Deming 14 Points Of Quality Pdf

Described are Deming’s 14 Points Explained and Implementation of those points in an.Dr. Edwards Deming’s 14 points of quality management provide a foundation for good management practices. Listed are Demings 14 points with a summary explanation for each of his points. Deming’s 14 Points Explained and Implementation: Listing and ExplanationThe first of 14 points describes a need from an overall business perspective:1. Create constancy of purpose toward improvement of product and service, with the aim to become competitive and to stay in business and to provide jobs.For the company that wants to stay in business, the two general types of problems that exist are the problems of today and the problems of tomorrow.

It is easy to become wrapped up with the problems of today, but the problems of the future demand, first and foremost, constancy of purpose and dedication to keep the company alive. Decisions need to be made to cultivate innovation, fund research and education, and improve the product design and service, remembering that the customer is the most important part of the production line.The second of Deming’s 14 points addresses leadership for change:2. Adopt the new philosophy. We are in a new economic age. Western management must awaken to the challenge, must learn their responsibilities, and take on leadership for change.Government regulations and antitrust activities need to be changed to support the well-being of people.

Commonly accepted levels of mistakes and defects can no longer be tolerated. People must receive effective training so that they understand their job and also understand that they should not be afraid to ask for assistance when it is needed. Supervision must be adequate and effective. Management must be rooted in the company and must not job-hop between positions within a company.The third of Deming’s 14 points out that we need to stop the common practice of trying to inspect quality into a product:3. Cease dependence on inspection to achieve quality. Eliminate the need for inspection on a mass basis by building quality into the product in the first place.Inspection is too late, ineffective, and costly.

It is too late to react to the quality of a product when the product leaves the door. Quality comes not from inspection but from improving the production process. Cor­rective actions are not inspection, scrap, downgrading, and rework the process.Deming’s 14 points numbered 4-14 describe additional activities that organizations should incorporate as part of doing business:4. End the practice of awarding business on the basis of price tag. Instead, minimize total cost. Move toward a single supplier for any one item, on a long-term relationship of loyalty and trust.Price and quality go hand in hand. Trying to drive down the price of anything purchased without regard to quality and service can drive good suppliers and good service out of business.

Single-source suppliers are desirable for many reasons. For example, a single-source supplier can become innovative and develop an economy in the production process that can only result from a long-term relationship with the purchaser. Lot-to-lot variability within a one-supplier process is often enough to disrupt the purchaser’s process. Only additional variation can be expected with two suppliers. To qualify a supplier as a source for parts in a manufacturing process, perhaps it is better first to discard manuals that may have been used as guidelines by unqualified examiners to rate suppliers. Instead, suppliers could be asked to present evidence of active in­volvement of management, encouraging the application of many of the IEE concepts discussed in this volume.

Special note should be given to the methodology used for continual process improvement.5. Improve constantly and forever the system of production and service, to improve quality and productivity, and thus constantly decrease costs.There is a need for constant improvement in test methods and for a better understanding of how the customer uses and misuses a product.

In the past, American companies have often worried about meeting specifications, while the Japanese have worried about uniformity, i.e., reducing variation about the nominal value. Continual process improvement can take many forms. For example, never-ending improvement in the manufacturing process means that work must be done continually with suppliers to improve their processes.

It is important to note that, like depending on inspection, putting out fires is not a process improvement.6. Institute training on the job.Management needs training to learn about all aspects of the company from incoming materials to customer needs, including the impact that process variation has on what is done within the company. Management must understand the problems the worker has in performing his or her tasks satisfactorily. A large obstacle exists in training and leadership when there are flexible standards for acceptable work.

The standard may often be most dependent on whether a foreperson is having difficulty in meeting a daily production quota. It should be noted that money and time spent would be ineffective unless the inhibitors to good work are removed.7. Institute leadership. The aim of supervision should be to help people and machines and gadgets to do a better job.Supervision by management is in need of overhaul, as well as supervision of production workers.” Management should lead, not supervise. Leaders must know the work that they supervise. They must be empowered and directed to communicate and to act on conditions that need correction. They must learn to fix the process, not react to every fault as if it were a special cause, which can lead to a higher defect rate.8.

Drive out fear, so that everyone may work effectively for the company.No one can give his best performance unless he feels secure. Employees should not be afraid to express their ideas or ask questions. Fear can take many forms, resulting in impaired performance and padded figures.

Industries should embrace new knowledge because it can yield better job performance and should not be fearful of this knowledge because it could disclose some of their failings.9. Break down barriers between departments. People in research, design, sales, and production must work as a team to foresee problems of production and use that may be encountered with the product or service.Teamwork is needed throughout the company. Everyone in design, sales, manufacturing can be doing superb work, and yet the company can be failing.

Functional areas are sub-optimizing their own work and not working as a team for the company. Many types of problems can occur when communication is poor. For example, service personnel working with customers know a great deal about their products, but there is often no routine procedure for disseminating this information.10. Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for the work force asking for zero defects and new levels of productivity.Such exhortations only create adversary relationships, as the bulk of the causes of low quality and low productivity belongs to the system and thus lies beyond the power of the work force. Exhortations, posters, targets, and slogans are directed at the wrong people, causing general frustration and resentment.

Posters and charts do not consider the fact that most trouble comes from the basic process. Management needs to learn that its main responsibility should be to improve the process and remove any special causes for defects found by statistical methods. Goals need to be set by an individual for the individual, but numerical goals set for other people without a road map to reach the objective have an opposite effect.11a. Eliminate work standards (quotas) on the factory floor. Substitute leadership.Never-ending improvement is incompatible with a quota.

Work standards, incentive pay, rates, and piecework are manifestations of management’s lack of understanding, which leads to inappropriate supervision. Pride of workmanship needs to be encouraged, while the quota system needs to be eliminated. Whenever work standards are replaced with leadership, quality and productivity increase substantially, and people are happier on their jobs.11b. Eliminate management by objective. Eliminate management by numbers, numerical goals. Substitute leadership.Goals such as “improve productivity by 4 percent next year” without a method are a burlesque.

The data tracking these targets are often questionable. Moreover, a natural fluctuation in the right direction is often interpreted as success, while small fluctuation in the opposite direction causes a scurry for explanations. If there is a stable process, a goal is not necessary because the output level will be what the process produces. A goal beyond the capability/performance of the process will not be achieved. A manager must understand the work that is to be done in order to lead and manage the sources for improvement.

Deming Definition Of Quality

New managers often short-circuit this process and focus instead on outcome; e.g., getting reports on quality, proportion defective, inventory, sales, and people.12a. Remove barriers that rob the hourly worker(s) of their right to pride of workmanship.The responsibility of supervisors must be changed from sheer numbers to quality. In many organizations, the hourly worker becomes a commodity. He may not even know whether he will be working next week. Management can face declining sales and increased costs of almost everything, but it is often helpless in facing the problems of personnel. The establishment of employee involvement and of participation plans has been a smoke screen. Management needs to listen and to correct process problems that are robbing the worker of pride of workmanship.12b.

Remove barriers that rob people in management and in engineering of their right to pride of workmanship.This means, inter alia, abolishment of the annual or merit rating and of managing by objective.” Merit rating rewards people who are doing well in the system; however, it does not reward attempts to improve the system. The performance appraisal erroneously focuses on the end product rather than on leadership to help people. People who are measured by counting are deprived of pride of workmanship. The indexes for these measurements can be ridiculous. For example, an individual is rated on the number of meetings he or she attends; hence, in negotiating a contract, the worker increases the number of meetings needed to reach a compromise. One can get a good rating for firefighting because the results are visible and quantifiable, while another person only satisfied minimum requirements because he or she did the job right the first time; in other words, mess up your job, and correct it later to become a hero.

A common fallacy is the supposition that it is possible to rate people by putting them in rank order from last year’s performance. There are too many combinations of forces involved: the worker, co-workers, noise, and confusion.

Apparent differences in the ranking of personnel will arise almost entirely from these factors in the system. A leader needs to be not a judge but a colleague and counselor who leads and learns with his or her people on a day-to-day basis. In absence of numerical data, a leader must make subjective judgments when discovering who, if any, of his or her people are outside the system, either on the good or the bad side, or within the system.13. Institute a vigorous program of education and self-improvement.An organization needs good people who are improving with education. Management should be encouraging everyone to get additional education and to engage in self-improvement.14.

Put everybody in the company to work to accomplish the transfor­mation. The transformation is everybody’s job.Management needs to take action to accomplish the transformation.

To do this, first consider that every job and activity is part of a process. A flow diagram breaks a process into stages. Questions then need to be asked about what changes could be made at each stage to improve the effectiveness of other upstream or downstream stages.

Everyone can be a part of the team effort to improve the input and output of the stages. Everyone on a team has a chance to contribute ideas and plans. A team has an aim and goal toward meeting the needs of the customer.The above 14 points with the summary of each was reproduced from, Forrest W.

Breyfogle III, Citius Publishing, 2008. Deming’s 14 Points Explained and Implementation: Enhanced System for ImplementationIt was Dr.

Deming who emphasized that the key to quality improvement was in the hands of management. Deming demonstrated that most problems are the result of the system and not of employees. He used statistical quality control techniques to identify special- and common-cause conditions, in which common cause was the result of systematic variability, while special cause was erratic and unpredictable.Based on many years of experience, we have found Dr. Deming’s philosophy to be a powerful guiding light to build a long-lasting system that can make companies more competitive.

I cut my teeth in the manufacturing and construction industries and was introduced to the works of Deming at an early age. I got to meet the great man and his philosophies made absolute sense to me, helped by the fact that I knew of not many others. I never realised how powerful his stuff was til I moved to other organisations which had not embraced the concept. Like Phil, I could never work out why Deming wasn’t applied to safety – makes more sense than some of the other stuff being done. Anyway I hope you enjoy as much as I did. Says Phil:I first posted my 14 Points Of Workplace Safety on my personal blog.

It started as a homage to W. Edward Deming’s work, but has since morphed into an encapsulation of my core beliefs regarding worker safety. I hope you will give it a read and let me know what you think. DEMING and THE 14 POINTS OF WORKPLACE SAFETYFrom“Deming’s work was rooted in engineering discipline and process control while safety grew out of the human resources function. This seemingly inconsequential difference has much to do with the state of safety in the world and why it needs to change.”1. SAFETY IS NOT YOUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITYIf safety were truly your number one priority you would close your doors and mothball your business.

Your number one priority should always be the continued survival of your business. Anyone who tells you different is either a liar or a fool.That having been said, you won’t be in business long if you don’t effectively manage safety. Safety is neither a priority nor a goal; instead it is a criterion by which manufacturers measure the efficacy of its efforts to be successful. Safety is a strategic business element that needs to be managed as scrupulously as quality, delivery, cost and morale.

MISTAKES ARE INEVITABLE, INJURIES ARE NOTPeople make mistakes; it’s practically embedded in our DNA. Stop trying to remind people not to make mistakes and focus instead on preventing the injuries that so predictably happen when people screw up. You may not prevent every injury, but that doesn’t make it impossible.FMEAs and other predictive tools should be used to identify areas of greatest risk and efforts should be made to reduce the risk of injuries to the lowest practical level. The true benefit in this point is the belief that it is possible and the disappointment we feel anytime we aren’t successful in prevention.3. FOCUS ON PREVENTIONPreventing injuries is more efficient than reacting to them. If you spend your money preventing injuries you will spend less money overall. Stop thinking that you might get lucky and avoid a serious and costly injury; you won’t.

Injuries are typically caused by failures in the system. By managing hazards (procedural, behavioral, and mechanical) organizations can reduce unplanned downtime, injuries, and defects.4.

MOVE BEYOND COMPLIANCECompliance with the government regulations is important and tends to correlate to a process that is in control. But we can never mistake being compliant with being safe. Stop congratulating yourself for doing only that which is mandated by the government; you get no credit for doing what you were always supposed to have been doing.5. INSTILL UNIVERSAL OWNERSHIP AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SAFETYEvery job plays a role in ensuring workplace safety.

Everyone must be answerable when processes and protocols fail to keep workers safe. Hold workers accountable for eliminating hazards rather than for injuries.6.

SHIFT THE OWNERSHIP OF SAFETY TO OPERATIONSOperations has the greatest control and oversight of the safety of the workplace. Operations leadership should conduct routine reviews of key safety metrics. Safety as a function should be instructive and should help Operations to be more efficient.7. THE ABSENCE OF INJURIES DOES NOT NECESSARILY DENOTE THE PRESENCE OF SAFETYSafety is an expression of probability. No situation is ever 100 percent risk free. Safety must be managed in terms of risk not by taking a body count.8. AVOID SHAME AND BLAME POLICIES AND TACTICSWorkers do not want to get hurt and manufacturing processes are not supposed to hurt them; no amount of behavior modification will change this.9.

INVEST IN BASIC SKILLS TRAININGThe best way to ensure worker safety is by providing them with good foundational training in the tasks they are routinely expected to do. People who are skilled at the basic tasks associated with their jobs are far less likely to be injured.10. END SAFETY GIMMICKSThere is a cottage industry devoted to taking your money in the name of safety rewards. Incentives should only be used to reward active participation in safety, not to reward an absence of reported injuries. Frankly, why isn’t coming home in one piece reward enough?Most workers I’ve talked to find safety incentives condescending and somewhat insulting. As one put it, “They give us a pizza party at the end of the month if we don’t kill anyone.

It’s as if they think the only reason we will ever work safe is for the pizza”.11. STOP COMPARING YOUR SAFETY PERFORMANCE TO THE INDUSTRY AVERAGEMeasuring an organization’s safety record relative to the broader industry average is meaningless and should be abandoned. Instead, use a combination of lagging and leading indicators to attain a more meaningful view of your overall performance in safety.12. ENCOURAGE BETTER DECISION MAKINGPeople take risks and that is not necessarily a bad thing.

Our policies and procedures can never cover every contingency. We need to invest in training to help our workers to avoid making bad judgment calls and stupid decisions.13. STOP LETTING SAFETY BLAME OPERATIONS FOR ITS OWN INADEQUACIESWhenever I suggest a substantive change in how the Safety function does business, I am invariably told that the Operations leadership will never support my idea. Safety must be a key resource to Operations and stop whining every time it doesn’t get its way.Instead of impeding Operations and hampering its progress, Safety must support Operations to find safe ways of accomplishing organizational goals instead of working at cross-purposes with Production. Safety needs to get out of the business of telling Operations “no” and Operations must collaborate with Safety to reduce risk as much as is practical.14. STOP TRYING TO MANIPULATE WORKERS’ BEHAVIORSSafety is not about managing people’s behavior; it’s about managing risk.

Behavioral psychology is overused and frequently misused in commercial safety solutions. Behavior-based safety appeals to operations executives who are looking for a magic bullet. In reality, it is too often snake oil being sold by the greedy to the dim-witted.It’s high time that we stop treating safety like it’s some mystical secret. Let’s stop hiding behind the platitudes and get to work. If the Safety function can’t support business than it’s time to get rid of it. Those safety professionals who understand the core business of the organizations in which they work should be celebrated, while those who simply collect a paycheck should be excused out the door. Phil La Duke is a principle and partner in Environmental Resources Management (ERM) a leading global provider of environmental, health, safety, risk, and social consulting services.

Deming 14 Points Examples

With over 140 offices in 40 countries and nearly 6,000 top professionals, ERM can help you wherever you find yourself doing business. At ERM we are committed to providing a service that is consistent, professional, and of thehighest quality to create value for our clients. Over the past five years we have worked for more than 50% of the Global Fortune 500 delivering innovative solutions for business and selected government clients helping them understand and manage the sustainability challenges that the world is increasingly facing.Phil works primarily in the Performance and Assurance practice at ERM; a speaker, author, consultant, trainer, provocateurPhil La Duke wears many hats. As an expert in safety, training, organizational development, and culture change, Phil and ERM can help you motivate your workforce, conduct safety performance assessments, help you to build robust training infrastructures, craft interventions to improve how your work place values safety, provide insights to your executive staff, and craft and execute business solutions.If you’re interested in what Phil La Duke and ERM can do for you, or if you would like to inquire about employment opportunites at ERM, contact Phil at phil.laduke@erm.com.