Linking Quality, Compliance and Continuous Improvement
Author: Carolyn Claridge, Finest Compliance
Quality:
A common perception businesses have is the more competition, the decrease in quality. Competitors lower prices; which in turn lowers the worth of their products and services through the corners cut in the process. Of course this presupposes that price is essential to competitiveness. Whilst price plays a significant factor of competition, if the consumer desires quality more than price, its importance is therefore lessened.
What about the majority of clients who want both quality and competitive pricing? Do the two have to be interdependent? Do our customers just want the certificate that goes with a qualification regardless of how it is gained; or do they want the learning outcomes which come with an educational experience which they can apply into their real lives? ‘Quality’ means different things to different people. Some explain it as meeting the minimum standard required to satisfy customer needs. Others explain it as a provision of excellence; being free from defects. The almighty Wikipedia describes quality as ‘being superior’. All of these definitions complement the reverent ISO (International Organization for Standardization) which explains quality as a ‘relative concept’ which compares the characteristics of something to its requirements. The degree of correspondence between the two gives the level of quality. This is where we connect quality to competitive advantage (or disadvantage).
Compliance:
Do you ‘do’ compliance?
The behaviour within organisations of having Governance, Compliance and Risk Managers, and Governance, Compliance and Risk Programs is becoming increasingly common in response to all of the rules placed upon us; whether through standards or legislation. We have safety rules, financial rules, privacy rules, marketing rules and even transparency rules. This kind of grouping is meaningful.
In regards to governing behaviour, where are the rules aimed? Dov Siedman (Forbes, 2012) alluded to this when he suggested that we instead need to move to a Culture and Leadership mindset (although I acknowledge Siedman did include Governance as part of this new mindset, I see this word as a controlling and dominating idea, which is contrary to my line of reasoning, hence its omission).
As an alternative to ‘doing’ compliance; Culture and Leadership becomes inherent in an organisation’s make-up; we become a supporter of compliance through our everyday culture and actions. Wouldn’t you rather have a Culture and Leadership Manager facilitating your Culture and Leadership Program for long-term compliance achievement?
Continuous Improvement:
Let’s look outside of the traditional square when it comes to reacting to needed improvements…
Innovation is the key; recognising that a variety of solutions could be possible, rather than focussing on what the ‘right answer’ may be to a problem area. The cultural infrastructure of your training organisation will determine the level of success when delivering innovative ideas. As leaders in the field, the onus is on us to encourage and support innovation not just amongst the senior team, but also amongst those who actually implement activities, deliver programs and are ‘on the ground’ when it comes to knowing what works best and what doesn’t. Having said this, a culture of “we’ve tried it before and it didn’t work” is all so common. Analysing why activities failed and determining what could be done differently for success is a major step in nurturing a continuous improvement culture which embraces learning from the past and being innovative about the future.
Establishment of appropriate and free-flowing discussion which draws on all of the skills, abilities, knowledge and creativity of all co-workers is a great first step in creating an innovative team of people focussed on continuous improvement. Involving each team member in contributing ideas provides for personal recognition; the likelihood of a better plan and one which is owned by more of the team when implementation-time comes around. This approach changes the commonplace culture of supplying and following direct-instruction (i.e. doing what you are told) to one of team input creating results (i.e. what do we think we need to do?).
Establishment of appropriate and free-flowing discussion which draws on all of the skills, abilities, knowledge and creativity of all co-workers is a great first step in creating an innovative team of people focussed on continuous improvement. Involving each team member in contributing ideas provides for personal recognition; the likelihood of a better plan and one which is owned by more of the team when implementation-time comes around. This approach changes the commonplace culture of supplying and following direct-instruction (i.e. doing what you are told) to one of team input creating results (i.e. what do we think we need to do?).
Now let’s link the three…
I’m not going to reinvent the wheel here; Deming links these elements in his model, the Deming Cycle, wonderfully. The Deming Cycle (Plan, Do, Review and Improve) emphasises the importance of learning from past activities and ensuring that future planning is suitable for delivering benefits across the whole organisation. I have included below, how the Deming Cycle can be applied in the context of quality, compliance and continuous improvement; incorporating Culture and Leadership at every step.
