Starting From Scratch

Abstract:There has previously been no general approach to starting a quality program by applying available quality methods and tools. A team of graduate students set out to help organizations solve this problem by developing the Quality System Development Roadmap (QSDR). QSDR is based on the Lean Six Sigma Quality Transformation Toolkit that facilitates team-based communication and problem solving. The structure of the roadmap is a set of flowcharts that outlines the decision process used to further develop the quality system. The roadmap helps organizations choose the appropriate tools and methods within a process-focused QMS by ensuring each process is linked to a specific quality …

Access this article
Other ways to access this article

Social Bookmarking

Digg, delicious, NewsVine, Furl, Google, StumbleUpon, BlogMarks, Facebook



Help us validate this QSDR by 1/15/2011 and get a chance to win a $50 Quality Press gift certificate. Thanks! http://qualityandinnovation.com/2010/12/04/help-validate-the-qsdr-win-a-50-quality-press-gift-certificate/
--Nicole Radziwill, 12-09-2010


Very good and useful article
--Angelica Astrain, 10-13-2008


Derek - you can see the APQC PCF at http://qualityandinnovation.com/qs726/APQC_PCF.pdf - hope this helps!

Ron - your point is well made, and in fact, this is one of the reasons why our team embarked on this project. If you read the 2003 QP article that initially posed the question, philosophies, methods and tools are ALL TREATED EQUIVALENTLY. This is reasonable since it was a collection of short articles written by multiple authors, but it can get people confused: how can you take a philosophy (Baldrige) and build a quality system from it? Hard to do, because it's not actionable. Unless I know the eight points that characterize ISO 9000 as a minimum standard for a quality system, for example, I might not recognize that I need to map my processes, figure out how they interact, figure out which quality goals I'm trying to accomplish through each, and keep records to see how I'm doing. Baldrige suggests all of that - and it's a solid philosophy compared to the quality BOK - but does not prescribe action. I agree with you that we need to take special care in the message that we send to the readership - that clarifying how to build a quality system does not eliminate the need for a strong set of core values that honor a commitment to quality. Our team recognizes the need to balance both, and in fact, if you look at the links to the full QSDR package online you'll notice that this was one of the formative concepts as we developed the roadmap.

Frank - thanks for the great idea. Definitely one that could be pursued in the future.

--Nicole Radziwill, 10-11-2008


I started reading this article with the feeling that having a map to help decide if a QMS is necessary is a positive step, and then to help select which one is most appropriate would be a real benefit. I was particulary interested in how the authors would equate the "tools" with the philosophy (Baldrige). It was pretty clear that the Organizational Profile that we are all familiar with had a place in the 'organizational evaluation' process, even if Baldrige was not mentioned. By the time I got to QSDR 3.0, I became livid in realizing that an article on quality systems written with one author from Wisconsin-Stout failed to draw the distinction of tools vs. philosophy; in other words, short vs. long term. What this article did do for me is highlight the short term view that Baldrige (a philosophy) takes time and therefore is not attractive in a short-term economy, while the focus in this economy is busy in fighting fires and looking for opportunities to capitalize on short vs. long-term gains. Amazing!! I believe all State quality programs, particularly our local ones, are encountering these forces (short-term gains vs. sustainment), and having ASQ publish an article that bypasses the philosophy while expounding on the shorter term tools is a big mistake without acknowledging the differences.
--Ron Marafioti, 10-02-2008



--Glenn Strausser, 09-24-2008


Very interesting article. Stimulating and timely. Frustrated by inability to find reference to: APQC Process Classification Framework.6 in article Starting from Scratch. Can you help?
--Derek T. Smith, 09-09-2008


Very thoughtful and interesting. More and better references would be helpful, along with a QFD matrix to illustrate the application, which would be a true breakthrough.
--Frank Voehl, 09-09-2008


Featured advertisers