8
inCite
1 April 1994
. . . o rg a n is a tio n s
n e e d to be
e x t r e m e ly c a r e f u l
t o align t h e i r
h u m a n reso u rce
m anagem ent
( H R M ) p o lic ie s t o
a n e w c o m m it m e n t
to T Q M .
Phil Te e c e
Manager, Personnel &
Industrial Services
I
n last m o n th ’s c o lu m n I w ro te
o f e v id e n c e n o w e m erg in g to
sh o w th a t re ce n t m an ag e m e n t
p re -o c c u p a tio n w ith d o w n siz in g
an d co st c u ttin g has failed to p ro ­
d u ce th e results p re d icte d . T h e fo ­
cus o n Q u a lity fo r th is e d itio n calls
fo r so m e c o m m e n t o n th e im p lic a ­
tio n s o f T o ta l Q u a lity M a n a g e ­
m e n t (T Q M ) fo r m a n a g e m e n t o f
p e o p le in A u s tra lia ’s o rg an isatio n s.
T Q M has risen q u ic k ly to b e ­
c o m e in th e 9 0 s th e m o st p o p u la r
p o lic y fo r p u rsu it o f im p ro v e d p e r­
fo rm a n c e in A u s tra lia n in d u s try .
W h ile th e c o n c e p t has been a ro u n d
fo r m a n y years, d e m o n stra te d esp e­
c ia lly in th e w o rk o f W .E .
D e m m in g in 1 9 5 0 ’s Ja p a n , it w as
th e e m p h a sis o n q u a lity in th e
F o le y R e p o rt o f 1 9 8 7 {Report o f the
C o m m ittee o f R eview o f S tan d ard s,
A c c re d ita tio n a n d Q u a lity C o n tro l
a n d A ssu ran ce. C a n b e rra : A G P S )
w h ic h began th e A u stra lia n fix atio n
w ith T Q M as a s o lu tio n to e ffi­
c ie n c y a n d p ro d u c tio n p ro b lem s.
O n e w a y o f lo o k in g at T Q M is
b ased o n th e ’Q u a lity T ria n g le ’:
C u s to m e r F ocus, D ata-B ase d D e c i­
sio n s a n d T e a m w o rk . In fac t th e
a p p ro a c h , w h ile seen as d iffe re n t
fro m e a rlie r m a n a g e m e n t styles,
b o rro w s q u ite h e a v ily fro m its
p red ecesso rs. In T a y lo r’s S c ie n tific
M a n a g e m e n t it fin d s its em p h asis
o n s tu d y in g th e systems fo r d o in g
w o rk . F ro m th e H u m a n R elatio n s
S c h o o l it in c lu d e s a c o n su lta tive
team -b ase d p e rso n n e l m an ag e m e n t
style. A n d , o f c o u rse , in th e ir e n ­
th u siasm to tack le th e ir p ro b le m s,
an d esp e c ially to be seen as u p -to d ate w ith c o n v e n tio n a l w isd o m , a
m a jo rity o f m an agers seem tem p ted
v ir tu a lly to g ra ft T Q M o n to o r ­
g a n is a tio n a l c u ltu re s w h ic h h ave
d e v e lo p e d fo r years u n d e r fu n d a ­
m e n ta lly d iffe re n t a n d o fte n d ia ­
m e tric a lly
o p p o s ite
reg im es.
T h e re in lie so m e o f th e dan g ers in
th e u rg e to ju m p o n th e T Q M
bandw agon.
In p a rtic u la r, o rg a n isa tio n s
n e e d to be e x tre m e ly c a re fu l to
alig n th e ir h u m a n re so u rc e m a n ­
ag em en t (H R M ) p o licies to a n ew
c o m m itm e n t to T Q M . I f th e y fail
to d o so, th e ir re te n tio n o f u n su it­
ab le p e rso n n e l m a n a g e m e n t styles
can alo n e m ak e a d o p tio n o f T Q M
a h ig h p ro file , e m b arrassin g failu re.
N o w h e re is th is b e tte r illu s­
trated th an in th e area o f s ta ff p e r­
fo rm a n c e
m e a s u re m e n t
and
re w a rd s. T ra d itio n a lly , m o st o r­
g an isatio n s h ave fe lt it essen tial to
p u t in place fa irly fo rm a lise d p e r­
fo rm a n c e ap p raisal system s in v o lv ­
in g se ttin g o f a n n u a l g o als and
assessm ent o f results ag ain st th em .
T h is, in fact, c o n tin u e s to rep resen t
th e c e n tra l e le m e n t o f an o b je c tive s-b a sed a p p ro a c h to c o rp o ra te
an d business p la n n in g still used in
a g reat m a n y A u s tra lia n o rg a n isa ­
tio n s, in c lu d in g th o se w h ic h n o w
p u rp o rt to be c o m m itte d to T o tal
Q u a lity M a n a g e m e n t. B u t it is a r­
g u ab le th a t th is re p re se n ts an im ­
p o ssib le c o n tra d ic tio n , as w e ll as
in d ic a tin g a lm o st c erta in failu re fo r
T Q M in tho se o rg an isatio n s, n o t­
w ith s ta n d in g th e tim e a n d e ffo rt
b ein g g iven to it.
F o r c arefu l an alysis w ill suggest
th a t in d iv id u a l p e rfo rm a n c e assess­
m e n t o f this k in d is q u ite in co n sist­
e n t w ith th e id eals o f T Q M . It
fo cu ses o n th e w o rk o f in d iv id u a l
w o rk e rs rath e r th a n o n th e o u tp u t
o f team s, w h ic h are c e n tra l to q u a l­
ity p h ilo so p h y . In d eed , because ap ­
praisal is th e basis fo r salary settin g ,
it in fa c t e n c o u ra g e s c o m p e titio n
a m o n g e m p lo y e es fo r access to an
in e v ita b ly lim ite d salary ‘cak e’, the
v e ry a n tith e s is o f te a m w o rk . B e­
cause a tte n tio n is alw ays fo cu sed on
resu lts o v e r a sin g le y e a r (o r even
less) ex istin g ap p raisal system s d is­
co u rag e the lo n g -te rm p la n n in g fo ­
cus on w h ic h all o f J a p a n ’s
e c o n o m ic su ccess has b een b u ilt.
B ecause it is n atu ral fo r e m p lo yees
a n d m an ag e rs to set g o als w h ic h
th e y can ach ieve, h o rizo n s are n a r­
ro w e d a n d ‘safety first attitu d e s are
lik ely.
M o re o v e r, th e w a y in w h ic h
goals are set b e tw e en m an ag er an d
su b o rd in a te as th e sole basis fo r re­
v ie w in g in d iv id u a l and u ltim a te ly
o rg a n isa tio n a l p e rfo rm a n c e m ean s
th a t in flu e n c e s w h ic h are system s
o r p ro c e d u ra lly based are o fte n
o v e rlo o k e d . In o th e r w o rd s , a p ­
p raisal assum es far too m u c h c o n ­
tro l b y th e in d iv id u a l e m p lo y e e
o v e r w o rk o u tp u t. In re a lity , b o th
g o o d an d bad results are o fte n c ru ­
c ia lly d e te rm in e d b y the q u a lity o f
system s an d processes. A g o o d sys­
tem w ill in v a ria b ly p ro d u c e g o o d
resu lts a n d the c o n ve rse is u su a lly
tru e . T ra d itio n a l s ta ff p e rfo rm a n c e
m e a su re m e n t te c h n iq u e s fail to
take this in to acco u n t.
A n d fin a lly , o f c o u rse , th ese
te c h n iq u e s m u st e ith e r o v e rtly
b ra n d h a lf th e w o rk fo rc e as fa llin g
s h o rt o f an a ve rag e c o m p e te n c e
level o r g o th ro u g h th e c h arad e o f
c o n c e a lin g the fact. It is d iffic u lt to
see h o w e ith e r can s tro n g ly m o ti­
vate s ta ff o r fac ilitate te a m w o rk as
a basis fo r su ccessful T Q M .
W h a t are th e lessons fro m all o f
this? T h e re are p ro b a b ly th re e .
F irst, i f T o ta l Q u a lity M a n a g e m e n t
is to p ro v id e a g e n u in e a n sw e r to
A u s tra lia ’s p ro d u c tiv ity p ro b le m s,
it c a n n o t ju st be im p o rte d in to an
o th e rw ise u n ch an g ed o rg a n isa tio n .
S e c o n d , if it is to w o rk m an ag e rs
a n d s ta ff m u st be g iv e n e x te n siv e
a n d d e ta ile d tra in in g in b o th its
m a jo r e le m e n ts a n d te c h n iq u e s .
A n d th ird , an d m o st im p o rta n tly ,
th e im p a c t on all aspects o f H u m a n
R eso u rce M a n a g e m e n t m u st be as­
sessed before a n d a p p ro p ria te
ch an g es m ad e d u rin g its in tro d u c ­
tio n i f T Q M is to a v o id th e fate o f
m a n y o f its p re d e c esso rs— th a t is,
g ra n d design s la u n c h e d in a blaze
o f ad van ce p u b lic ity b u t so o n c o n ­
sig n ed to th e m a n a g e ria l ru b b ish
b in as m e re ly y e s te rd a y ’s fad.