The Deming Application Prize Checklist

The Deming Application Prize Checklist

The following information is excerpted from "1996 The Deming Prize Guide for Overseas Companies" and permission was graciously provided by Mr. Ichiro Kotsuka of JUSE. For other use or for permission to use the Criteria in published media, please see information at the end of this message.

1. Policies (Hoshin)

(1) Quality and quality control policies and their place in overall business management.

(2) Clarity of policies (targets and priority measures)

(3) Methods and processes for establishing policies

(4) Relationship of policies to long - and short - term plans

(5) Communication (deployment) of policies, and grasp and management of achieving policies

(6) Executives and managers leadership

2. Organization

(l) Appropriateness of the organizational structure for quality control and status of employee involvement

(2) Clarity of authority and responsibility

(3) Status of interdepartmental coordination

(4) Status of committee and project team activities

(5) Status of staff activities

(6) Relationships with associated companies (group companies, vendors, contractors, sales companies, etc.)

3. Information

(l) Appropriateness of collecting and communicating external information

(2) Appropriateness of collecting and communicating internal information

(3) Status of applying statistical techniques to data analysis

(4) Appropriateness of information retention

(5) Status of utilizing information

(6) Status of utilizing computers for data processing

4. Standardization

(l) Appropriateness of the system of standards

(2) Procedures for establishing, revising and abolishing standards

(3) Actual performance in establishing, revising and abolishing standards

(4) Contents of standards

(5) Status of utilizing and adhering to standards

(6) Status of systematically developing, accumulating, handing down and utilizing technologies

5. Human resources

(l) Education and training plans and their development and results utilization

(2) Status of quality consciousness, consciousness of managing jobs, and understanding of quality control

(3) Status of supporting and motivating self-development and self-realization

(4) Status of understanding and utilizing statistical concepts and methods

(5) Status of QC circle development and improvement suggestions

(6) Status of supporting the development of human resources in associated companies

6. Quality assurance

(l) Status of managing the quality assurance activities system

(2) Status of quality control diagnosis

(3) Status of new product and technology development (including quality analysis, quality deployment and design review activities)

(4) Status of process control

(5) Status of process analysis and process improvement (including process capability studies)

(6) Status of inspection, quality evaluation and quality audit

(7) Status of managing production equipment, measuring instruments and vendors

(8) Status of packaging, storage, transportation, sales and service activities

(9) Grasping and responding to product usage, disposal, recovery and recycling

(l0) Status of quality assurance

(11) Grasping of the status of customer satisfaction

(l2) Status of assuring reliability, safety, product liability and environmental protection

7. Maintenance

(l) Rotation of management (PDCA) cycle control activities

(2) Methods for determining control items and their levels

(3) In-control situations (status of utilizing control charts and other tools)

(4) Status of taking temporary and permanent measures

(5) Status of operating management systems for cost, quantity, delivery, etc.

(6) Relationship of quality assurance system to other operating management systems

8. Improvement

(l) Methods of selecting themes (important activities problems and priority issues)

(2) Linkage of analytical methods and intrinsic technology

(3) Status of utilizing statistical methods for analysis

(4) Utilization of analysis results

(5) Status of confirming improvement results and transferring them to maintenance/control activities

(6) Contribution of QC circle activities

9. Effects

(l) Tangible effects (such as quality, delivery, cost, profit, safety and environment)

(2) Intangible effects

(3) Methods for measuring and grasping effects

(4) Customer satisfaction and employee satisfaction

(5) Influence on associated companies

(6) Influence on local and international communities

l0. Future plans

(l) Status of grasping current situations

(2) Future plans for improving problems

(3) Projection of changes in social environment and customer requirements and future plans based on these projected changes

(4) Relationships among management philosophy, vision and long-term plans

(5) Continuity of quality control activities

(6) Concreteness of future plans

---

THE DEMING APPLICATION PRIZE CHECKLIST
(FOR SENIOR EXECUTIVES)

l. Understanding

(l) Are the objectives of quality control and enthusiasm introduction and promotion clearly defined and well understood?

(2) How well do they understand quality control, quality assurance, reliability, product liability, etc.?

(3) How well do they understand the importance of the statistical way of thinking and the application of quality control techniques?

(4) How well do they understand QC circle activities?

(5) How well do they understand the relationship of quality control and the concepts and methods of other management activities?

(6) How enthusiastic are they in promoting quality control? How well are they exercising leadership?

(7) How well do they understand the status and the characteristics of their company's quality and quality control?

2. Policies

(l) How are quality policies and quality control policies established? Where and how do these policies stand in relation to overall business management?

(2) How are these policies related to short- and long-term plans?

(3) How are these policies deployed throughout the company for their achievement?

(4) How do they grasp the status of policy achievement? Are they taking appropriate corrective actions when needed?

(5) How do they grasp priority quality issues (priority business issues)? Do they make effective use of diagnostic methods such as top management diagnosis?

(6) How well are targets and priority measures aligned with policies?

(7) What kind of policies do they employ for establishing cooperative relationships with associated companies?

3. Organization

(l) How is the company organized and managed to human resources effectively and efficiently practice quality control?

(2) How are the authorities and responsibilities in the organization established?

(3) Is the allocation of human resources suitable for the organization?

(4) How do they strive to make employers happy and satisfied?

(5) How do they grasp and evaluate employees capability and motivation levels?

(6) How do they strive interdepartmental cooperation? How do they utilize committees and project teams?

(7) How do they relate to associated companies?

4. Human resources

(l) How clear is the philosophy for hiring, development developing and utilizing human resources?

(2) How appropriate are the employee education and training plans? Are the necessary budget and time allocated?

(3) How do they communicate the policies for quality control education and training and how do they grasp the status achieving their policies?

(4) How do they provide education and training specific to the company's business needs?

(5) How well do they understand the importance of employee self- and mutual-development? How do they support this effort?

(6) How do they strive to develop QC circle activities?

(7) How interested are they in developing human resources in associated companies?

5. Implementation

(l) What kind of measures do they have for the and evaluation effective and efficient implementation of quality control?

(2) How well is the overall coordination of quality control and other management systems?

(3) How do they grasp the status of improvement in the business processes and the individual steps of these processes so as to provide products and services that satisfy the customer needs? Are they taking necessary corrective actions?

(4) How well are the systems for developing new products and services, new technologies and new markets established and managed?

(5) How well are the necessary resources secured and allocated for establishing and operating management and information systems?

(6) How do they grasp the effects and contributions of quality control to the improvement of business performance?

(7) How do they evaluate their employees efforts?

6. Corporate social

(l) Is the company structured to ensure responsibilities appropriate profits for a long time?

(2) How well do they regard employer well being (wage levels, working hours, etc.)?

(3) How well do they regard employee self-realization?

(4) How well do they strive for co-existence and co-prosperity with associated companies?

(5) How well does the company contribute to the local community?

(6) How well does the company exert efforts to protect the environment?

(7) How well does the company positively impact the international community?

7. Future visions

(l) How do they assure the continuity of and future plans quality control?

(2) How do they anticipate and cope with changes in surrounding business environment and progress in science and technology?

(3) How do they grasp and cope with changes in customer requirements?

(4) How do they consider their employees and help them achieve happiness and satisfaction?

(5) How do they consider and manage relationships with associated companies?

(6) How do they plan for the future to cope with the items above?

(7) How do they utilize quality control to achieve the future plans?

1995年 （民84年）1 月

1995年 （民84年）

○ David and Sarah Kerridge(1995)“Guilt by Association”，BDA內部刊物“Variation”，1995年元月號。

字面義"Guilt by Association"
主要Deming澄清自己的學問並非 俗稱的TQM

1994

◎ Quality Progress 月刊3月份登 Dr. Deming之訃文Gone But Not Forgotten ，由 Brad Stratton 任主編，可參閱www.deming.org 網站。..

○ 4月27/28日英國戴明協會所BDA)第7屆年會，主題為 Competition is Ruining Us! There is a Better Way. 【本會備檔】

◎ John O. Whitney是美國企業重整專家，妙手回春六家企業，後來當了哥倫比亞大學商學院教授及其戴明品質管理中心主任，1994年出版The Trust Factor，闡述「信任」為公司獲利及活力的根源。戴明為該書寫了前言，說該書幫助我們透過淵博知識的稜鏡，看清「不信任」對企業各方面造成的損失，使我們能以「合作、雙贏」方式來經營。該書的理論精華為（p. .185）：

「企業為相互依賴部分組成的複雜系統。要能管理其複雜性，要有勝任的成員在流通的組織架構中，在開放而信任的環境下，運用互動的流程。在績效評估及獎賞制度不能反映其組成的相互依賴，而系統的績效又為不正確或誤導人的情報所影響，就會造成不信任。此不信任造成浪費及不必要的複雜。尤有進者，不信任會稀釋企業從事其真正工作－設計、製造、銷售、分配、收款能獲取並保持有利可圖的顧客－的努力及誤導其創造力。

反之，對績效評估及獎賞制度公平性的信任，對同事及組織勝任的信任，對組織及其員工生產的情報信任，對組織及其員工的操守信任，可以減少浪費及複雜性。一旦上述信任之各條件得以建立，而員工對企業的宗旨、任務、價值觀、目的、目標等了解、相信，並願意支持之，創造力會發揮、成本大降、獲利提昇。組織的生存及成長力大為增強，公司及員工的活力也大為豐富化。」

五大不信任化解法為其論述重點：

病源一：衡量與獎賞失調－使員工誤入「人與人之間」及「人與公司之間」相互為敵的陷阱。解決之道為建立公司的宗旨、任務、願景、價值觀，然後以包容（inclusive）系統方式經營－獎賞方式為全體員工及公司皆蒙其利。

病源二：老闆、同儕及部屬不勝任或信心不足而退縮。解決之道為創造出流通的組織架構及在開放、互信的環境下及運行互動的管理程序，能在工作中學習及以正式教育、培訓方式發揮「乘數」效果。

病源三：對各系統（制度）了解不周全，致使活動、努力與組織目標違背。解決之道為要了解各組成部分是相互關連，而且要使大家都有所體認、了解。

病源四：情報偏差、過時、無用及錯誤。解決之道為針對公司的各種正式及非正式的衡量及控制制度稽查。要消除噪音－此為對公司主要任務（及獲利的設計、建造、銷售產品及服務）沒貢獻的情報。

病源五：操守、統整性有缺陷。解決之道為：以快速而又重點方式去除各項犯因。去除會造成再犯的各種條件。

The Statistician Who Changed the World: W. Edwards Deming, 1900-1993

Journal article by Thomas J. Boardman; The American Statistician, Vol. 48, 1994

Journal Article Excerpt

The statistician who changed the world: W. Edwards Deming, 1900-1993 by Thomas J. Boardman 1. BRIEF BIOGRAPHY W. Edwards Deming, Consultant in Statistical Studies, died on December 20, 1993 at his home surrounded by his family. He was 93. His battle with cancer finally ended but not before he had changed how the world thinks about quality. Judging from his letterhead, business cards, and personal conversations, he considered himself to be a statistician. Yet we know that he was so much more. The New York Times obituary headlined him as "Expert on Business Management" (Holusha 1993). Others described him as the "world-famous quality expert" (Hillkirk 1993). Japan named their prestigious quality award in his honor in 1951. His name is well known in Japan, perhaps even more widely recognized than Japan's top political figures. Many in this country are now realizing that Deming fathered an industrial renaissance (see Moore and Hovelson 1993). How many of us in the statistics profession really understand his contributions to the world and to our profession? 2. CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE WORLD 2.1 NBC White Paper: 1980 Long before the NBC documentary "If Japan Can, Why Can't We?" appeared on television in 1980, some people knew of the contributions Deming was making in Japan and elsewhere. Companies in the United States had consulted with Deming on problems associated with statistical procedures such as interstate motor freight. He was a busy consultant with an office in the basement of his Washington. DC, home. Nevertheless, few in this country knew Deming. Fewer still knew the breadth of his consulting expertise. Remember that, in 1980 when the NBC telecast aired. Deming was 80. Indeed, the producer for the NBC broadcast, Clare Crawford-Mason, told me that when she visited Japan and heard about the contributions that Deming had made, she assumed he had already died. (She shares more insights in the video "The Prophet of Quality," Dobyns and Crawford-Mason 1992.) Is this an example of the axiom: You can not be a prophet (consultant) in your own country? Until this program aired Dr. Deming was not well known in this country. And then his life changed dramatically! Corporate America asked itself, "Could it be that an American had played a major role in the changes...\ The American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 24, No. 1, 67-84 (1994) DOI: 10.1177/027507409402400104 Administrative Man Faces the Quality Transformation: Comparing the Ideas of Herbert A. Simon and W. Edwards Deming John H. Little Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Is Deming's quality management just another management fad? Examination of its philosophical underpinnings shows that it is based in a new theoretical framework that places it at a cross-roads for organization theory and design that is as momentous as Simon's development and application of decision theory and positivistic science. Failure to understand Deming's "system of profound knowledge" has meant an undervaluing of his major contribution to the theory of organizations.