Structure/process polarity and dilemma

Organizations are systems, and business communities are networks of the interacting systems. At a given point of time an organization is a dynamic and dualistic composition of process and structure. This is analogous to well-known philosophical principles of mind and matter/body (Descartes), and emptiness and form (Buddhism). Process and structure are not separate, and considering an organization we should deal with them at the same time. They cannot be replaced by each other.

In a business context, process means a continuous activity by organized resources for fulfilling organization’s basic duties. A project is a singular or unique process. There are always processes in all organizations:

• Processes put into practice organization’s business/action plan.  
• Operational everyday work is carried out in processes.  
• Processes produce outputs (results) to the stakeholders.  

In general, processes adhere to all kinds of activities or operations made by human resources or automatic means. The process concept just denotes any kind of doing and getting some outcome. Basic activities that exit in all organizations, "elementary processes", typically include working for something, moving people, material or information, and interacting or communicating. When the elementary processes within an organization are linked to achieving organization's business goals, one may talk about business processes. 

Organization's overall business performance is the result of managerial decisions both in processes and structures. Process/structure-solutions are always according to each organization’s specific business needs. Naturally, the structures should support the processes. Management measures for process structures aim at increasing effectiveness and efficiency of business operations. Processes are the primary issues from the business performance’s point of view, and structures should support that. However, we have recognized cases where structural aspects, e.g. organization charts and formal process diagrams, have been harmfully overly emphasized in process management. The principal importance of structures relate to the continuity or survival of the organization.

The processes are performed by the resources that consist of supply of money, materials, staff, and other assets drawn on by the organization in order to function effectively. Processes include business activities and tasks, which are either on-going or idle.

Organizational structure does not only include structural elements and constituents but their interrelations have an important role in organizations. Organizational structure, “infrastructure” as stated in some management system standards, include the fundamental facilities and systems, (e.g. buildings, workspace and associated utilities), process equipment (both hardware and software), and supporting systems (such as for transport, communication or information ) that form the basis for any business operation. Structure has close relationships with assets, property owned by the organization, regarded as having value and available to meet debts, commitments, or legacies, items of ownership convertible into cash. Assets include physical, human, financial, information, and intangible assets.

The structure of an organization is based on the management’s decisions and often relate to agreements and other commitments the organization has made with natural or other juridical persons in order to perform the activities required for meeting organization’s strategic and operational goals. These commitments can be categorized into agreements for acquiring organization’s own productive resources in the form of labor and capital, and those for acquiring goods and services from outside the organization.

Quality management principles for the development of quality management within an organization

Quality management principles have been as the foundation for the development of the ISO 9000 standards and recognized performance excellence models (quality award criteria) [see the reference].

They may be also useful directly for developing a business-integrated and organization-dedicated quality management (QM) approach. General quality management principles of the standards and excellence models are good as references but each organization should, however, define the principles from the organization’s own business point of view. The general principles may help the organization in its task.

We have an example. A company thought own QM principles as a suitable starting point for their QM development. At first they made clear what is the meaning of a quality management principle as follows:

• A principle is a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning.  
• QM was understood according to the ISO 9000 standard as coordinated activities to direct and control an organization with regard to quality. Hence QM equals quality of management that aims at business excellence.  

After this conceptual consideration they started innovate by brainstorming their own fundamental principles for managing the company towards performance excellence. They took all elements from the principles of ISO 9000, EFQM, and Malcolm Baldrige [see the reference] and took into account their own business-relevant flavorings. They finalized their results by a group-work to the following seven principles:

• Centering on customers’ needs and expectations
• Envisioning the future challenges
• Valuing employees
• Managing the organization as a system of responsive and agile business processes
• Appreciating multiple means for discovering, collaborating, and learning in order to continually enhance organization’s business performance
• Networking with and valuing partners
• Anticipating timely changes in the needs and expectations of the market and society

What is quality policy?

Quality policy is an important concept for a professional quality integration in organizations. Quality policy means what is the overall intention and direction within an organization related to quality. Again the genuine quality policy can be seen only in the awareness and actions of people, not in documents. Documented quality policy statement issued and signed by the top management of an organization is only a tip of iceberg of the actual policy. It may, however, be a useful managerial tool. Anyway, it is not necessary to use the term "quality policy" in practical business operations although people have always certain quality policies.

Quality awareness (or its synonym quality consciousness) is most essential topic for realizing quality and quality integration in practical cases. The concept may be defined very simply: having knowledge of quality. However, what is the meaning of this, is not at all any simple thing. Awareness is a profound totality of physical, psychological, and philosophical aspects of sensations, perceptions, ideas, attitudes, and feelings related to an individual or a group having knowledge of the abstract and comprehensive object of quality of a certain item, at any given time, or within a given time span.

A reference: Information is beautiful: What is consciousness?:

Business systems and management system standardization

System is a set of interrelated or interacting elements. An organization is managed as one single system. As early as in 1950, Deming presented the whole company as a system of processes (see the following figure).

A system is always created and owned by somebody. A system is an entity that maintains its existence and functions as a whole through the interaction of its parts. A system has always an aim or purpose defined by the system’s creators or owners. The system is just created to accomplish its aim. A system has interactions and transactions with its environment to get input from and to provide outputs to system’s stakeholders. Stakeholders may set requirements to the system.

A system is managed as a whole. Management is based on knowledge and information and a feedback function. The system is managed on behalf of its owners (shareholders). The system has its internal structure and process architecture according to the business needs, and it is operating within a certain business community (system environment) and interacting with other systems. Systems have also partners and competitors in its business community.

General international standardization for the management systems started in the beginning of the 1980’s. The first standards were ISO 9000 standards for quality management and quality assurance. Later a lot of other standards have been created for many specialized disciplines of the business management, including environmental protection, social responsibility, risks, occupational health and safety, information systems/services, information security, etc.

There are general standards for these disciplines but there are also sector-specific standards for these disciplines, e.g. for automobile industry, software industry, aviation industry, military applications, health care, etc. The management system standardization for specialized management disciplines typically consist of two different kinds of standards:

1. Standards describing comprehensively the discipline in question (e.g. quality managemet in ISO 9004) to be taken into account for the development of organization’s business management system 
2. Standards describing requirements, i.e. needs and expectations, (e.g. quality management requirements in ISO 9001) for the discipline in question.  

However, these standards may not describe any management system itself because according to the well-known Russell's paradox “whatever involves all of a collection of objects must not be one of the collection” (see the following figure).

The first category (1) of the standards are guidance documents for organizations’ internal use. The requirements standards (2) are factually general standardized models of organization-external requirements that may become obligatory in a contractual context or that may be used for auditing purposes for quality assurance and certifications.

In the existing management system standards of the different disciplines, there are many structural and conceptual differences. That may cause difficulties when different standards are implemented simultaneously within an organization’s business system. Now, however, an improvement is coming because ISO has defined a high level structure and identical text-parts and common core terms and definitions that must be used in all management system standards in the future. The proposed high level structure consists of key issues of the business management that is a significant issue for promoting the business-integration in applying the standards.

There are many problems in applying management standards in practice in organizations. Specialized standardization of different disciplines is carried out by the experts of the different expertise who don’t have necessarily close contacts or communication with business leaders or with each other. Those standards and also their application in organizations may become rather isolated from the business management system and from each other. However, even experts should understand and appreciate traditions and recognized practices of business management that are very often emphasized by the business leaders from the financial and legal points of view.

In order to avoid problems, ineffectiveness, and inefficiency, standards should be applied with integration, responsiveness, and innovation. That is also possibility to fulfill organizations’ targets for competitiveness and sustained business success.

Principles of quality management emphasize factual information in a broad sense

Well-known quality management principles of the ISO 9000 standards have direct links to quality management. They consist of eight principles, of which the seventh principle, “Factual approach to decision making”, is closely related to business facts and measurements.

Also performance excellence models (quality awards criteria) include good management principles that emphasize the importance of business facts and information in management. The American Malcolm Baldrige Model, for instance, defines eleven core values and concepts for excellent management. One of those, “Management by fact”, is very relevant to our topic. Aspects of the factual information and measurements are as an implicit flavor also in the EFQM model

In all cases, the factual management principle has significant links with all other management principles in order to understand the management discipline holistically.

As a summary, these recognized good management principles of standards and excellence models present that:

• Organizations depend on the measurement and analysis of performance. Such measurements should be derived from business needs and strategy. 
• Many types of data and information are needed for performance management.
• Measures and indicators should support decision making in a rapidly changing environment.
• Making decisions and taking actions should be based on factual analysis, balanced with experience and intuition.
• Data and information should be sufficiently accurate and reliable.
• Data and information must be analyzed by using valid methods.
• Data and information should be made accessible to those who need it.
• Performance improvement and change management involve the selection and use of adequate performance measures or indicators.

Good management principles and guiding ideas for the quality integration

Quality Integration implies professional quality practices that are integrated seamlessly with normal business management activities in any kinds of organizations. Quality integration takes place in practice on the cornerstones of guiding ideas, managing infrastructure, and theory, methods and tools (figure).

The aim of the quality integration is excellence in organization’s business performance and sustained success.

The Fifth Discipline Field book (1995), the book of P. Senge, C. Roberts, B. Ross, and A. Kleiner considers principles and examples for organizational development in a natural way of learning. The following text quotes and summarizes the core ideas of the book.

Guiding ideas or governing management principles can be developed and articulated deliberately. This is a central function of genuine leadership. Guiding ideas for organizations’ quality integration start with vision, values, and purpose: What the organization stands for and what its members seek to create.

Every organization is governed according to some principles. They are not necessarily benign. A typical but often pernicious guiding idea of the traditional Western business management is that the purpose of the enterprise is to maximize return of the shareholders investment. If people come to believe this, then whatever ideas are articulated will be subordinate to making money. The new modern view is, however, that a company a living organism, and, much like an individual, it can have collective sense of identity and fundamental purpose. This is the organizational equivalent of self knowledge - a shared understanding of what the company stands for, where it's going, what kind of world it wants to live in, and, most importantly, how it intends to make that world a reality.

Often attempts to articulate guiding ideas in organizations result only in mission or vision statements. What distinguishes powerful guiding ideas? The first distinguishing feature is philosophical depth. Agreeing genuinely the fundamental purpose of a company requires a lot of time (investment) in study and conversation among the key persons of the company. This is the contrast to only traditionally having short meetings where the management team drafts mission or vision statements.

Traditional organizations are designed to provide for the first three levels of Maslow's hierarchy of human needs - food, shelter, and belonging. Since these are now widely available to members of industrial society, these organizations do not provide anything particularly unique to command the loyalty and commitment of people. The ferment in management today will continue until organizations begin to address the higher order needs: self respect and self actualization. That articulates a larger context within which to consider the specifics of an organization’s mission, vision, and values. It suggests that changes in the world offer new opportunities for organizations to reach for higher aspirations. These views arise from considerable thought, and they carry a sense of passionate conviction not captured in most mission statements. Years are needed to develop "a guiding philosophy" for the organization and that means patience and perseverance.

The second distinguishing feature of powerful guiding ideas follows from the first - seeing the process as ongoing. Guiding ideas are not static. Their meaning, and sometimes their expression, evolve as people reflect and talk about them, and as they are applied to guide decisions and action. This, of course, is the central tenet of the discipline of building shared vision - that shared visions live in our ongoing conversations about what we seek together to create.

Are there guiding ideas relevant for all efforts to build quality integration through organizational learning? One example offers three interrelated ideas which constitute the philosophical core of the systems perspective. All three of these ideas question bedrock tacit assumptions of the Western cultural tradition.

The primacy of the whole suggests that relationships are more fundamental than things, and that wholes are primordial to parts. Our world is interrelated.

In our organizations, we normally tend to think the opposite. We tend to assume that parts are primary, existing somehow independent of the wholes within which they are constituted. How we define "parts" is highly subjective, a matter of perspective and purpose.

In the realm of management and leadership, many people are conditioned to see our "organization" as things rather than as patterns of interaction. We look for solutions that will "fix problems", as if they were external and can be fixed without "fixing" that which is within us that led to their creation. Consequently, we are inevitably drawn into an endless spiral of superficial quick fixed, worsening difficulties in the long run, and an ever-deepening sense of powerlessness. In organizations, articulating the primacy of the whole as a guiding idea may be the first step in helping people break this vicious cycle.

The community nature of the self challenges us to see the interrelatedness that exists in us. However, we tend to see the individual primordial to the community in which the individual is embedded. The self is a point of view that unifies the flow of experience into a coherent narrative - a narrative striving to connect with other narratives. More over, the narrative is deeply informed by our culture. The stories we construct to make sense of our experience, to give meaning to our actions and thoughts, are stories that we have learned to construct.

When we forget the community nature of the self, we identify our self with our ego. We then assign a primordial value to the ego (part) and see the community (whole) as secondary. We see the community as nothing but a network of contractual commitments to symbolic and economic exchanges. Encounters with others become transactions that can add or subtract to the possessions of the ego. The resulting loss is incalculable - isolation, loneliness, and loss of our "sense of place". On the contrary, consistency with a systems view of life suggests that the self is never "given" and is always in a process of transformation.

The community nature of the self opens the door to powerful and beneficial changes in our underlying values. When we do not take other people as objects for our use, but see them as fellow human beings with whom we can learn and change, we open new possibilities for being ourselves more fully.

The generative power of language illuminates the subtle interdependency operating whenever we interact with "reality" and implies a radical shift in how we see some of these changes coming about. We participate more deeply than we imagine in shaping the world that we perceive.

"Naïve realism" is the worldview which holds rigid positions like the primacy of the parts and the isolated nature of the self. This worldview takes reality as a given entity outside our perception, and sees language as the tool through which we describe this external reality "out there". We have no actual way of ever knowing what is "out there". Whenever we articulate what we see, our language interacts with our direct experience. The "reality" we bring forth arises from this interaction.

The alternative to "naïve realism" is recognizing the generative role of the traditions of observation and meaning shared by a community - and that these traditions are all that we ever have. When we are confronted by multiple interpretations of the "real world" the alternative to seeking to determine which is "right" is to admit multiple interpretations and seek those that are most useful for a particular purpose, knowing that there is no ultimately "correct" interpretation. The alternative to seeing language as describing an independent reality is to recognize the power of language that allows us to freshly interpret our experience - and might enable us to bring forth new realities.

Quality management principles (QMP's)

The international standardization committee ISO/TC 176 (Quality management and quality assurance) has started to revise its well-known and popular Quality Management Principles.

Just now there are interesting questions:

• What is the purpose of the QMP's in general and in particular in the ISO 9000 standardization?
• What is the relevance of the existing QMP's of the TC 176?
• What are the other recognized references for QMP's?
• What are the necessary changes needed for the existing QMP's of the TC 176?
• How to get a concensus to the QMP's within the standardization committee?
• How to use the QMP's in different organizations for their quality management development?

The existing eight QMP's of the ISO/TC 176 are as follows:

• Customer focus
• Leadership
• Involvement of people
• Process approach
• System approach to management
• Continual improvement
• Factual approach to decision making
• Mutually beneficial supplier relationships

The detailed descriptions of the principles are in the ISO/TC 176 web site. These principles are already about 20 years old and therefore revision is needed especially because the world business environments have changed.

Also the recognized performance excellence models (Quality award criteria) have defined their principles for the quality management although they use different titles for them. Most important are the following:

Malcolm Baldrige - Core values and concepts:

• Visionary leadership
• Customer-driven excellence
• Organizational and personal learning
• Valuing employees and partners
• Agility
• Focus on the future
• Managing for innovation
• Management by fact
• Social responsibility
• Focus on results and creating value
• Systems perspective

EFQM - Fundamental concepts of excellence:

• Achieving balanced results
• Adding value for customers
• Leading with vision, inspiration & integrity
• Managing by processes
• Succeeding through people
• Nurturing creativity & innovation
• Building partnerships
• Taking responsibility for a sustainable future

Deming Application Prize – Total Quality Management (TQM) Principles:

• Distinctive performance improvement through the application of TQM:

                 - Challenging and customer-oriented business objectives and               strategies under the management leadership

                 - Proper implementation of TQM to achieve the business               objectives

                 - Outstanding results obtained for the business objectives

• TQM understanding and enthusiasm

                 - Aiming at long-term success through benefits to customers               and other interested parties

                 - Managing the organization putting 'quality' in its core

                 - Top management leadership, vision, strategies, and policies

                 - Participation of organization’s all members based on human               resource development

                 - Developing and applying effective quality management               methods

                 - Improving and transforming organization's constitution for               sustainable success

References to these principles may be found from their web pages: Deming Application Prize, The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, The EFQM Excellence Model.

What is the meaning of the QMP's?

At first, what is the general meaning of a principle? According to a general dictionary a principle is a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning. Quality management may be understood according the ISO 9000 vocabulary as "coordinated activities to direct and control an organization with regard to quality".

As an example the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence define that their basic principles (core values and concepts) are embedded beliefs and behaviors found in high-performing organizations. They are the foundation for integrating key performance and operational requirements within a results-oriented framework that creates a basis for action and feedback.

The quality management principles provide a conceptual foundation for the further development of the ISO 9000 standards.

Measures/indicators and measuring in quality management

Quality management calls for appropriate and systematic tracking of appropriately selected performance measures and indicators. Such measures are used to describe important phenomena of the business. Measurements serve organizational management in business direction, including control, continual improvement, transformations and quality assurance.

Measurements form a basis for effective communications and implementing strategies into practice. A measure/indicator is a directly measurable factor, or a combination of these that is used to determine the current value of the thing being measured in singular instances. A measure may indicate directly the phenomenon or factor (e.g. market share) in interest or be a measure that depicts or anticipates such (e.g. number of complaints).

Measurement means (i.e. meters) should be specified clearly in order to facilitate correct measurements and to prevent risks of mislead.

Measurement issues are often in disarray due to historical reasons. There also may be the divorce between factual information and praxis of management. Concerning strategic measures and indicators, a good approach is to apply the methodology of strategy card, e.g. a balanced scorecard, e.g. in order to prevent increasing productivity measures at the expense of satisfaction amongst major customers.

ls our set of measures a "flea market"? Do we measure results by inputs? What can I do?

• I am aware of what phenomena our measures concern. I will distinguish strategic and operative information from one another.
• I will use really correct measurement data in management.
• I will make sure that I won't use ad hoc noise data for management. Measures pertaining to random phenomena, such as system availability, are difficult to manage.
• I know what the quality of our process data is.

What do costs have to do with quality?

Can luxury be cheap? No. Can an anonymous mass production item be expensive? No. Both of these can be produced either cost-efficiently or inefficiently, but the grade of performance of the product determines the price level. According to the ISO9000 standard, the grade means a category or rank given to different performance requirements for products having the same functional use. Therefore the grade is definitely the point of departure of the product costs planning.

Is quality free? What does lack of quality cost? Can quality costs be optimized? Nothing is free, but the lack of quality always causes so much costs that prevention of quality-related problems is worthwhile.

Is cost-efficiency quality? What happens to quality when costs are cut? Cost-efficiency in the appropriate cases forms an essential part of performance, as otherwise the only destination that will be reached efficiently is a dead-end. If the issues are the right ones, the only way to cut costs without causing quality-related problems is to improve processes. In practice, this implies more effective structuring of processes, re-engineering functions, and process performance control.

What can I do?

• I will learn to understand and consider the real overall costs accrued to a customer from our products.
• I will understand that the value-added we create should surpass clearly these costs.
• I will consider what a customer looses by selecting us. Is it something else besides money? How about in comparison with selecting our competitor?
• What did a customer lose by selecting our competitor? Was it worth it?
• I will know what we pay due to making mistakes, fixing them, unproductive work, and dissatisfaction. Who pays for all that? The perpetrator? With what and when?
• I will distinguish between fixed and variable costs.

• 
  

Teams and networks are different

Team

The team concept is often used very vaguely. A useful definition to consider team-issues consistently is as follows: "A team is a group of individuals appointed from one or more organizations that works together for achieving a common purpose. The team operates by self-managing selection, design and implementation the necessary tools and means it needs for achieving its intended purpose.” 

This definition includes three basic characteristics of a team:

1. The team consists of certain named persons.
2. The team has its own clearly defined purpose. 
3. The team works through self-management. 

These aspects do not yet fully define the essence of a team. Teams may differ greatly between different organizations or even within the same organization. However, all groups within a specific project or work-task are not necessarily teams.

Genuine, effective and efficient team work has the following characteristics:

• The team purpose and goal are common to all team members and known by everybody of them. 
• The atmosphere in a team work is based on trust and transparency – team work is full of joy.
• Communication and exchange of information in a team is effective.
• Everyone feels the genuine team cohesion.
• Diversity is appreciated in teams.
• Team members are encouraged to creativity and risk-taking, and a team is capable to fix or improve its working procedures.
• Team members feel a need for each other and each other's skills to achieve the common goal. 
• Decision-making and leadership are based on consensus - every team member is a resource.

Network

A network may be defined as ”a group of interconnected independent individuals or other actors who exchange information, contacts, and experience for professional or social purposes”.

In all networks there are knots and links. Relationship is the most significant issue.

There are networks everywhere:

• Biological nature
• Physics and chemistry
• Mathematics
• Human aggregations
• Business communities
• Economy
• Technics
• Societies

Genuine business networks are primarily unplanned, emergent aggregations. Their growth is sporadic and self-organizing. An actor’s role can be characterized by centrality in the network: Activity, Betweenness, and Closeness. Networks may not be managed in a traditional way like organizations because they are not any single systems. E.g. networks may not have shared values, strategies, etc.

The network as a whole is managed by nobody but each actor has its own characteristic impact in the network:

• Access = actor’s easiness getting to the resources of the network
• Reach = actor’s potential wielding influence in the network
• Control = actor’s ability to control over the resources of the network

• 
  
  

Satisfied, dissatisfied or indifferent?

Is a customer satisfied if he says so when asked? Usually yes, but not always and with certainty; he or she might say "yes" out of politeness or without realizing that satisfaction does not mean merely lack of dissatisfaction. However, if a customer says he or she is satisfied without being asked, he or she might very well be. This is so especially if he tells this to good friends at his or her own initiative. Is a customer satisfied if he buys more of what he or she is satisfied with and possibly even something else? Usually yes, but not always. It could be, for example, that repurchase takes place out of habit or he or she might be a satisfied user yet dissatisfied payer, despite the purchase.

Customer satisfaction is generated when expectations are surpassed appropriately at the right time. This triggers a pleasure reaction and increases goodwill. However, customer dissatisfaction is a completely different matter. If there is something that the customer does not like he or she is, in principle, dissatisfied but may nevertheless accept the situation out of e.g. habit or due to a lack of options. He or she may also blame him- or herself, another customer, or the industry practice for the issue.

Feelings of dissatisfaction eat into goodwill resources and, when strong enough, causes negative feelings, which increase badwill potential. When this badwill potential is realized, it ruins the customer relationship and, in the worst case, damages the reputation of the product or the company in the market for years to come.

Most commonly, however a customer is indifferent. He or she does not feel satisfied nor dissatisfied, even regardless of how well his or her needs are satisfied. Those who are not indifferent are usually simultaneously satisfied and dissatisfied and can easily make their purchases anywhere.

Satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not any opposite issues:

What can I do?

• I will not trust customer satisfaction surveys blindly but I will create multifaceted customer satisfaction measurements.
• I will measure customer satisfaction and dissatisfaction separately.
• I will try to affect the large group of indifferent customers. That is the real challenge!
  

Business performance self-assessment and criteria “3in1”

Self-assessment is a business performance improvement approach deployed in accordance with business requirements and preconditions. It covers an organization’s or a unit’s business scope as a whole.

Top management of the organization or unit being assessed should personally participate in the assessing. In fact, all business leaders certainly appraise the condition and features of their business at least sometimes. By participating in a systematic self-assessment he or she can free his or her capacities from handling avoidable problem situations to real improvement of business performance.

Self-assessment does not provide benefits unless it is aligned with leadership and is a part of leadership practices.

Seven main phases of systematic self-assessment are:

l. Relevant facts pertaining to the assessment criteria are identified in accordance with the business requirements.2. A consensus concerning facts is brought about. Facts may be strengths or weaknesses and they may have different importance from organization’s performance excellence point of view.

3. The situation is scored on the basis of the facts, and consensus concerning the scores is reached.

4. Conclusions concerning strategic directions, emphases, and improvement measures are drawn.

5. Conclusions are translated into business strategy and action plans.

6. Recognition is granted based on improvement.

7. Communications are seen to and is integrated fully into the business.

Items 4-7 can also be viewed as belonging to planning, communicating, or some other area of leadership than self-assessment. The main issue is to integrate everything into the business management effectively and in a natural way. Because self-assessment is a process-like activity, it is recommended that it is implemented in accordance with a defined process. The self-assessment process indicates alignment with business in accordance with the organization’s management model. The assessment is implemented effectively when executed in a process-like manner.

A self-assessment should not be a laborious or separate task. It is more akin to adhering to age-old basic practices, such as “think first before acting”, “recognizing facts is the source of wisdom”, “pass judgment only after you know what you are judging and on what basis", and “learn your lessons”.

The assessment criteria address important business performance areas and items to be assessed. The criteria are the basis for conducting organizational self-assessments in order to strengthen an organization’s competitiveness by:
- helping improve organizational performance practices, capabilities, and results
- facilitating communication and sharing of information on best practices among other organizations
- serving as a working tool for understanding and managing performance and for guiding organizational planning and opportunities for learning

The criteria are designed to help provide organizations with an integrated approach to organizational performance management that results in
- delivery of ever-improving value to customers and stakeholders, contributing to organizational sustainability
- improvement of overall organizational effectiveness and capabilities
organizational and personal learning

All assessment categories of the criteria are related to one another. The assessment model provides a tool with which to assess the entire business in relation to weights of its different areas. The maximum score of each examination itern illustrates its relative significance as a competitive business performance driver. In order to achieve excellent performance a company cannot optimize a single area of activities and neglect the entirety.

An organization's 3in1 performance self-assessment bring together the following viewpoints:

1. Quality management standards such as ISO 9000,
2. Excellence performance models, e.g. Malcolm Baldrige and the EFQM models, and
3. The organization's business system.

The evaluation model is easily customizable solution for organizations.

For organizations’ the initial assessment there is a simple evaluation model 3in1 Start, from which the organization can continue its assessment to more comprehensive and detailed assessments.

The interactive ZEF evaluation tool is used in practical self-assessments. It makes self-assessment easy and fast to perform and is also very easily adaptable to the organization's own business assessments and measurements.

How to understand our customer relationship?

Custom has a life cycle consisting of different stages. Custom gains the form of a customer relationship when both parties (buyer/seller) experience the relationship in this way. Custom begins when a potential customer first notices us as a possible vendor. The relationship ends when the customer ceases to have any contact with us, our business, or products and he or she is no longer within the range of their influence. Or, when either party severs the relationship in a duly responsible way.

Custom always begins with an interest phase. If this stage awakens sufficient interest, custom moves onto the beginning of the purchasing phase, i.e. communication of either a purchase or selling offer. Once a deal is thus made, custom moves on to the actual service phase. It is at this phase, at the latest, that custom takes on the form of a customer relationship.

The service phase ends once the service in question has been realized and the duties of both parties have been met. In other words, the service stage includes always participation on the customer's part. Actual use of the product in question begins at custom care phase. This concerns customer care after delivery has taken place and supporting use in accordance with agreed upon terms and in line with the good conventions of the business field throughout all stages of the customer relationship. 

When new life cycles in the customer relationship emerge the custom care phase continues alongside these as custom maintenance.

Test yourself:

1. I will do what I have promised. How can I make that I won't make promises that I won,t be able keep?
2. The customer receives what he wants. How do I ensure this?
3. I will improve my activities continually. Can I succeed in this by just seeing to customer relationship management?
   

(Reference: Anttila, J., Vakkuri, J.: ISO 9000 for the creative leader)

The mysterious concept of quality

Again and again, often in various meetings with different people – among amateurs and among quality experts – there are lengthy discussions about the definition and substance of the quality concept.

Everyone can understand quality without explanations or formal definitions. Quality is a much used word in general everyday language. When something is associated with quality it is purpose to bring out positive features incorporated with that. Quality is a concept of good and success. However, if you will analyze the concept in details what does it include strictly speaking in different situations, it comes out a very wide range of viewpoints. This multi-mindedness is a self-contained character of the quality concept.

A variety of approaches to the definitions of quality concept may be grouped as follows although the different groups do not cross clearly or sharply:

1. Definitions based on product characteristics
Quality means measurable properties of a product. Quality means speed, efficiency, gold content, economy/business class, etc. Difference in quality depends on differences in these characteristics. Quality may be examined objectively. Such a concept of quality is often associated with price and cost, so that better quality means higher cost. For the same reason, a high price can be justified by the quality of the product. In this way the quality concept is often understood by the marketing people.

2. Definitions based on production performance
Quality is fulfillment of the specified requirements. This definition has been used in traditional quality engineering, which has its roots strongly in the manufacture of material products and prevention of manufacturing defects. Quality means the degree in which the product meets the design and manufacturing or contractual requirements. Quality is an objectively and unambiguously measurable quantity. It is expressed as a rate of nonconforming units or rate of number of nonconformities and managed by statistical process control. Operating target for the production is an acceptable quality limit, AQL, or zero defect level. Quality costs due to defects can be avoided only by doing everything right first time.

3. Monetary (financial) value based definitions
Quality is the use-value (utility) of an object. It is a measure of the relative satisfaction from the use of a product in fulfilling somebody’s needs. In this case, quality of the product is in connection with the added-value created by the producer. In classic free-market economic equilibrium, added-value corresponds to the exchange-value (the purchase price). Quality describes the ratio of use-value to price.

4. Real economy value based definitions
Quality of an item equals the real experienced and perceived benefit or advantage obtained by its user - even during its entire lifetime - regardless of what is paid (i.e. what is its exchange-value) and how much added-value it represents. E.g. quality in a human service may be achieved by right attitude of the service personnel without any additional cost. According to this definition, quality is an item's ability to meet the user's genuine - even implied - needs and expectations. Quality of a product traces back to the producer’s and the user’s needs and, therefore, it is always a subjective and also time-varying concept. Quality can only subjectively be assessed. Quality does not necessarily imply high costs of production. Quality is based on producer’s excellence in skills and customer-centered activity and by delighting each customer individually.

5. Philosophical and mythical definitions
Quality is of excellent goodness or luxury. Quality can not be measured or not even defined explicitly. You know what it is. Quality is based on the Platonic ideas. Love is the archetype of all quality considerations. Such a quality is the establishment of idealistic philosophy. In this way, the quality concept is also brought up a lot in advertising and the activities of "excellence" organizations. The quality is of reasserted superiority.

-----------------

The multi-mindedness is included in the nature of the quality concept. Quality can not be forced into a single inflexible definition framework. Quality is always what you want it to be although this may also cause confusions or problems.

However, quality is also one of the basic concepts of business, production and marketing. For this reason, it is justified to have the international standard definition published in the ISO 9000 standard: Quality = ”degree to which a set of inherent characteristics fulfills needs and expectations”. This definition reflects the practice and the multi-minded character of the concept.

In business context it is appropriate that the quality concept is understood in such a way that will support the organization's business objectives. In this case, quality should be attached to the company's products (goods and services) in a positive way. It is also often necessary to demonstrate quality undisputedly to organization’s customers or other stakeholders. Quality has a strong impact to customers' satisfaction. This can be achieved in a low-cost and competitive manner, when the company manages properly the production and product-related business processes and activities, i.e. the company's quality management is effective and efficient. Just in the same way it can be argued in public and third sector organizations.

Integrated quality approach in business networks

Organizations have many different kinds of stakeholders that operate as networks. Networks include customer network(s), partner networks (out-sourcing, crowd-sourcing networks), supplier networks and networks with other business stakeholders.

Among different kinds of organizations there are networks of regional operators and business clusters that should also be taken into account in business planning of individual organization. Also competitors are members of these networks.

People of organizations operate in networks internally and and are involved with external networks, e.g. expert networks and science communities.

In addition to the the closely business-activity related networks organizations’ people are involved with “free” networked communities. According to Einstein "A person starts to live when he can live outside himself". Etienne Wenger defined a concept of “Community of practice” that may be understood as a network of “ProAms” consisting of both professionals and amateurs. Similar networked communities are:

• Community of interest
• Community of action
• Community of context
• Communities of circumstance
• Communities of position
• Communities of purpose

Business communities of all organizations include many different kinds of actors in networks:

• Companies or organizations (private, public or not-for-profit)
• Corporate-internal business units, competence centers
• Individuals, e.g. experts or business managers

Factually, very often organizations’ stakeholders’ networks are not genuine networks but various kinds of organizational extensions or even ”slave networks”. Genuine business networks are primarily unplanned, emergent systems. Their growth is sporadic and self-organizing. A network member’s role can be characterized by centrality in the network as described by concepts activity, betweenness, and closeness (Valdis Krebs). Genuine network members are independent actors. The network as a whole is managed by nobody but each actor has its own characteristic impact in the network

• Access = actor’s easiness getting to the resources of the network
• Reach = actor’s potential wielding influence in the network
• Control = actor’s ability to control over the resources of the network

Relationships phenomena and transactions costs are significant aspects in understanding the formulation and operation of business networks. Interesting and and even still very relevant classical references are Maurice Dobb (1925) and Roland Coase (1937).

According to Dobb there are relations of the person with the rest of the world outside his immediate sphere. He busies himself with the division of labour inside the organization and he plans and organises consciously, but he is related to the much larger economic environment, of which he himself is merely one specialised unit. Here, he plays his part as a single ceIl in a larger organism, mainly unconscious of the wider role he fills.

Coase explaned in his study that firms are entities endogenous to the economic system and whose existence is justified only in the presence of transactions costs to production. Firms and other economic organizations and institutions, exist because people use them as a way to minimize transaction costs

Strong network actors (hubs) keep a network alive, and quality of the network facilitates its growth. Networks compete with each other and one with highest quality wins. Individual actors or small entities may sporadically (according their own decisions) liberate from or join with the network. A network is however robust, and particularly strong hubs keep it together.

It is network member’s own responsibility to keep actively him/her as a network member otherwise he/she drops out of the network. To be successful brand yourself and sell your value on the network.

Business environments and concepts have changed radically in networked businesses. That includes crucial changes e.g. in the following key concepts of business management:

• Organizing the business, the business system
• Business environments and its behaviour
• Stakeholders
• Business models, performance and targets
• Management and leadership
• Technology
• Products (goods and services)
• Business processes
• Work, employeeship
• Custom, customers
• Business culture

Professional business integrated quality management approaches that consist of:

• Quality management concepts and principles
• Quality management and quality assurance
• Frameworks (ISO 9000 standards and performance excellence models)
• Quality methodology
• Quality expertise

are very closely related to the above mentioned business management aspects. Therefore traditional professional quality management approaches are not appropriate within networked business environments without innovations. Network quality may not be achieved by traditional quality management means.

Quality of a business (or any) network is based on multiple win / win. Quality of a network may be defined according to the general ISO 9000 definition of the concept quality. According to this basis quality of a network means: “degree to which a set of inherent characteristics of the network fulfils needs and expectations of the involved network members”

All network members have their own needs and expectations and they produce something to and get something from the other network members. Network members may get benefits from the whole network, i.e. from its members. Quality of a network may be calculated based on this situation according to the mathematical formula in the following figure:
This is also according to Metcalfe’s Law: A network increases in value as the square of the numbers of its users.

A genuine network, so called scale-free network, follows mathematically a power law (see the following figure) that means that:

• A network grows one by one node.
• A new node is easier linked with a node with many existing links. This power law is also same as the Pareto principle (80/20 principle: 80% of the links are connected to 20% of the nodes)
  

A slogan that describes a scale-free network says: “Rich get richer”.

The most significant factors for influencing in and getting influences from a network are power and authority in relationships, and effectiveness of communication Paradox of real networks include gaps between private / public and politics / ethics. In a real life politics always overcome ethics.

Benefits of networking relate particularly to new information, knowledge and learning. That is most importatnt for organizations for operational management and strategic regeration.

Learning process is sped up and made more effective through participation in collaborative networks. In fact, best learning and 80% of all learning takes place informally in networks.

(Mid-summer in the archipelago of the city of Salo - Our summerplace)

Learning for transforming quality management

Organizations developing their quality management approaches are confronted with challenges of modern rapidly changing and turbulent business enviroments. That impacts on basic concepts and general principles of quality management and quality assurance, organizational quality realizing infrastructures, and applicable managerial tools. There is not very much help of the traditional quality management practices or standards. What should be done?

I have used in my training courses an excersice to define an initiative for transforming an organization's quality management approach as a project to carry out most immediate and necessary measures in order to enhance your organization's business effectiveness and efficiency. In order to promote the use of modern social technology, the task is presented in a blog in Internet and the student teams are creating their solutions also in their own blog.

International standardization for quality management - The concensus nature of the standards

The work with the fourth generation of ISO 9000 basic standards is approaching its end and results: The new ISO 9001 was published in 2008 and ISO 9004 will be published in 2009. Now it is again time to look at the results. One cannot be completely happy about the achievements (See my previous blog). However we should also try to understand the situation in order be able to apply the standards in the most beneficial way.

Problems related to understanding and applying standards are often caused by the nature of standardization efforts and process themselves. It seems almost impossible that people who have not participated in drafting up standards would be able to understand their real nature.

The core feature of standardization process is consensus approach (shared approval). Everyone involved in the said activity has the opportunity to voice his or her opinion and all opinions should also be taken into account. This has its benefits (+) and drawbacks (-):

+ Broad acceptance and distribution of the texts
+ Extensive expertise in preparing and commenting the standards
+ Global commitment
+ There are – at least in principle – no restrictions for innovative implementation

- “The mob has many heads but no brains”
- Only communally interesting issues are accepted to the final texts
- Only trivial means to implement the standard clauses may be considered in the standards
- Handling of the issues in the standard text is superficial
- It is hard to really understand the standards without participating their drafting
 
The most important consensus practices applied in this kind of standardization work are: (a) Someone’s proposal is accepted (b) A commonly acceptable text is edited in order to get consensus (c) 'Competing' alternatives are included in the standard although they may be contradictory and therefore confusing and (d) Disputed issues are not mentioned at all in the standard. Users of standards must be aware of these approaches, as possible problems caused by deficiencies in them should be avoided when implementing them. They must supplement the missing issues and rectify the inaccuracies and ambiguities.

Two worlds meet in the international standards, i.e. the world of standardization based on consensus principle and the world of the applying standards in an organization based on innovation (see the figure)

The consensus text of a standard represents mediocrity but its wisdom is entailed in the fact that the issues to which it points attract one’s attention to certain important issues. Then implementation of those issues may be innovative according to the real business requirements. This applies especially to understanding the central principles of the subject matter, and using effective and efficient tools and infrastructure for implementation.

In the consensus text all issues are not visible. Those that are, should be understood as advisory guidelines in the organization-specific application of the issues in question. The reality of the organization’s business calls for solutions to the superior implementation of issues brought to light by the standard.

The clauses of the standards can be applied creatively both in the domains of QM (ISO 9004) and QA (ISO 9001).

Otto von Bismarck: "People who appreciate laws and sausages have never seen how they are produced.” This view can be expanded to cover also tbe ISO 9000 standards.

(Reference: Anttila, J., Vakkuri, J.: ISO 9000 for the creative leader)

Understanding current challenges of quality profession

As professional experts we ought to recognize continuously needs for development, renovation and transformation within our profession in order to preserve its effectiveness, competence and attractiveness to exist and to serve the society by responding to its current requirements and challenges.

We have had almost one hundred years development in the modern type of professional quality principles, methodologies, and practices. Success of the discipline has primarily based on brilliant thinkers and persistent, brave and unprejudiced appliers. In the end this is a people issue.

Responsible professionals of the field are interested in looking and planning for future challenges both in general and from their own particular interests. In reflecting this one should be clearly aware of the facts of current situation and how we have entered this situation.

Having a protracked active involvement with professional quality thinking and applications one is able to consider the present “Now” situation in the development perspective. Factually, there are always three temporal dimensions in the present moment “Now”:

• The ‘Now’ of future events and performance
• The ‘Now’ of present events and performance
• The ‘Now’ of past events and performance

The present “Now” always includes the impacts of the past events and the pressure / challenges of the future events.

Things are always seen and understood by individuals. Practical things are singular, not general. Knowledge cannot be objective. Objectivity is theoretical generalizing real things. Knowledge makes us possible to act in a new meaningful way. Knowledge is genuine only if it can be tried and justified in operation.

Everybody has his / her own tacit knowledge of experience, background, bias, and interests when selecting items to be addressed and making observations for getting and understanding facts.

I have considered the current situation of the quality discipline in a previous blog-post, “There are serious problems in the prevailing quality management approaches”. I don’t feel the situation satisfactory. In fact, the quality profession is in a serious crisis. We should have something radically new based on new innovations in the field.

This year’s Future Study ”The old boundaries have been obliterated” of the ASQ has also emphasized the need of change in our profession. Their preferred scenario proposes Global adaptation: Evolution toward a synergistic society. This is a big challenge to the prevailing quality approach. We should also reconsider the whole concept of quality taking into account the large global and societal perspectives.

Individuals influence according their inherent networking capabilities and power through their relationships (Ref. e.g. Valdis Krebs). Distribution of ideas is promoted by the evidence of practical applications and result thereof. However, fundamentally adopting new ides is a cultural issue within organizations, communities, societies, etc. (see the figure later).

When planning for the future in rapidly changing environments we should get radical transformations happen into our operations in increasing pace. One way to understand this is that we should move in our time-thinking from the khronos (time as a physical entity) to kairos (time as a personal challenge) (Ref. Christian Mayeur).

Kairos is a non-linear challenge to proactive development-decisions. In today’s situation this requires a broad and multi-disciplinary collaboration among experts and non-experts. Networks with relational ”hyperlinks” may break linear time concept (khronos) and open ways to new multidimensional and nonlinear quality of time (kairos): This makes it possible to operate at this moment and context so that our human reality and unlimited creative omnipotentials meet. Life becomes an interactive experience and coexistence of paradoxical things and events and insoluble problems (oxymoron) from where unlimited creativity may liberate.

Development takes place within different scopes (see figure).
At all these levels the developments are unique. Although these different areas interact it is difficult to liberate from the burden of the existing cultures and behavior. Experts and expert organizations may act as mediators for border-breaking development and even for solving acute crises and conflicts. It is only a question of will and collaboration (Ref. Nobel Awarded Martti Ahtisaari: Nobel lecture text, Nobel lecture video). The will includes that they should start with strategic development plans for themselves.

Qua Vadis quality management standardization?

International committee ISO/TC 176 is responsible organization for the general standardization in the field of quality management. That committee has defined in 2001 a long term strategic plan for the quality management standardization in document “Horizon 2010”. That consists of vision, goals, and strategic intents and strategies.

The whole international standards family of quality management consists of many different kinds of documents prepared by the ISO/TC 176 committee and some other sector specific standardization committees. Now the fourth generation of the ISO 9000 standards is under preparation consisting of amendment of ISO 9001 and revision of ISO 9004

• Amending ISO 9001, “Quality management systems – Requirements” includes only very few minor changes in the text.
• Revising ISO 9004, “Managing for sustainable success – A quality management approach” is a complete rewriting the whole standard in the form of general guidance.

The new ISO 9001 will be published in 2008 and ISO 9004 in 2009. Now draft documents are available.

Although the situation seems to be reasonably good in general and the basic ISO 9000 standardization (ISO 9001 and ISO 9004 standards) have had an enormous impact on the development of quality practices globally, this has not taken place without problems and drawbacks:

• There is stagnation in the development of the ISO 9001 standard. Factually there has been no essential development during the recent 20 years in the standard and no remarkable change is expected during the next 10 years. However, organizational business environments and communities are changing at increasing pace.
• Standard ISO 9004 is too general, vague, and customary and therefore hardly can provide practical guidance or support for organizations’ performance development. There are better other literature and reference material available for this purpose. Assessment model in the new draft standard is theoretical and does not reflect the needs of organizations. It cannot compete with the recognized performance excellence models (quality awards criteria).
• ISO 9000 standardization process is too slow and poorly managed and cannot follow the general development and trends of business environments and society at large.
• Standardization bodies have weak means to control or support the use of the standards. The use of the standards is directed strongly by commercial consulting / certification business but not by genuine business needs.

When we started the ongoing work with the next generation of the ISO 9000 standards we had a strong enthusiasm – at least with the ISO 9004 standard – to develop something different from earlier but later it proved that that was not possible with the existing standardization practices.

In spite of this harmful development in the standardization, however, organizations have all possibilities to get maximum benefits in their realizing ISO 9000 standards with their own proactive activities by:

1. Understanding the ultimate purposes of the ISO 9000 standards.
2. Avoiding the known problems of ISO 9000 applications, and quality realizations in general.
3. Liberating themselves from the enslaving formalism of the standards documents and consultants / certifiers.
4. Taking into account the genuine needs, expectations and environments of the business in question.
5. Applying also all other beneficial references with the ISO 9000 standards. A good way to start to use the ISO 9000 standards is to carry out self-assessment based on some recognized performance excellence model.
6. Challenging to the future by recognizing the weak signals in the standardization in a multi-faceted way.

There are serious problems in the prevailing quality management approaches

There are plenty of cases where established organizational quality management approaches don’t respond to the real needs of the organizations

• Business management is not involved / committed – Quality is only a specialist issue.
• Communication between business managers and quality experts is not effective.
• Quality initiatives are superficial. – Typical distinct quality (management) systems are not business-centred. There are too much copied solutions without innovations. Diversity in quality realizations is endangered.
• People don’t understand – not even experts – difference between the basic concepts of quality management (QM = organization-internal quality of management for excellence) and quality assurance (QA = external communication with stakeholders for confidence).
• There are many different, distinct, and competing quality methodologies on which even quality experts don’t share the same opinions.
• There are many other specialized managerial initiatives competing with quality development.
• Quality initiatives in organizations are certification-emphasized, not for enhancing real business performance. Certification is commercialized and lost its credibility.
• Formal documentation is highlighted instead of a comprehensive management and application of business information and knowledge.
• Too often quality related actions are only reactive and there are very little proactive innovations in the field of quality.
• Quality implementations don’t take effectively into account realities of the modern business environments that relate to the aspects of time, speed, agility, networking, complexity, tacit knowledge, and informal learning and innovation.

In very many cases quality development has not redeemed its promises indisputably.

Are there really any new innovations created for organizations' quality development after Deming, Ichikawa, and Juran? Is the quality profession not able to follow the general development of organizations' business development and trends of the society at large (see figure)? Is it only "Plus ca change, plus c'est la même chose “?

One may recognize the needs for change also through some factual signals:

• There is an expanding critical discussion about the prevalent approaches of quality discipline.
• There are many cases of coping and feeling satisfactory with certain theories, principles, techniques, methodology, etc. that are being tried / used distinctly (“one-leg approach”) and with risks (trepidation), e.g. related to ISO 9000, EFQM or SixSigma.
• There are some new (ad hoc) initiatives also in the quality management standardization (ISO TC 176) presenting business integrated development of quality management.

New principles, tools, and infrastructures are necessary for quality management to take into account modern changed business environments. This includes new crystallized understanding of the foundations and aims of quality profession and integrated approach with multifarious means (“multi-leg approach”).

In practice the new way to organizational quality realizations consists of three key aspects:

1. Integration: Organizations implement effective / efficient and business-relevant quality principles and methodology embedded within their normal business management activities for both strategic management and operational management. Conceptually this means change from quality management (management of quality) to quality of management.
2. Responsiveness: Organizations enhancing abilities to adjust quickly to suddenly altered external conditions, and to resume stable operation without undue delay that is based on dynamic and flexible business management.
3. Innovation: All quality realizations are organization-dedicated solutions. There is no single solution to organizations’ challenges. Organizations strive continuously for new organization-dedicated innovative and unique approaches. Multiple different choices for quality management are encouraged in competitive business environments. That especially emphasizes change from standard approach to organization’s own unique approach.

Carry out appropriate surveys, questionnaires, evaluations, etc. and use advanced on-line web tool

Surveys, questionnaires, evaluations, etc. are very essential activities in all quality integration realizations. They are needed for both operational and strategic management purposes. They may be comprehensive covering organizational entities as a whole or they may be focused on very detailed aspects only (see and click the following figure). Different evaluations are always a part of organizational development.

Key aspects of beneficial evaluation approaches are the appropriateness of questioning phraseology and the technique to collect answers, opinions, responses, etc. from the target audience. Especially the questioning technique and tools have remarkable influence on the answering easiness and percentage. An advanced questioning methodology is, however, more than only collecting information. It functions as a media between specialists and other parties. By means of that kind of tool any specialist can communicate his/her area of expertise that might be difficult to others to understand, and receive valuable information as a feedback. The tacit knowledge that different parties possess becomes visible by using an appropriate assessment tool. Within organizational environments, especially, this comes into question when professional specialist expertise is used in communication with the management, personnel, suppliers, customers, and other stakeholders.

ZEF evaluation methodology was originally developed in Finland at Oulu University as Z-scored Electronic Feedback (= ZEF) tool. Effectiveness of its two dimensional evaluation structure was validated by University of Lapland. Commercial ZEF solution is the product of Oulu, Finland based innovative company ZEF Solutions Inc. ZEF is an all-purpose tool for assessments and comparisons that is suitable for all kinds of organizations.

ZEF is web-based evaluation solution operating as SAAS (Software as a Service). It is a software tool with which one may collect and evaluate information effectively and efficiently from even a big group of people. The visual appearance is easy to use and interesting or even exiting to the end-users. E.g. in Finland ZEF tool has been used by hundreds thousands of ordinary citizens in several cases of general societal interest.

Evaluation made by the ZEF tool includes the following process phases:

1. Construct your questions on the two-dimensional matrix or use customized templates.
2. Send an e-mail invitation to your target group to take part in the survey on the Internet.
3. Follow up the progress of the survey in real time and send reminders to the participants when required.
4. Get graphical reports that present average and variation of the individual answers in two dimensions. (see and click the following figure) Also verbal comments, explanations, questions, etc. may be obtained from the responders.

As an example ZEF tool may be used for an effective organizational self-assessment. It is very easy to apply with different self-assessment criteria, e.g. ZEF assessment application for Malcolm Baldrige short form assessment ”Are we making progress?”. There is also available the “3-In-1 assessment” ZEF application where all aspects of full Malcolm Baldrige and EFQM criteria and ISO 9000 standards have been combined. This application for example has also modified to health care services by using the guidance document CEN/TS 15224.

Another example of using ZEF-methodology was an international study carried out in 2008 by the standardization committee ISO/TC176/SC3 to get information on the significance of time, speed and agility and some other related aspects in organizations' businesses and how the ISO 9000 standards and some other quality management references support those aspects. The web site of the questionnaire is still open for information in the Internet.

Detailed business information is obtained from ZEF raw data through statistical treatments. All individual respondent answers to the query items in the ZEF evaluations are recorded as separate data pieces that are then used for statistical analyses:

• The basic ZEF report presents the means and standard deviations of all respondents’ answers per query items in two dimensions
• The result data may be arranged according Z-score transformation to a normalized form that is useful when seeking to compare the relative standings of items from distributions with different means and standard deviations.
• Answers from respondents may be grouped in arbitrary way or presented as individual answers.
• Results of different ZEF evaluations, e.g. from different points in time, may be compared by using ZEF’s “comparison engine” function.
• Raw data of evaluations may be presented in the formats of Excel (.xls) or "Comma-separated values" (.csv) in order to facilitate the use of more sophisticated statistical tools, e.g. SPSS, for data analyses. 

Challenging against quality burn-out

There is a lot of stagnation, doubts, and even frustration about quality related initiatives in many organizations, e.g. application of ISO 9000 standards and quality awards criteria has routinized into stereotypic rituals. Major reasons for this kind of harmful development obviously include lack of innovation, lack of courage to take radically new approaches, and immense busyness of business people.

What should be done for rehabilitating the whole quality professionalism and discipline?

When implementing quality management (QM), one should reform QM principles and create new effective professional methodology to be employed in a natural and innovative manner integrated with organization-specific business emphases and within contemporary management infrastructures and business environments. General ISO 9000 Quality Management Principles and Core Values and Concepts of the quality award models can be as a good starting point for this development. New business models and emergent technologies may cause problems but may also offer new challenging solutions.

When striving for competitiveness in these circumstances one could underscore the following aspects:

• Recognizing business performance excellence instead of a narrow quality thinking
  
• Striving for flexible realization of quality of management and leadership instead of distinct and vague quality management (i.e. management of quality)
  
• Adopting organizational learning instead of continual improvement
  
• Applying the "systematicity" (systematic approach) of the quality of leadership instead of formal and distinct quality systems
  
• Using business-related principles and actions of the quality of leadership instead of formal and general quality assurance requirements only
  
• Setting stretched business objectives instead of minimum standard requirements
• Aiming at innovative and unique solutions instead of stereotyped systems
  
• Relying on genuine and effective internal business performance self-assessments instead of third party audits and certifications of "artificial" quality systems
  
• Getting advantage of tacit knowledge instead of only records of explicit data and information
  
• Having genuine impacts on the company's quality approach and success by the behaviour of the top management.
  
• Using company's own internal expertise and effective cooperation with world-wide quality experts' network instead of external consultants

Basically, effective implementing organization-dedicated business integrated QM does not call for any extra measures or investments. General information sources e.g. ISO 9000 standards and performance excellence models can still be utilized as reference materials innovatively. Experiences have proved that it is always worthwhile to improve the existing management systematicity of the organization based on a systematic methodology. For QM the organization must be always ready but never finished. Managing for sustainable business success through quality is only possible if the responsible top manager is aware and actively and practically committed in his / her personal role to get quality happen in the whole company. Additionally, it is needed a productive cooperation between business leaders and quality experts.