. A follow-up about changes in the number of quality employees showed it has increased or stayed the same the past two years for the majority of respondents. Again, due to the survey's timing, the picture may appear rosier than it actually is; recent unemployment figures were the worst in years. Yet the apparent addition of quality employees bodes well.

Another insight is a possible shift from centralized quality. In 2000, 55.9% of respondents reported their organizations had centralized quality departments. For 2001, the U.S. percentage dropped to 50.7 (though it was higher in Canada at 54.1%). Perhaps the data mean quality practitioners' efforts to "spread the gospel" are paying off, especially in convincing management to add quality personnel throughout the organization.

I can't help but echo a phrase I heard recently from Paul Borawski, executive director of ASQ: conservative optimism. He was talking about the current state of the Society; I think it could apply to the entire quality profession.

Debbie Phillips-Donaldson

Editor