Article Abstract
Quality tools are techniques and methods that increase our speed and efficiency in achieving the results of implementing quality systems. Just as using the wrong tool in technical and production matters leads to an unfavorable and even counterproductive result, in quality systems, the improper use of quality tools may also bring about an unfavorable and even contrary-to-expectation outcome from the implementation of a quality system within an organization. In this article, we first identify and classify the tools and techniques found in Total Quality Management (TQM) systems from various books and sources. Then, based on their role and importance in improving and increasing quality in different organizations, they are analyzed for their strengths and weaknesses. Since a wide range of tools are considered quality tools, this article will only address those that are directly related to Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI). Furthermore, to compare the tools in the “problem-solving tools” group, we conducted a field study and, by gathering the opinions of respondents, tested the hypothesis that “the tools within a group have the same average score for effectiveness (null hypothesis)” against the hypothesis of “a difference in the effectiveness of the tools in the group (alternative hypothesis)”. Using the ANOVA method, we tested the above hypothesis and presented the results at the end of the article.
Keywords
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT (QI): The improvement of work processes and methods that lead to quality improvement in an organization. QUALITY TOOLS (QT): Techniques and methods that help to strengthen and support the effectiveness of quality improvement projects. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT (CI): The continuous and ongoing implementation of quality improvement plans so that the movement for improvement never stops.
Introduction
This article is the result of over 10 years of experience in quality systems consulting and teaching quality-related courses in universities, companies, and training institutions. Since Total Quality Management (TQM) systems are applicable in all organizations (both service and manufacturing), many books and articles have been published on the various tools and techniques in TQM. Users and implementers of these systems often face the question of which technique and tool is better and more effective. The inappropriate use of existing techniques in the field of quality systems leads to low and sometimes negative returns in organizations. As a result, users and individuals in these organizations who had trusted the consultant lose their faith in the effectiveness of these systems upon seeing the poor results and resist them. A very wide range of scientific techniques and tools can be included in the tools used in the TQM system. In this article, by examining various books and sources, a general summary of the strengths and weaknesses of quality management tools used in Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) in organizations is provided. For a well-reasoned and theoretical conclusion, a statistical analysis using the ANOVA method was performed on the tools within the “problem-solving techniques group.”
Classification of TQM Tools and Techniques
Various classifications have been introduced by quality management experts and specialists for TQM-related tools. Since quality management is a topic that can be applied in all parts of an organization, a wide range of techniques (from financial techniques to engineering methods) are included in the tools of Total Quality Management (TQM). In this article, we have considered the following classification, which introduces quality management techniques based on “subject.”
- Strategic Planning Tools:
- BENCHMARKING
- BUSINESS PROCESS RE-ENGINEERING
- BUSINESS SIMPLIFICATION
- DEPARTMENTAL PURPOSE ANALYSIS
- HOSHIN
- DECISION ANALYSIS
- JOB RE-DESIGN
- JUST-IN-TIME
- KAIZEN
- MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVE
- MAINTENANCE
- QUALITY CIRCLE
- Problem-Solving Tools:
- CAUSE AND EFFECT DIAGRAM
- AFFINITY DIAGRAM
- SOLUTION EFFECT ANALYSIS
- ROOT CAUSE EVALUATION MATRIX
- PROCESS FAILURE ANALYSIS
- PROCESS DEFINITION
- PROBLEM ANALYSIS
- Cost Management Tools:
- BREAK-EVEN CHART
- COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS
- LIFE-CYCLE COSTING
- ZERO BASED BUDGETING
- Change Management Tools:
- ACTIVITY ANALYSIS
- BARRIER ANALYSIS
- CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAM
- ENDPOINT STATE ANALYSIS
- FOCUS GROUP
- Product and Process Design Tools:
- DESIGN REVIEW
- FAILURE MODE EFFECT AND CRITICALITY ANALYSIS
- KANBAN
- POKA YOKE
- PROCESS ANALYSIS
- Data Collection Tools:
- CHECKLIST
- CHECK SHEET
- CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ASSESSMENT
- SUGGESTION SCHEMES
- SUPPLIER SURVEY
- BRAINSTORMING
- Statistical Quality Control Tools:
- ACCEPTANCE SAMPLING
- C CHART
- CONTROL CHART
- DESIGN OF EXPERIMENTS (DOE)
- MULTI-VARIABLE CHART
- NP CHART
- P CHART
- PROCESS CAPABILITY ANALYSIS
- R CHART
- RELIABILITY PREDICTION AND ANALYSIS
- SCATTER DIAGRAM
- STRATIFICATION
- TREND CHART
- U CHART
- X CHART
- Quality Management System Tools:
- AUDIT CHECKLIST
- CORRECTIVE ACTION CHECKLIST
- PREVENTIVE ACTION CHECKLIST
- QUALITY OBJECTIVES CHECKLIST
- Management and Planning Tools:
- ACTION PLANS
- GAP ANALYSIS
- ARROW DIAGRAM
- CRITICAL PATH ANALYSIS
- GANTT CHART
- MEETING CHECKLIST
- RESPONSIBILITY MATRIX
- Prioritization and Classification Tools:
- CLASSIFICATION OF DEFECTS
- CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
- PARETO ANALYSIS
- QUALITY FUNCTION DEPLOYMENT (QFD)
- Diagrammatic and Visual Techniques:
- BAND GRAPH
- BAR CHART
- TREE DIAGRAM
- CONCENTRATION DIAGRAM
- DATA FLOW DIAGRAM
- FLOW CHARTS
- HISTOGRAM
- LINE GRAPH
- PIE CHART
- RADAR CHART
- RELEVANCE TREE
- SPIDER DIAGRAM
- RELATIONS DIAGRAM
- General Tools:
- DELPHI TECHNIQUE
- PAIRED COMPARISONS
Some of the tools and techniques introduced in the above list are, on their own, extensive topics that must be implemented as a complete project within the organization (such as BPR or life-cycle costing). Another group deals with quality from a customer-centric perspective, and yet another is related to improving organizational processes and improvement projects. Given that examining all the aforementioned tools is beyond the scope of a single article, we will now introduce and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the tools related to the problem-solving group. The reason for choosing this group is its applicability in most quality system implementation projects.
Strengths and Weaknesses of “Cause and Effect Diagram”
This tool is perhaps one of the most important tools and techniques in quality management systems and is mentioned in all specialized books on quality improvement. This tool, also known as the Ishikawa diagram or fishbone diagram, has been fully introduced in several sources (SEVEN BASIC QUALITY TOOLS by Nancy R. Tague – 2004) and is one of the seven basic tools for quality improvement. The most important strength of this tool is its ability to summarize all factors and causes of a problem in a single diagram and classify them into different groups. When using this tool, one should be careful not to get too detailed with the causes and factors of the problem, as this might lead to confusion and complicate the decision-making process for choosing the most important and main cause. Therefore, care must be taken to prevent the inclusion of insignificant factors in creating the problem. In the field study, 98% of respondents rated this tool as highly practical. It is worth noting that when presenting the causes and factors of a problem, one should not use general and vague words. Instead, the causes of the problem must be specific, clear, and measurable.
Strengths and Weaknesses of “Affinity Diagram”
In many books related to improving organizational processes, including the book Affinity Diagram – Kawakita Jiro or KJ Method, this tool is mentioned as a useful tool for organizational process improvement. In the stages of using this tool, one must resort to the brainstorming technique and use the viewpoints of others to classify and group the topics. Therefore, there is a one hundred percent dependency between this tool and the brainstorming tool, which prevents its independent use. Since this tool resolves organizational process issues by holding group meetings, it is not very effective in companies where employees do not have a good relationship with each other and avoid joint meetings. However, in companies where employees feel responsible for improving and solving organizational problems, using the viewpoints of individuals and officials related to organizational processes is a very suitable and effective solution for process improvement, because those who suggest improvements will be the ones implementing the subsequent process corrections. Therefore, this tool is highly practical in companies with a high level of teamwork. In the survey conducted, over 95% of the surveyed individuals considered this tool to be highly practical. In summary, its strengths include encouraging group participation and creating a group decision-making atmosphere, while its weaknesses are its dependency on another tool and a lack of effectiveness in companies with an unsuitable collaborative culture.
Strengths and Weaknesses of “Solution Effect Analysis”
As the name of this tool suggests, its greatest strength is the ability to predict the effects of proposed solutions for existing problems. Sometimes, solutions are proposed to solve a problem that, despite solving the current issue, may create new problems for the organization. Therefore, this tool thoroughly examines the proposed solution before its implementation. This is also evident in the survey, as 98% of the opinions voted for this tool being highly practical. Not many weaknesses for this tool are mentioned in existing books and sources. One must only be careful to welcome any criticism of improvement plans during expert meetings and not create any barriers to the expression of viewpoints.
Strengths and Weaknesses of “Root Cause Evaluation Matrix”
This tool serves as a complementary technique to the Solution Effect Analysis tool. Therefore, it cannot be used alone and must be utilized after the Solution Effect Analysis tool is implemented, and this lack of independence is a weakness of this tool. Once the factors and causes of the problem are identified, this tool is capable of visually showing the importance of the identified causes. Thus, it can be used to show the impact and importance of various factors in a matrix format. This tool is very suitable and effective at the expert level for analyzing work team meetings of the QI team and is mentioned in most books related to the implementation of quality systems in the automotive industry. It is very necessary and effective for implementing systems such as QFD and ISO TS.
Strengths and Weaknesses of “Process Problem and Failure Analysis”
This tool is one of the newer tools in improving the performance of an organization’s processes and is not mentioned in older books and sources. The only source that discusses it in detail is the book The TQM Toolkit by Jenny Waller, which introduces this tool by providing examples of its capabilities. The most important strength of this tool is its focus on prevention rather than correction. Of course, if a problem occurs, it must first be corrected, and then its re-occurrence should be prevented. This tool tries to identify weaknesses in processes and prevent their occurrence by holding QI team meetings. The most important achievement of using this tool is strengthening the control points in a process. It should be noted that this tool only provides suitable and desirable control methods for the process, and its use does not mean that the process is being controlled. It seems that the full and effective use of this tool requires more training and sufficient time to demonstrate individuals’ effectiveness, as only 90% of respondents voted for this tool being highly practical.
Strengths and Weaknesses of “Process Workflow Definition”
The preparation of organizational process workflows is the first output of a quality system implementation and is the starting point for organizational process improvement. It can be stated with certainty that without a workflow, any activity aimed at improving organizational performance would be meaningless. Given the undeniable importance of a workflow and recalling that this tool is one of the seven basic tools for quality improvement, it can be expected that numerous sources and references have mentioned this tool and its importance. For example, it is discussed in detail in the book Structured Systems Analysis by Weaver. However, the key point is how to prepare the workflow. Finding the appropriate level for drawing the workflow requires the experience and knowledge of those responsible for implementing the quality system. Preparing a workflow with excessive details leads to staff aversion and non-use, while a simple and low-quality workflow leads to a lack of proper effectiveness in improving organizational processes. Various methods for preparing workflows are presented in different sources, but the workflow must be in accordance with the conditions of each organization and, as far as possible, be visual and in accordance with existing standards.
Strengths and Weaknesses of “Problem Analysis”
This tool is a relatively academic tool for solving organizational issues and problems and is best not used in organizations where employees have a lower level of knowledge regarding scientific and academic methods. The problem analysis method is introduced in newer books and sources published in the field of quality improvement, including the book The TQM Toolkit by Jenny Waller. Given the systematic approach of this method to examining and analyzing problems, it can be expected that the solutions provided by this method are acceptable and logical. Therefore, providing scientific and logical solutions is the most important advantage of this tool, while the need for skill, a high level of knowledge, and sufficient training and practice are its disadvantages. Users and members of the QI team must be fully familiar with examples, similar conditions, and how to apply it. 95% of the respondents gave a positive opinion on the effectiveness of this tool.
Results and Discussion of the Statistical Analysis of Field Study Survey Forms
Regarding the “problem-solving tools” group in this article, which includes 7 tools: Affinity Diagram, Cause and Effect Diagram, Solution Effect Analysis, Root Cause Evaluation Matrix, Process Problem and Failure Analysis, Process Workflow Definition, and Problem Analysis, the following results were obtained:
Using the one-way ANOVA method, we examined whether the average opinions regarding the use of the 7 mentioned problem-solving tools differ from each other at a significance level of 0.01. Therefore, our null hypothesis is that “the population means are equal,” and our alternative hypothesis is that “at least one of the means is not equal to the others.”
- SST or Total Sum of Squares equals: 114.5
- SSR or Sum of Squares due to Treatments (each tool represents a treatment) equals: 3.53
- SSE or Sum of Squares due to Errors equals: 110.97
Based on the table on the next page, we perform our calculations: (Number of treatments or K is 7 and the number of samples or n is 30)
Using the Fisher table, we find the F-value with a significance level of 0.01 and K-1=6 and K(n-1)=203 to be 2.80.
Therefore, since the obtained F-value from the table above is smaller than the F-value from the Fisher table, the null hypothesis is accepted. As a result, the means in this population do not have a significant difference, and the users’ opinion about the tools in this family is the same.
Results and Discussion
In the present article, the hypothesis that the tools within a group have the same average score for effectiveness was proposed. We tested this hypothesis using the ANOVA method and presented the results. According to the results of the ANOVA method, the null hypothesis was accepted. Despite the acceptance of the null hypothesis, by introducing the strengths and weaknesses, it can be stated that the Solution Effect Analysis tool is a preventive tool and predicts the impact of proposed solutions. In contrast, the Cause and Effect Diagram tool looks for the reasons for a problem occurring in an organization’s processes, and the Affinity Diagram tool identifies and classifies process problems by gathering the opinions of individuals related to the process. Overall, one cannot expect to get the same result from a Cause and Effect Diagram when trying to predict the impact of a solution as one can from the Solution Effect Analysis tool. Therefore, the idea that each tool should be used based on its stated strengths and weaknesses is accepted, and if we intend to get more effectiveness from the tools, we must use the appropriate tool in line with its strengths.
Based on the survey and the results of the statistical analysis, users consider the tools in the “problem-solving” group to have the same value in terms of “practicality.” For example, although the Cause and Effect Diagram and the Affinity Diagram are in the same group of tools and have different effectiveness, both have an almost equal practical value.
I hope this article is useful for colleagues in both the training and implementation of management improvement systems, and if necessary, please send your comments to my email address (). I will be happy to use your critiques and suggestions.
References
Persian Sources:
- Freund, J. (1962). Mathematical Statistics. Translated by Ali Amidi and colleagues, University Publishing Center.
- Montgomery, D. (2005). Introduction to Statistical Quality Control. Translated by Dr. Noursana, Iran University of Science and Technology Press.
- Zakeri, A. (Year unknown). Systems Analysis.
English Sources:
- Affinity Diagram – Kawakita Jiro or KJ Method, Retrieved June 6, 2010.
- Ishikawa, K. (1990). Introduction to Quality Control. (Translator: J. H. Loftus).
- Montgomery, D. (2005). Introduction to Statistical Quality Control. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 9780471656319.
- Stapleton, G., Howse, J., Taylor, J., & Thompson, S. (2009). What can spider diagrams say? In Proc.
- Tague, N. R. (2004). “Seven Basic Quality Tools”. The Quality Toolbox. Milwaukee, Wisconsin: American Society for Quality. p. 15. Retrieved 2010-02-05 from www.asq.org/learn-about-quality/seven-basic-quality-tools/overview/overview.html.
- Gane, C., & Sarson, T. (1977). Structured Systems Analysis: Tools and Techniques. McDonnell Douglas Systems Integration Company.
- Friendly, M. (2008). The Golden Age of Statistical Graphics, Statistical Science, 23(4), 502-535.
- Diehl, M. & Stroebe, W. (1987). “Productivity Loss in Brainstorming Groups: Toward the Solution of a Riddle”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497-509.
