Deploying Total QualityManagement in Russia

028 Total quality management

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

Deploying Total Quality Management in Russia Professor Paul Watson, & Mr Nicholas Chileshe, Sheffield Hallam University,Dr. Dmitry Maslow, Ivanov Power University, Russia

Today’s arsenal of improvement tools is robust and continues to grow with the addition of new approaches: Six Sigma, BS EN ISO 9001:2000, Balanced Scorecard, Quality Function Deployment (QFD), Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) and various Self-assessment models. The majority of offered approaches are based on the principles of Total Quality Management, but for the majority of Russian managers TQM remains a mystery. Thus, research has been undertaken specifically focused upon Russian businesses to find an approach to quality adoption that is understandable and deployable. The developed Management Functional Assessment Model is currently being implemented and the process monitored. This article examines progress to date.

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

Total quality management 029

030 Total quality management

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

Total quality management in Russia

for purchasing one product or service as opposed to another or as noted in Russia ‘vote by rouble’, as no choice existed.

T

he struggle to satisfy clients in ser-

This artificial market did not promote a

vices and manufacturing within

positive attitude towards quality or its impor-

Russia has forced senior managers to

tance in a global competitive market place. A

search for new appropriate approaches to con-

sea change has been necessary to move from

duct business practices. Within Russia supply

this over-managed (by central government)

and demand has historically been the func-

system to a more westernised approach.

tion of an administrative command system

Although this change has been evolutionary,

and was subject to state planning. The con-

Russia has been able to build upon the accu-

cept and application of competition between

mulated experience of eastern and western

manufacturers and service providers was

experiences. In short, Russia is now behind

absent (Yasin, 2003). Customers could not opt

the West in its understanding and application

Table 1: Quality Systems Development in the USSR Title

City

Year

Comments

Zero-defects manufacturing of products (BIP - Russian abbreviation)

Saratov

1955

The first time in Russian practice that a new measure of production quality is introduced.

Quality, Reliability, Resource from the first items (KANARSPI)

Gorky

1958

Relying on a products design stage for the elimination of defects before production.

Zero-defects operation system (SBT)

Lvov

1961

Calculation of a complex index of operation quality with allowance for individual features that influence the operation quality of various divisions and separate workers.

Scientific organisation of operations on increasing motor-resource of drives (NORM)

Yaroslavl

1964

Acceptance of criteria for quality and the technical parameter, direct purpose of the system, control of a level of a motor-resource and its sequential increase on the base rises of reliability of details.

Complex control for the management of quality (KSUKP)

Lvov

1975

The system has united all previous experience of quality systems, development of an organisational, technical base of the system on the basis of enterprise standards.

Complex system of production efficiency enhance (KSPEP)

Krasnodar

1980

Co-ordination of quality improvements of production, with production efficiency enhanced.

Total quality management 031

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

of TQM. This gap is now being greatly

Russia. Their framework is a standards

reduced and this paper will contribute to

approach to quality, i.e. one of installing a set

enhancing the deployment TQM in Russia.

of standards/procedures. They have no real managerial experience or any concept of the

Quality Deployment Russia Experiences

importance of people management, contrast

It should be noted that there has been some

this with the modern management approach

systematic activity in applying quality

to quality which fully embraces statistics,

improvement concepts but that each develop-

knowledge of economics and customer

ment has tended to be of a regional nature in

requirements embraced within a culture of

the USSR. The main developments are pre-

empowerment. Russia has to move from its

sented in Table 1. Upon inspection of Table 1

current approach to quality which is one of

it is possible to identify that before the 1980’s

concentrating on limiting the quantity of

developments really did take place, however,

defects and increasing reliability. This is not

many of these innovations were used mainly

to say that these are unimportant, they are.

for the Russian military industry. There were

The problem is that it has instilled a culture of

few quality activities in the provision of con-

‘Quality Control’ rather than ‘Assurance’ or

sumer goods manufacturing or services.

even ‘TQM’.

The Soviet system has specific problems in trying to engender a TQM philosophy, the main ones being: • A limited sphere of influence from the early approaches of quality development due to the bureaucratic system.

• The absence of a customer focus.

The future strategy for attaining quality improvements in Russia is to stress the importance of economics and management

• An economic environment that is not supportive of an enterprise culture built on a quality approach.

• Later systems have had an unsystematic

The necessity to train new managers in the field of quality and instill a more western view was recognised in 1999 by the Ministry

application.

of Education of Russia (Dickenson et al 2000).

(Mazur & Shapiro 2003)

However, most quality managers are educated

The Soviet school of quality experts are

within technical departments. Even in

descended from military or engineering back-

Russian high schools with economic faculties,

grounds. These experts have designed and are

quality managers are part of material-support,

responsible for most quality developments in

goods - support and standardisation depart-

032 Total quality management

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

Total quality management in Russia

National Quality Award, which was established in 1996. Over the past seven years more than 800 applications from 67 subjects of the

ments. The future strategy for attaining qual-

Russian Federation have taken part in the

ity improvements in Russia is to stress the

competition, 65 of these organisations have

importance of economics and management

been successful. (Secretariat of National

and this is to be part of graduate education

Quality Award of Russia 2004). The award

programmes and its success monitored in

however for most companies does not pro-

companies who employ graduates.

vide a true improvement tool, its potential for

Russia has not fully employed TQM but

self-assessment

linked

to

continuous

some Russian businesses have implemented

improvement has not been fully realised.

BS EN ISO 9001:2000, benchmarking and self

Further the best practice of leading organisa-

assessment strategies. The problem is that

tions has not been successfully disseminated

managers of western companies accept the

to other less able businesses. The self-assess-

concept of customer focus, continuous

ment aspect linked to internal and external

improvement, process approach, quality

benchmarking is a vital activity of EFQM EM,

management, involving employees, social

but this aspect has been only partially realised

responsibility of businesses, all as an integral

by Russian firms (Conti 2003).

part of quality improvement. In Russia these business concepts are alien; therefore adopting TQM is a most problematic activity. Key issues that have to be addressed are engaging with a change philosophy, a lack of knowledge, resistance to change and a lack of senior management support.

there still exists a fear of disclosure; this is based upon many years of non performance being associated with sanctions

Within Europe an approach to TQM deployment has been developed by the

Russian managers do not appreciate the

Quality

value of self-assessment unless it is linked to

Management in the form of an Excellence

some kind of financial analysis. This is

Model. The Excellence Model defines and

because

describes TQM in a way that can be more eas-

Performance Indicators (KPI’s) and available

ily understood by senior managers (Vander

self-assessment techniques. Within Russia

Wiele et al 2000).

there still exists a fear of disclosure; this is

European

Foundation

for

EFQM EM forms the basis of the Russian

there

is

an

absence

of

Key

based upon many years of non performance

Total quality management 033

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

being associated with sanctions. Self-assess-

upon a procedural system without the under-

ment leading to improvement requires the

pinning morphogenic culture is bound to fail.

identification of problematic issues along

In order to address the above noted issues

with the development of advocated solutions

a Functional Assessment Mode has been

and corrective actions. However, one must

developed from research conducted within

remember that until recently there existed a

Russia (Maslov, Belokorovin 2003).

culture of reluctance to identify errors or mis-

Corporate excellence is measured by an

takes and showing initiative was not always

organisation’s ability to both achieve and sus-

well received. This situation provides a true

tain a competitive advantage through satisfy-

hindrance to objective of implementing self-

ing its stakeholders. This can only be achieved

assessment techniques. Senior managers of

by the efficient and effective utilisation of all

large companies entrust all quality activities

corporate resources which include the 5M’s:

to appropriate sub-divisions; in small and

The 5M’s have to be treated as a holistic

medium enterprises (SME’s) a culture exists

whole and the model provided within this

where the chief executive always knows best

paper provides a means for setting corporate

and therefore there is no need to engage in

objectives that link with all stakeholder

activities requiring the support of other staff,

expectations/needs. The advocated model

such as benchmarking or self-assessment. In

empowers organisations to monitor and

their view this would be a waste of valuable

benchmark their performance and further

resources. Very few organisations use bench-

enables them to score their performance in

marking in Russia, the ones that do are repre-

key operational areas.

sentatives of large businesses having contracts

By adopting a holistic approach to cus-

with foreign partners. For most SME’s ‘bench-

tomer requirements, building on stakeholder

marking’ is an unfamiliar word and bench-

contribution not only can ‘added value’ be

marking is not accepted as a valid manage-

attained but it can also be measured. Once

ment technique. Its deployment is further

measured the benchmark can be set for

hindered by the secretive and complex nature

engaging in the continued drive for organisa-

of Russian domestic business practices.

tional excellence.

Analysis of the deployment of improvement tools inevitably leads to the conclusion

Competitive Advantage

that a lack of a quality focused culture does

The

hinder the effective and efficient deployment

Assessment Model’. However, the functional

and application of the said tools and tech-

assessment model forms part of ‘competitive-

niques. Building a quality approach based

orientated management’. This is a system of

model

presented

is

a

‘Functional

034 Total quality management

Total quality management in Russia

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

have to be given the time and skills to make a useful contribution towards the drive for a sustainable competitive advantage.

management designed to gain and sustain a competitive corporate advantage by way of

Personnel

continued internal and external self assess-

Employers have to be motivated to engage in

ment and an improvement driven agenda.

a corporate culture directed at stakeholder sat-

The concept of competitive-orientated

isfaction. Senior management must not forget

management may be represented as a tetrahe-

that employees are also stakeholders. Thus

dron (as in Figure 1). It is based upon three

they should remember to engage in ‘consulta-

principles of competitive achievement, lead-

tion’ before ‘implementation’ in corporate

ership, personnel and development. The

plans. This aspect allows staff to contribute to

emphasis should be placed on the attainment

the decision making process. Culture is a vital

of a ‘Sustainable Competitive Advantage’.

aspect for consideration and a morphogenic culture should be the aim of senior manage-

Leadership

ment.

The role of senior management is critical to the success of any change process and leader-

Development

ship has to be demonstrated. All employees

The development of an organisation requires the consideration of both business processes

Figure 1 Competitive-Orientated Management Core Concept Constituent parts of the tetrahedron

and environmental issues/aspects. Therefore environmental scanning has to be deployed in order to establish external influences and may be done by SWOT and PEST analysis.

This should be linked to the RADAR concept for the techniques to be effective.

Management Functional Assessment Model (MFAM) The MFAM is based upon six functions of management: • forecasting and planning • organising • motivation

Total quality management 035

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

• control

future corporate plans?

• co-ordination

• how is the company to achieve set aims

• communication

based upon forecasts?

The first five functions are encapsulated

The planning criterion contains five basic

within a framework of an effective and effi-

categories:

cient system of communication (see Fig 2).

1.1

The MFAM has been designed to aid construction managers in determining the key activities to

to

improve

be

addressed

corporate

in

ning process in motion.

1.2

order

efficiency

Gathering and analysing information related to both clients and the markets

and

effectiveness.

Setting the objectives and strategic plan-

(all stakeholders).

1.3

Detailing business-processes (who, what, where and why).

1. Forecasting Planning

1.4

Gathering and analysing information

This criterion is concerned with determining

relating to competitors and

the shape of future strategy; its function is to

benchmarking.

answer three questions:

1.5

Resources planning (5M’s).

• where is the company now in terms of its vision and mission?

• where does it want to be as part of its

2. Organising The main managerial tasks here are to organise business-processes with a concen-

Figure 2 Management Functional-Assessment Model (MFAM) incorporating the ‘RADAR’ concept

tration on maximising effectiveness and efficiency.

The organising criterion contains five basic categories: 2.1

Creating an appropriate organisational structure

2.2

Establishing authority and responsibility for all personnel

2.3

Creating a self-learning organisational culture (morphogenic)

2.4

Developing a value system based upon enhancing performance

2.5

Deployment of new technology linked to corporate enhancement

036 Total quality management

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

Total quality management in Russia

4.1

A monitoring system for each key stage of business-processes.

4.2

Measuring performance levels (with an internal and external perspective).

3. Motivation It has to be noted that motivation has many

4.3

aspects both intrinsic and extrinsic.

Determining

customer

satisfaction

levels.

The motivation criterion contains five

4.4

Determining the efficiency and effec-

basic categories:

tiveness of resource utilisation linked to

3.1

corporate aims.

Developing a co-operative culture based on stakeholder satisfaction.

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

4.5

Conducting a comparative analysis

Ensuring staff have the skills and com-

between set targets and actual results,

petences to perform set tasks.

leading to appropriate actions (RADAR).

A consideration of personnel needs linked to self-actualisation.

5. Co-ordination

Involvement in processes, increase areas

The analysis of deviations on business-

of responsibility and self-monitoring

processes and updating of the current plans in

(empowerment).

a holistic manner based on feedback is a criti-

Results satisfaction - feedback on perfor-

cal point in co-ordination management.

mance in a timely manner linked to

Again this can only be fully attained by

‘RADAR’.

‘RADAR’ application.

The co-ordination criterion contains five

4. Control

basic categories:

Control is dependent upon constant feedback

5.1

Unity of all the other functions.

from each stage of business-process, checking

5.2

Establishing effective communications.

against quality and measuring performance

5.3

Developing a conflict solving culture

indicators. A correct monitoring system allows for an increase in the efficiency and effectiveness

of

organisational

linked to enhancement.

5.4

activity.

Organisations must consider feeding forward

Updating of deviations: revision and possible reco-ordination of resources.

5.5

Information management - information

of information for effective control. This can

has to be timely and in sufficient detail

only be fully achieved by deploying ‘RADAR’

to inform corrective actions (RADAR).

incorporating a plan, do, check and act cycle.

The control criterion contains five basic categories:

6. Communication This is the link and the life blood of corpo-

Total quality management 037

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

rate activity and its effectiveness is measured

ment of previously determined objectives,

within the context of the five other functions.

contained within a specific plan, the plan being the method to be deployed in order to

RADAR

achieve the pre-determined objectives.

Control is concerned with the efficient and

Control is exercised by the feedback and

effective utilisation of resources in the attain-

feeding forward of information on actual per-

Table 2 Marking criteria for MFAM Complete the score card based on organisational performance following the scoring criteria in Table 3.

Criteria

Assessment category

Max

1. Forecasting/ Planning

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

Setting the objective and strategic planning process in motion Gathering and analysing information related to clients and markets Detailing business-processes Gathering and analysing information related to competitors and benchmarking 1.5 Resources planning Criterion total

4 4 4

2. Organising

2.1 Creating the correct organisational structure 2.2 Establishing authority and the responsibility for all personnel 2.3 Creating a self-learning organisational culture 2.4 Developing a value system based on enhancing performance 2.5 Deployment of new technology linked to corporate enhancement Criterion estimation

4 4 4 4 4 20

3. Motivation

3.1 Developing a co-operative culture based upon stakeholder satisfaction 3.2 Ensuring staff have the skills, resources and competences to perform set tasks 3.3 A consideration of personal needs linked to self-actualisation 3.4 Engagement in processes, increase areas of responsibility and self-monitoring 3.5 Results satisfaction - feedback on performance in a timely manner Criterion estimation

4 4 4 4 4 20

4. Control

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5

A monitoring system for each key stage of business-process Measuring performance levels Determining customer satisfaction levels Determine the efficiency and effectiveness of resource utilisation Conduct a comparative analysis between set targets and actual results, leading to appropriate actions Criterion estimation

4 4 4 4 4

5.1 Unity of all other functions 5.2 Establishing effective internal communications 5.3 Developing a conflict solving system 5.4 Updating of deviations: revision and possible reco-ordination of other resources 5.5 Ensure effective Information management Criterion estimation

4 4 4 4 4 20

5. Coordinating

Total management estimation

4 20

20

100

Score

038 Total quality management

Total quality management in Russia

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

RADAR logic explained The RADAR logic states that an organisation needs to:

formance when compared with the pre-deter-

•

determine the Results the organisation is

mined plan, therefore planning and control

aiming for as part of its policy and strategy

are very closely linked. Control is concerned

making processes. These include the per-

with the establishment of deviations from

formance of the organisation, both finan-

planned activities/objectives and initiating

cially and operationally, and the percep-

effective and efficient corrective actions.

tion of its stakeholders

These assessments may also establish areas of

• plan and develop an integrated set of

best practice to be disseminated throughout

sound Approaches to deliver the required

the organisation.

results

Table 3 Summary of Results for MFAM The total management estimation helps to define a level of Management Maturity Level

Total Score

I

(0~20)

II

(21~40) ∑

Management has the potential for development.Managers should develop their leadership skills, define organisational purposes clearly and develop a strategy based on TQM principles.

III

(41~60) ∑

Management systems are in evidence.It is necessary to pay attention to the optimisation of business processes and improvement of quality at each stage.Perfecting a control system and taking into account the importance of stakeholders.

IV

(61~80) ∑

Constant quality checks within the management system take place.Utilisation of external benchmarking in order to improve corporate performance.

V

(81~100) ∑

The maximum outcomes in all areas of corporate activity are reached; the management system is benchmarked and monitored in a drive for continuous improvement.

∑

Assessment No methodology or system, management purposes are not defined.For further development it is necessary to reconsider core business principles.

In scoring 0 - 4 the following criteria as shown in Table 3, should be used.

Table 4 Scoring criteria Score

Criteria for Scoring

0

No activity demonstrated

1

Activity not consistently utilised

2

Activity utilised but dependent upon the situation

3

The activity is deployed permanently and systematically

4

The activity is deployed permanently and systematically, monitored and reviewed via benchmarking for improvement

Total quality management 039

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

Both the ‘Results’ and ‘Approaches’ ele-

The basic premise of both BS EN ISO

ments related to the Plan stage of Deming’s

9001:2000 and the European Foundation for

control cycle, see Figure 3. Matching of Plan,

Quality Excellence Model is the concept of

Do, Check and Act Cycle with RADAR

control as depicted in Figure 5.

• Deploy the approaches in a systematic way to

ensure

full

implementation.

One must remember it is not possible to

The

have retrospective effective corrective actions.

deployment is the ‘Act’ stage of Deming’s

Therefore, timeliness of data is a key compo-

Cycle.

nent of the control function.

• Assess and Review the approaches followed based on monitoring and analysis of the results achieved utilising ongoing learning activities. Based on this assessment, companies should identify, prioritise, plan and implement improvements where needed.

(European

Foundation

for

Quality

Corporate excellence is measured by an organisation’s ability to both achieve and sustain outstanding results for its stakeholders

Management, 1999).

‘Assess’ and ‘Review’ cover the ‘check’ and ‘act’ components of Deming’s Cycle.

Linking RADAR and the Management Functional Assessment Model (MFAM).

Figure 2: The Management Functional

Figure 3 Matching of Plan, Do, Check and Act Cycle with RADAR

Assessment

Model

incorporating

RADAR

encapsulates the facility for organisations to fully engage in a drive for continuous improvement. Thus, every time the MFAM is implemented and the scoring process applied RADAR is embodied within the model. In this way forecasts and plans linked to deployment strategies are evaluated and appropriate actions determined via assessment and review. Only by employing this approach can the full benefits of MFAM deployment be attained.

Conclusion The model (MFA) recognises that sustainable excellence in all aspects of performance

040 Total quality management

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

Total quality management in Russia

ple can excel. A truly empowered organisation employs both a top down and bottom up approach to managing its activities with-

is based on the management functions of

in the context of aiming to fully satisfy all

forecasting/planning, organising, co-ordinat-

stakeholders.

ing, motivating, control and communication.

Organisations perform more effectively

The application of the MFAM will address the

and efficiently when all interrelated activi-

key deployment issues and empower the

ties are understood and systematically man-

resulting benefits.

aged and decisions concerning current operations and planned improvements are made

A truly empowered organisation employs both a top down and bottom up approach to managing its activities within the context of aiming to fully satisfy all stakeholders

using reliable information that includes stakeholder perceptions. The full potential of an organisation’s people is best released through shared values and a culture of trust and empowerment. This necessitates a holistic approach to people and their operational systems

and

organisational

structure.

Performance is maximised when based on management and sharing of knowledge

Excellence is dependent upon balancing

within a culture of continuous learning,

and satisfying the needs of all relevant

innovation and improvement. An organisa-

stakeholders

people

tion works more effectively when it has

employed, customers, suppliers and society

mutually beneficial relationships built on

in general, as well as those with financial

trust, the sharing of knowledge and integra-

interests in the organisation). The customer

tion with its partners.

(this

includes

is the final judge of product and service

Corporate excellence is measured by an

quality and customer loyalty, retention and

organisation’s ability to both achieve and

market share gain are best optimised

sustain outstanding results for its stakehold-

through a clear focus on the needs of cur-

ers, thus MFAM linked to RADAR has been

rent and potential stakeholders.

developed. It is essential if a truly holistic

The behaviour of an organisation’s lead-

control mechanism is to be attained.

ers creates a clarity and unity of purpose within the organisation and an environ-

References

ment in which the organisation and its peo-

• European Foundation for Quality Management

European Quality •Volume 11 Number 2

(1999) Radar and the EFQM Excellence Model, EFQM Press Releases & Announcements, [on line] last accessed on 12 June 2000 at URL:www.efqm.org/ • Conti,T., (2003), "Pochemu ne polnostyu ispolsuetsya potencial samoocenki?" (Why the potential of a selfassessment is not used?), Standarty i Kachestvo, No. 3.

Dickenson, R. P., Campbell, D. R., and Azarov, V. N., (2000), "Quality management implementation in Russian Strategies for change", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 66-81.

• Maslov D. , Belokorovin, E. (2003),‘Malyi business: puti razvitia,’ (Small Business, routes of development), M’art, Archangelsk • Mazur, I. I., & Shapiro, V. D., (2003) "Upravleniye kachestvom: uchebnoye posobie" (Quality management: the Guidebook), Vysshaya shkola, Moskva.

•Secretariat of National Quality Award of Russia (2002, 2003), Russian National Quality Award, AllRussian Scientific and Research Institute for Certification, www.vniis.ru • Van der Wiele, A., Dale, B., and Williams, R., (2000), "ISO 9000 series and excellence models: fad to fashion to fit", Journal of General Management,Vol. 25 No. 3, Spring, pp. 50-66.

• Yasin, E.G., (2003), "Rossiyskaya ekonomika. Istoki i panorama rynochnych reform: Kurs lekciy" (The Russian economy. Sources and panorama of market reforms: Course of lectures), 2-e izd, GU VshE, Moskva.

For further information, contact: Dmitry Maslow: Maslow@front.ru

Total quality management 041