One of the things that always disturbs me about introducing quality processes to a business - no matter what it ‘produces’, is how the process itself is valued. This is just adding a wheel inside the wheel - nobody ‘gets’ quality; nobody understands ‘value’.
In itself, quality is somewhat nebulous - no-one can define what they mean when they throw around phrases like TQM (total quality management) or standards, in the general sense, or DQ (data quality) or best practice in a specific context. The understanding is always relative to the background & knowledge of the person making statements. Someone who’s been involved in quality issues in one arena is unlikely the know the specific problems in another, but will at least have a grasp of the ‘importance’ of having standards, processes, reviews, etc.
But knowing the importance is not enough - you have to value the idea of introducing Quality as a concept. This is why executive sponsorship is probably the most important aspect of introducing quality to an organisation that has so far been naive enough to believe that it is somehow immune to the perils of the tight-rope, yet continues to work without a net. That is, a start-up.
There are only two ways of getting executive sponsorship (& keeping it) - buy it through budget re-allocations that rob other business units, making it seem to cost the executive (or board) nothing. Or else sell the importance as a whole-of-business strategic step that needs its own board-level support in the next round of budgets, in some way that puts Quality on the same level as (or else a part of) Corporate Governance. In either case, if the executive doesn’t ‘get it’ - doesn’t value what can & must be achieved through a quality regime, then you might as well then blow that budget on making little signs that say “You don’t have to be mad to work here, but being angry helps”.
Executive sponsorship equates to management directives or buy-in. It also means independence from business unit in-fighting (especially over budgets). Strategic positioning within an organisation ‘guarantees’ precedence over tactical operations, in general. This all comes down to executives (CEO, fundamentally) valuing the idea of quality high enough to get it out in front of everyone’s eyes where KPIs can be written in, measurements concerning the quality process (not the business process that Quality is measuring) are understood & acted on, & the business itself can be turned around from its course heading into the whirlpool of self-destruction that quality-free blind navigation inevitably leads to.
Too dramatic? Perhaps. Does the metaphor hold? Probably near enough.
Having seen a few failed start-ups, one thing that is consistent is that early development usually cuts corners due to budget constraints - time or resources. Once ‘the money’ comes through, there is a lot of frustration that all of the success & progress from the early days is getting ‘mired down’ by the ‘extra weight’ of a public company or else private investors’ interests - that is, corporate governance. This is usually dealt with by cutting more corners elsewhere - which is easy when you’ve been used to doing that to create the product or service.
This superficial semblance of steady velocity does not take into consideration the changing environment - more obstacles in the path, & the path itself becoming more treacherous. There are two ways to deal with those changing circumstances - continue as you always have & metaphorically close your eyes, or else slow down & react to the changing surrounds.
When you close your eyes, you ignore what’s happening around you, miss opportunities, hit snags, occasionally crash & burn.
When you slow down, then you can work out how to deal with the new environment. That environment requires that you treat it with respect - business partners, service providers, customers - stakeholders. These are new entries into the start-up’s environment. The common thread for dealing with stakeholders is having quality processes in place that ensure that those relationships - imperative to the success of the business - become & remain solid, effective, & long-term.
If you value your stakeholders, then you must value quality processes (including communication with your stakeholders) in your business. If you value your business, then you must value the things that keep the business alive. Many start-ups, in particular, think that their business is based solely on one idea, one product or service.
It never is. It is always dependent solely on the relationships the company has. Many start-ups, with what has amounted to a break-through product, have gone under with the belief that someone has done them wrong - if only an investor hadn’t pulled out or a customer lost faith. The reality is that they have not taken care of the relationships that define the business. They have forgotten to change the thinking of the start-up to incorporate those relationships. They drive with their eyes closed.
It might be very Zen to attempt to run a business as if the rest of the world was a figment of your warped imagination. It would be more effective to become aware of an organisation’s operational needs, & stakeholders’ expectations of the business, & react accordingly. It requires a change in the value system - away from the product or service & towards the business. It requires a change in perspective from the delivery of widgets to the delivery on expectations.
This is achieved through an approach that values quality in all aspects of decision-making.
No comments:
Post a Comment