deploying total qualitymanagement in russia
DESCRIPTION
Today’s arsenal of improvement tools is robust and continues to grow with the addition of new approaches: Six Sigma, BS EN ISO 9001:2000, Balanced Scorecard, Quality Function Deployment (QFD), Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) and various Self-assessment models. The majority of offered approaches are based on the principles of Total Quality Management, but for the majority of Russian managers TQM remains a mystery. Thus, research has been undertaken specifically focused upon Russian businesses to find an approach to quality adoption that is understandable and deployable. The developed Management Functional Assessment Model is currently being implemented and the process monitored.TRANSCRIPT
028 Total quality management European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2
Deploying Total QualityManagement in Russia
Today’s arsenal of improvement tools is robust and continues to grow with
the addition of new approaches: Six Sigma, BS EN ISO 9001:2000,
Balanced Scorecard, Quality Function Deployment (QFD), Failure Mode and
Effect Analysis (FMEA) and various Self-assessment models. The majority
of offered approaches are based on the principles of Total Quality
Management, but for the majority of Russian managers TQM remains a
mystery. Thus, research has been undertaken specifically focused upon
Russian businesses to find an approach to quality adoption that is
understandable and deployable. The developed Management Functional
Assessment Model is currently being implemented and the process
monitored. This article examines progress to date.
Professor Paul Watson, & Mr Nicholas Chileshe, Sheffield Hallam
University,Dr. Dmitry Maslow, Ivanov Power University, Russia
European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2 Total quality management 029
The struggle to satisfy clients in ser-
vices and manufacturing within
Russia has forced senior managers to
search for new appropriate approaches to con-
duct business practices. Within Russia supply
and demand has historically been the func-
tion of an administrative command system
and was subject to state planning. The con-
cept and application of competition between
manufacturers and service providers was
absent (Yasin, 2003). Customers could not opt
for purchasing one product or service as
opposed to another or as noted in Russia ‘vote
by rouble’, as no choice existed.
This artificial market did not promote a
positive attitude towards quality or its impor-
tance in a global competitive market place. A
sea change has been necessary to move from
this over-managed (by central government)
system to a more westernised approach.
Although this change has been evolutionary,
Russia has been able to build upon the accu-
mulated experience of eastern and western
experiences. In short, Russia is now behind
the West in its understanding and application
030 Total quality management European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2
Total quality management in Russia
Title City Year Comments
Zero-defects manufacturing of products(BIP - Russian abbreviation)
Saratov 1955 The first time in Russian practice that a newmeasure of production quality is introduced.
Quality, Reliability, Resource from the firstitems (KANARSPI)
Gorky 1958 Relying on a products design stage for theelimination of defects before production.
Zero-defects operation system (SBT) Lvov 1961 Calculation of a complex index of operationquality with allowance for individual featuresthat influence the operation quality of variousdivisions and separate workers.
Scientific organisation of operations onincreasing motor-resource of drives (NORM)
Yaroslavl 1964 Acceptance of criteria for quality and thetechnical parameter, direct purpose of thesystem, control of a level of a motor-resourceand its sequential increase on the base rises ofreliability of details.
Complex control for the management ofquality (KSUKP)
Lvov 1975 The system has united all previous experienceof quality systems, development of anorganisational, technical base of the system onthe basis of enterprise standards.
Complex system of production efficiencyenhance (KSPEP)
Krasnodar 1980 Co-ordination of quality improvements ofproduction, with production efficiencyenhanced.
Table 1: Quality Systems Development in the USSR
of TQM. This gap is now being greatly
reduced and this paper will contribute to
enhancing the deployment TQM in Russia.
Quality Deployment Russia ExperiencesIt should be noted that there has been some
systematic activity in applying quality
improvement concepts but that each develop-
ment has tended to be of a regional nature in
the USSR. The main developments are pre-
sented in Table 1. Upon inspection of Table 1
it is possible to identify that before the 1980’s
developments really did take place, however,
many of these innovations were used mainly
for the Russian military industry. There were
few quality activities in the provision of con-
sumer goods manufacturing or services.
The Soviet system has specific problems in
trying to engender a TQM philosophy, the
main ones being:
• A limited sphere of influence from the
early approaches of quality development
due to the bureaucratic system.
• The absence of a customer focus.
• An economic environment that is not sup-
portive of an enterprise culture built on a
quality approach.
• Later systems have had an unsystematic
application.
(Mazur & Shapiro 2003)
The Soviet school of quality experts are
descended from military or engineering back-
grounds. These experts have designed and are
responsible for most quality developments in
Russia. Their framework is a standards
approach to quality, i.e. one of installing a set
of standards/procedures. They have no real
managerial experience or any concept of the
importance of people management, contrast
this with the modern management approach
to quality which fully embraces statistics,
knowledge of economics and customer
requirements embraced within a culture of
empowerment. Russia has to move from its
current approach to quality which is one of
concentrating on limiting the quantity of
defects and increasing reliability. This is not
to say that these are unimportant, they are.
The problem is that it has instilled a culture of
‘Quality Control’ rather than ‘Assurance’ or
even ‘TQM’.
The future strategy forattaining qualityimprovements in Russia is tostress the importance ofeconomics and management
The necessity to train new managers in the
field of quality and instill a more western
view was recognised in 1999 by the Ministry
of Education of Russia (Dickenson et al 2000).
However, most quality managers are educated
within technical departments. Even in
Russian high schools with economic faculties,
quality managers are part of material-support,
goods - support and standardisation depart-
European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2 Total quality management 031
032 Total quality management European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2
ments. The future strategy for attaining qual-
ity improvements in Russia is to stress the
importance of economics and management
and this is to be part of graduate education
programmes and its success monitored in
companies who employ graduates.
Russia has not fully employed TQM but
some Russian businesses have implemented
BS EN ISO 9001:2000, benchmarking and self
assessment strategies. The problem is that
managers of western companies accept the
concept of customer focus, continuous
improvement, process approach, quality
management, involving employees, social
responsibility of businesses, all as an integral
part of quality improvement. In Russia these
business concepts are alien; therefore adopt-
ing TQM is a most problematic activity. Key
issues that have to be addressed are engaging
with a change philosophy, a lack of knowl-
edge, resistance to change and a lack of senior
management support.
Within Europe an approach to TQM
deployment has been developed by the
European Foundation for Quality
Management in the form of an Excellence
Model. The Excellence Model defines and
describes TQM in a way that can be more eas-
ily understood by senior managers (Vander
Wiele et al 2000).
EFQM EM forms the basis of the Russian
National Quality Award, which was estab-
lished in 1996. Over the past seven years more
than 800 applications from 67 subjects of the
Russian Federation have taken part in the
competition, 65 of these organisations have
been successful. (Secretariat of National
Quality Award of Russia 2004). The award
however for most companies does not pro-
vide a true improvement tool, its potential for
self-assessment linked to continuous
improvement has not been fully realised.
Further the best practice of leading organisa-
tions has not been successfully disseminated
to other less able businesses. The self-assess-
ment aspect linked to internal and external
benchmarking is a vital activity of EFQM EM,
but this aspect has been only partially realised
by Russian firms (Conti 2003).
there still exists a fear ofdisclosure; this is based upon many years of nonperformance being associated with sanctions
Russian managers do not appreciate the
value of self-assessment unless it is linked to
some kind of financial analysis. This is
because there is an absence of Key
Performance Indicators (KPI’s) and available
self-assessment techniques. Within Russia
there still exists a fear of disclosure; this is
based upon many years of non performance
Total quality management in Russia
being associated with sanctions. Self-assess-
ment leading to improvement requires the
identification of problematic issues along
with the development of advocated solutions
and corrective actions. However, one must
remember that until recently there existed a
culture of reluctance to identify errors or mis-
takes and showing initiative was not always
well received. This situation provides a true
hindrance to objective of implementing self-
assessment techniques. Senior managers of
large companies entrust all quality activities
to appropriate sub-divisions; in small and
medium enterprises (SME’s) a culture exists
where the chief executive always knows best
and therefore there is no need to engage in
activities requiring the support of other staff,
such as benchmarking or self-assessment. In
their view this would be a waste of valuable
resources. Very few organisations use bench-
marking in Russia, the ones that do are repre-
sentatives of large businesses having contracts
with foreign partners. For most SME’s ‘bench-
marking’ is an unfamiliar word and bench-
marking is not accepted as a valid manage-
ment technique. Its deployment is further
hindered by the secretive and complex nature
of Russian domestic business practices.
Analysis of the deployment of improve-
ment tools inevitably leads to the conclusion
that a lack of a quality focused culture does
hinder the effective and efficient deployment
and application of the said tools and tech-
niques. Building a quality approach based
upon a procedural system without the under-
pinning morphogenic culture is bound to fail.
In order to address the above noted issues
a Functional Assessment Mode has been
developed from research conducted within
Russia (Maslov, Belokorovin 2003).
Corporate excellence is measured by an
organisation’s ability to both achieve and sus-
tain a competitive advantage through satisfy-
ing its stakeholders. This can only be achieved
by the efficient and effective utilisation of all
corporate resources which include the 5M’s:
The 5M’s have to be treated as a holistic
whole and the model provided within this
paper provides a means for setting corporate
objectives that link with all stakeholder
expectations/needs. The advocated model
empowers organisations to monitor and
benchmark their performance and further
enables them to score their performance in
key operational areas.
By adopting a holistic approach to cus-
tomer requirements, building on stakeholder
contribution not only can ‘added value’ be
attained but it can also be measured. Once
measured the benchmark can be set for
engaging in the continued drive for organisa-
tional excellence.
Competitive AdvantageThe model presented is a ‘Functional
Assessment Model’. However, the functional
assessment model forms part of ‘competitive-
orientated management’. This is a system of
European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2 Total quality management 033
034 Total quality management European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2
management designed to gain and sustain a
competitive corporate advantage by way of
continued internal and external self assess-
ment and an improvement driven agenda.
The concept of competitive-orientated
management may be represented as a tetrahe-
dron (as in Figure 1). It is based upon three
principles of competitive achievement, lead-
ership, personnel and development. The
emphasis should be placed on the attainment
of a ‘Sustainable Competitive Advantage’.
Leadership
The role of senior management is critical to
the success of any change process and leader-
ship has to be demonstrated. All employees
have to be given the time and skills to make a
useful contribution towards the drive for a
sustainable competitive advantage.
Personnel
Employers have to be motivated to engage in
a corporate culture directed at stakeholder sat-
isfaction. Senior management must not forget
that employees are also stakeholders. Thus
they should remember to engage in ‘consulta-
tion’ before ‘implementation’ in corporate
plans. This aspect allows staff to contribute to
the decision making process. Culture is a vital
aspect for consideration and a morphogenic
culture should be the aim of senior manage-
ment.
Development
The development of an organisation requires
the consideration of both business processes
and environmental issues/aspects. Therefore
environmental scanning has to be deployed
in order to establish external influences and
may be done by SWOT and PEST analysis.
This should be linked to the RADAR concept
for the techniques to be effective.
Management Functional Assessment Model(MFAM)The MFAM is based upon six functions of
management:
• forecasting and planning
• organising
• motivation
Total quality management in Russia
Figure 1
Competitive-Orientated Management Core
Concept Constituent parts of the tetrahedron
• control
• co-ordination
• communication
The first five functions are encapsulated
within a framework of an effective and effi-
cient system of communication (see Fig 2).
The MFAM has been designed to aid con-
struction managers in determining the key
activities to be addressed in order
to improve corporate efficiency and
effectiveness.
1. Forecasting Planning
This criterion is concerned with determining
the shape of future strategy; its function is to
answer three questions:
• where is the company now in terms of its
vision and mission?
• where does it want to be as part of its
future corporate plans?
• how is the company to achieve set aims
based upon forecasts?
The planning criterion contains five basic
categories:
1.1 Setting the objectives and strategic plan-
ning process in motion.
1.2 Gathering and analysing information
related to both clients and the markets
(all stakeholders).
1.3 Detailing business-processes (who, what,
where and why).
1.4 Gathering and analysing information
relating to competitors and
benchmarking.
1.5 Resources planning (5M’s).
2. Organising
The main managerial tasks here are to
organise business-processes with a concen-
tration on maximising effectiveness and
efficiency.
The organising criterion contains five basic
categories:
2.1 Creating an appropriate organisational
structure
2.2 Establishing authority and responsibility
for all personnel
2.3 Creating a self-learning organisational
culture (morphogenic)
2.4 Developing a value system based upon
enhancing performance
2.5 Deployment of new technology linked
to corporate enhancement
European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2 Total quality management 035
Figure 2
Management Functional-Assessment Model
(MFAM) incorporating the ‘RADAR’ concept
036 Total quality management European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2
3. Motivation
It has to be noted that motivation has many
aspects both intrinsic and extrinsic.
The motivation criterion contains five
basic categories:
3.1 Developing a co-operative culture based
on stakeholder satisfaction.
3.2 Ensuring staff have the skills and com-
petences to perform set tasks.
3.3 A consideration of personnel needs
linked to self-actualisation.
3.4 Involvement in processes, increase areas
of responsibility and self-monitoring
(empowerment).
3.5 Results satisfaction - feedback on perfor-
mance in a timely manner linked to
‘RADAR’.
4. Control
Control is dependent upon constant feedback
from each stage of business-process, checking
against quality and measuring performance
indicators. A correct monitoring system
allows for an increase in the efficiency and
effectiveness of organisational activity.
Organisations must consider feeding forward
of information for effective control. This can
only be fully achieved by deploying ‘RADAR’
incorporating a plan, do, check and act cycle.
The control criterion contains five basic
categories:
4.1 A monitoring system for each key stage
of business-processes.
4.2 Measuring performance levels (with an
internal and external perspective).
4.3 Determining customer satisfaction
levels.
4.4 Determining the efficiency and effec-
tiveness of resource utilisation linked to
corporate aims.
4.5 Conducting a comparative analysis
between set targets and actual results,
leading to appropriate actions (RADAR).
5. Co-ordination
The analysis of deviations on business-
processes and updating of the current plans in
a holistic manner based on feedback is a criti-
cal point in co-ordination management.
Again this can only be fully attained by
‘RADAR’ application.
The co-ordination criterion contains five
basic categories:
5.1 Unity of all the other functions.
5.2 Establishing effective communications.
5.3 Developing a conflict solving culture
linked to enhancement.
5.4 Updating of deviations: revision and
possible reco-ordination of resources.
5.5 Information management - information
has to be timely and in sufficient detail
to inform corrective actions (RADAR).
6. Communication
This is the link and the life blood of corpo-
Total quality management in Russia
rate activity and its effectiveness is measured
within the context of the five other functions.
RADARControl is concerned with the efficient and
effective utilisation of resources in the attain-
ment of previously determined objectives,
contained within a specific plan, the plan
being the method to be deployed in order to
achieve the pre-determined objectives.
Control is exercised by the feedback and
feeding forward of information on actual per-
European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2 Total quality management 037
Criteria Assessment category Max Score
1. Forecasting/Planning
1.1 Setting the objective and strategic planning process in motion1.2 Gathering and analysing information related to clients and markets1.3 Detailing business-processes1.4 Gathering and analysing information related to competitors and
benchmarking1.5 Resources planningCriterion total
444
420
2. Organising 2.1 Creating the correct organisational structure2.2 Establishing authority and the responsibility for all personnel2.3 Creating a self-learning organisational culture2.4 Developing a value system based on enhancing performance2.5 Deployment of new technology linked to corporate enhancement Criterion estimation
4444420
3. Motivation 3.1 Developing a co-operative culture based upon stakeholder satisfaction3.2 Ensuring staff have the skills, resources and competences to perform set tasks3.3 A consideration of personal needs linked to self-actualisation3.4 Engagement in processes, increase areas of responsibility and self-monitoring3.5 Results satisfaction - feedback on performance in a timely mannerCriterion estimation
4444420
4. Control 4.1 A monitoring system for each key stage of business-process4.2 Measuring performance levels4.3 Determining customer satisfaction levels4.4 Determine the efficiency and effectiveness of resource utilisation4.5 Conduct a comparative analysis between set targets and actual results,
leading to appropriate actionsCriterion estimation
44444
20
5. Coordinating 5.1 Unity of all other functions5.2 Establishing effective internal communications5.3 Developing a conflict solving system5.4 Updating of deviations: revision and possible reco-ordination of other resources5.5 Ensure effective Information managementCriterion estimation
4444420
Total management estimation 100
Table 2 Marking criteria for MFAM
Complete the score card based on organisational performance following the scoring criteria in Table 3.
038 Total quality management European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2
formance when compared with the pre-deter-
mined plan, therefore planning and control
are very closely linked. Control is concerned
with the establishment of deviations from
planned activities/objectives and initiating
effective and efficient corrective actions.
These assessments may also establish areas of
best practice to be disseminated throughout
the organisation.
RADAR logic explainedThe RADAR logic states that an organisation
needs to:
• determine the Results the organisation is
aiming for as part of its policy and strategy
making processes. These include the per-
formance of the organisation, both finan-
cially and operationally, and the percep-
tion of its stakeholders
• plan and develop an integrated set of
sound Approaches to deliver the required
results
Total quality management in Russia
Table 3 Summary of Results for MFAM
The total management estimation helps to define a level of Management Maturity
In scoring 0 - 4 the following criteria as shown in Table 3, should be used.
Table 4 Scoring criteria
Level Total Score Assessment
I (0~20) ∑ No methodology or system, management purposes are not defined. For further development it is necessaryto reconsider core business principles.
II (21~40) ∑ Management has the potential for development. Managers should develop their leadership skills, defineorganisational purposes clearly and develop a strategy based on TQM principles.
III (41~60) ∑ Management systems are in evidence. It is necessary to pay attention to the optimisation of businessprocesses and improvement of quality at each stage. Perfecting a control system and taking into account theimportance of stakeholders.
IV (61~80) ∑ Constant quality checks within the management system take place. Utilisation of external benchmarking inorder to improve corporate performance.
V (81~100) ∑ The maximum outcomes in all areas of corporate activity are reached; the management system isbenchmarked and monitored in a drive for continuous improvement.
Score Criteria for Scoring
0 No activity demonstrated
1 Activity not consistently utilised
2 Activity utilised but dependent upon the situation
3 The activity is deployed permanently and systematically
4 The activity is deployed permanently and systematically, monitored and reviewed via benchmarking for improvement
Both the ‘Results’ and ‘Approaches’ ele-
ments related to the Plan stage of Deming’s
control cycle, see Figure 3. Matching of Plan,
Do, Check and Act Cycle with RADAR
• Deploy the approaches in a systematic way
to ensure full implementation. The
deployment is the ‘Act’ stage of Deming’s
Cycle.
• Assess and Review the approaches followed
based on monitoring and analysis of the
results achieved utilising ongoing learning
activities. Based on this assessment, com-
panies should identify, prioritise, plan and
implement improvements where needed.
(European Foundation for Quality
Management, 1999).
‘Assess’ and ‘Review’ cover the ‘check’ and
‘act’ components of Deming’s Cycle.
The basic premise of both BS EN ISO
9001:2000 and the European Foundation for
Quality Excellence Model is the concept of
control as depicted in Figure 5.
One must remember it is not possible to
have retrospective effective corrective actions.
Therefore, timeliness of data is a key compo-
nent of the control function.
Corporate excellence ismeasured by an organisation’sability to both achieve andsustain outstanding results for its stakeholders
Linking RADAR and the Management
Functional Assessment Model (MFAM).
Figure 2: The Management Functional
Assessment Model incorporating RADAR
encapsulates the facility for organisations to
fully engage in a drive for continuous improve-
ment. Thus, every time the MFAM is imple-
mented and the scoring process applied RADAR
is embodied within the model. In this way fore-
casts and plans linked to deployment strategies
are evaluated and appropriate actions deter-
mined via assessment and review. Only by
employing this approach can the full benefits
of MFAM deployment be attained.
ConclusionThe model (MFA) recognises that sustain-
able excellence in all aspects of performance
European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2 Total quality management 039
Figure 3
Matching of Plan, Do, Check and Act Cycle
with RADAR
040 Total quality management European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2
is based on the management functions of
forecasting/planning, organising, co-ordinat-
ing, motivating, control and communication.
The application of the MFAM will address the
key deployment issues and empower the
resulting benefits.
A truly empoweredorganisation employs both a top down and bottom upapproach to managing itsactivities within the context of aiming to fully satisfy allstakeholders
Excellence is dependent upon balancing
and satisfying the needs of all relevant
stakeholders (this includes people
employed, customers, suppliers and society
in general, as well as those with financial
interests in the organisation). The customer
is the final judge of product and service
quality and customer loyalty, retention and
market share gain are best optimised
through a clear focus on the needs of cur-
rent and potential stakeholders.
The behaviour of an organisation’s lead-
ers creates a clarity and unity of purpose
within the organisation and an environ-
ment in which the organisation and its peo-
ple can excel. A truly empowered organisa-
tion employs both a top down and bottom
up approach to managing its activities with-
in the context of aiming to fully satisfy all
stakeholders.
Organisations perform more effectively
and efficiently when all interrelated activi-
ties are understood and systematically man-
aged and decisions concerning current oper-
ations and planned improvements are made
using reliable information that includes
stakeholder perceptions. The full potential
of an organisation’s people is best released
through shared values and a culture of trust
and empowerment. This necessitates a holis-
tic approach to people and their operational
systems and organisational structure.
Performance is maximised when based on
management and sharing of knowledge
within a culture of continuous learning,
innovation and improvement. An organisa-
tion works more effectively when it has
mutually beneficial relationships built on
trust, the sharing of knowledge and integra-
tion with its partners.
Corporate excellence is measured by an
organisation’s ability to both achieve and
sustain outstanding results for its stakehold-
ers, thus MFAM linked to RADAR has been
developed. It is essential if a truly holistic
control mechanism is to be attained.
References• European Foundation for Quality Management
Total quality management in Russia
(1999) Radar and the EFQM Excellence Model, EFQM
Press Releases & Announcements, [on line] last
accessed on 12 June 2000 at URL:www.efqm.org/
• Conti,T., (2003), "Pochemu ne polnostyu ispolsuetsya
potencial samoocenki?" (Why the potential of a self-
assessment is not used?), Standarty i Kachestvo, No. 3.
Dickenson, R. P., Campbell, D. R., and Azarov, V. N.,
(2000), "Quality management implementation in
Russian Strategies for change", International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol.
17 No. 1, pp. 66-81.
• Maslov D. , Belokorovin, E. (2003), ‘Malyi business:
puti razvitia,’ (Small Business, routes of
development), M’art, Archangelsk
• Mazur, I. I., & Shapiro, V. D., (2003) "Upravleniye
kachestvom: uchebnoye posobie" (Quality
management: the Guidebook), Vysshaya shkola,
Moskva.
•Secretariat of National Quality Award of Russia
(2002, 2003), Russian National Quality Award, All-
Russian Scientific and Research Institute for
Certification, www.vniis.ru
• Van der Wiele, A., Dale, B., and Williams, R., (2000),
"ISO 9000 series and excellence models: fad to
fashion to fit", Journal of General Management,Vol.
25 No. 3, Spring, pp. 50-66.
• Yasin, E.G., (2003), "Rossiyskaya ekonomika. Istoki i
panorama rynochnych reform: Kurs lekciy" (The
Russian economy. Sources and panorama of market
reforms: Course of lectures), 2-e izd, GU VshE, Moskva.
For further information, contact:
Dmitry Maslow: [email protected]
European Quality • Volume 11 Number 2 Total quality management 041