"What really is a Good and Effective Quality Circle Project?"

Attributes of a Good Q-Circles Quality Team, in relation to Quality Circle project using PDCA methodology.

• 1.0 Vision /Direction Thinking (Forward and Future Thinking)
• 2.0 System Thinking
• 3.0 Cause and Effect (Fishbone) Thinking
• 4.0 Scientists' Inquisitive Mind Thinking (Exploring, experimenting, theorising)
• 5.0 Standardisation Thinking
• 6.0 Creative Thinking

1.0 Vision /Direction Thinking (Forward and Future Thinking) (1st stage of PDCA 1.1 Theme or Purpose Creation)

"Problem Thinking or Improvement Thinking IS NOT Forward and Future Thinking"

Many Q-circles start with "Problem Thinking" (In the name of Improvement) and proceed with group brainstorming, which is followed by evaluation matrix using some mathematical model to conclude a Theme or Project for the Q-cirlce team. In most cases, it results in many shallow and restricted choices and hence little direction for the rest of the Quality Journey.

A directionless Q-cirlce becomes obvious when the group starts brainstorming without a good FOCUS.

How to enjoy a picnic by focusing the thinking on what are the problems associated with picnic, instead of focusing on thinking direction towards e.g. "picnic in high mountain with fresh air and waterfall" (a vision thinking), only then other peripheral thinking comes in.

A Q-circle will have a good chance of exciting and interesting journey when the team has a good FOCUS and carries out a mapping of that Focus towards a Vision. For example : Focusing on their Business Activity (whereby most members are involved), a SWOT (Strength, Weakness, Opportunity and Threats) or PMI (Plus, Minus and Interesting) is brainstormed on that Focus. By doing so, a situaton understanding is made.

From the various ideas brainstormed, which are merely different perceptions by members, an analysis is to be carried out by exploring the underlying assumptions. A pattern may then become apparent. A good chance for a vision thinking to take place so as to arrive at a meaningful Theme for the quality team, setting a good foundation for "Shared Vision" for the team.

A common mistake by most Q-cirlce team is "jumping into conclusion" "or propose action or remedy" on the brainstormed ideas, and a Theme is created. It is no more PDCA but partial P (Plan), straightaway A (Action). It is reactive thinking, not vision thinking. And this team works backward i.e. P>A> followed by restricted PDCA of smaller dimension.

2.0 System thinking (Plan 1.2 Understand Present Situation of PDCA)

Many Q-circles treat this stage very superficially, and they quickly jump into FishBone : cause and effect Analysis and Pareto. Imagine a little boy who does not understand the present situation about our earth environment, e.g. the gravitational force and starts jumping down from the window of his 2-storey house like a SuperBoy. Disaster!

A good Q-circle will make full use of all team members synergised thinking by brainstorming and use as many relevant Thinking Tools like "SWOT" (without 'Opportunity' thinking first), "PMI", "FlowChart", "Previously established Control Charts" "Interview relevant specialists" "Inviting Line Managers or other dept. specialist / supervisors to brief them on the related or upstream or downstream processes that may affect their projects etc." "collect more data to understand the situation better"

All the various clue, information, advice etc. gathered from the above should enable the Q-circles team to understand how the "whole system" is working or operating; "a system" that consists of many components, processes, in which they are just dealing on one aspect of it.

In Sun Tze War Tactic , there is a saying "Know thyself, know thy enemy, in hundred battles, you win them all". Likewise "know your environment, know your system of operation, in hundred hurdles, you overcome all".

3.0 Cause and Effect (Fishbone) Thinking

Without the above "Vision /Direction Thinking : Forward and Future Thinking" and "System Thinking", Fishbone application is usually very crudely applied. Not only the root causes can't be easily identified, many causes are more surface and symptomatic indications, which may not even be possible causes, let alone root causes.

It is further made worse by restricted thinking on a few or 5-elememts "Man" "Method" "Machine" "Material" "Environment" etc. (Refer previous article "QCC Activities - A Random Walk Theory Manifestation?" (Three Blind men and an Elephant) in this homepage)

For organisations with established ISO 9000 Quality System, all the 20 elements should be used as exploration ground for the possible CAUSES to the EFFECT, not just a few elements.

4.0 Scientists' Inquisitive Mind Thinking (Exploring, experimenting, theorising)

Without the above Disciplined Thinking process, Pareto application by Q-circle can only be poorly done. Obviously, without good conceptual design (Vision Thinking), foundation construction (System and Cause & Effect Thinking), the structural framework (Pareto) of a building is flimsily built.

This is an exploring and experimenting stage. A great deal of review and reflection of the original assumptions need to be undertaken by the Q-cirlce team. Choice of data collection becomes important. What possible data trend or control chart may be the outcome need to be well thought off.

5.0 Standardisation Thinking

Many Q-circle teams have done some standardisation of their proven experiments. However there is generally lack of review of the whole process (from beginning of the journey to current) and apply the System Thinking to see how the proposed Standardisation fits into the whole system of operation, its long term effects and implication. Hence piece-meal standardisation proliferates. There is a good chance that the very Standardisation will introduce more system entanglement and problems (for another Q-cirlce to resolve).

A good Standardisation thinking involves some Future Thinking. At this stage the team members generally feel good and convinced of all the PLUS apects of their project for Standardisation. It requires a disciplined MINUS thinking by the group to project into the future. "Will the Standardisation create more problem later on?", "Will it introduce more red tape, more paper work?", "Are there resources to cope?" "Will it add on more workload to the existing heavy workload?", "Will it introduce more complication to the interface or downstream process?" etc. "Shall we invite other dept. specialists in this subject to help us in understanding more the MINUS points (PMI tool), WEAKNESS, THREATS (SWOT tool) on our proposed Standardisation?"

6.0 Creative Thinking (Breakthrough Thinking)

At the end of the day, what Serious Creativity Thinking has been achieved? If the Q-Cirlce can have the gut feeling like Picaso (in creating another masterpiece), or Sherlock Holmes (in cleverly solve another big crime puzzle) or Stephen Job (a new discovery, computer, in his garage) or Galileo (experimented and convinced that the earth is round, though he got jailed for that), then such feeling will be mutually felt by the audience, judges or the management.

What are the tale tells signs of a Q_Circle without the above Good Attributes?

When the project is in quite advanced stage or almost finished, and on looking back, i.e. taking an overall review of the Quality Journey so far :

• 1.0 There is a feeling that the outcome can be (should be) easily reached by simple means, e.g. Employee Suggestion Scheme, or simply a proposal in a memo to the right execution party etc. No need such elaborate PDCA.
• 2.0 The elaborate data taking, analysis, is on the hindsight, not really necessary as it does not effectively contribute towards the intended outcome or area of interest or Process control.
• 3.0 There is no real CREATIVITY.
• 4.0 There is No real IMPACT to the Core-Business of the Team Concerned.
• 5.0 It is still the same medicine, e.g. increase the maintenance effort, make some physical re-arrangement or changes, but not conceptual or structural basic chances.
• 6.0 The recommended Standardisation, if on closer examination and analysis, may produce more problems, liability etc. in the long run, if the team is sincere and courageous enough to see into the future.
• 7.0 There is no distinct cultural change, almost the same way of doing things, with only a slight differences.
• 8.0 The real ROOT CAUSE(s) is (are) still not discovered. - a gut feeling by some or all the members.
• 9.0 The essential Process Control is never clearly identified, let alone controlled.
• 10.0 A overall feeling that it is still a peripheral treatment, scratching the surface only.
• 11.0 The whole of the Q-Circle approach is, in summary "I suggest, other perple (dept) do the work" (i.e. The team fishbone, pareto, the action parties are all other dept. to carry out!)

End.