Leaderboard

Quality Circles: A group of team members who do the same or similar kind of work get together and identify few issues/ concerns and deliberate together on the probable improvements and development. This can be adopted across organization, people on job are the one’s knows the techniques to manage and improve the quality and this will build in a philosophy. The one who is on job is the most trained person to bring improvements provided they take sometime out to sit back and understand the day to day issues, identify the concern areas, analyze and find resolution to the problems through simple, innovative and unique ideas. Yes, it is very much relevant even today in the organization: One such framework that was implemented in IT infrastructure services is provided below. We created a governance mechanism to ensure that the ideas are logged, tracked till their completion. We clubbed it with the organization roles to enable the small group employees to work together to identify the related problems and they are arriving at the improvement and where required we have the seniors/supervisors and required support team assistance for the completion. In this framework we came across of self-motivated who were limited number met frequently with their own interest to identify areas of improvement at a periodic interval arrived at action items and reported the status of the same with their supervisor. The status update was presented with and probable solutions which were arrived with detailed analysis such as severity of the problem, urgency of the problem, and frequency of the occurrence. Supervisor would evaluate each of these solutions vs problem and take it up to the management to get the necessary approvals on investments, change management and consensus for implementing the solutions. I remember those days with my colleagues when we implemented this and it was a huge hit because everyone could relate to it as it went well with the organization structure. And it also got the traction as there was rewards and recognition associated with it along with the strong governance model. Since quality circle is more a voluntary activity it can die if it does not get the management support. An Agile organization is very similar to the quality circles in my view. There can be improvements identified with in Chapter, Tribes and squad. Quality circles and agile sprints both work towards coming up with best solution. There is a cross functional team approach for quality circles, and we see the same with mix of roles coming together in sprints to achieve a common objective and bring in improvements sprints after sprints In agile organizations we do see self- motivated individuals and self organized teams who are empowered to come together by their supervisors to solve business problems. There is so much of similarity in the way quality circles relates with Agile. In both the approaches we see the focus is on customer and organization objectives. The concept of quality circle is not time bound, it will be applicable across times, we may use different names to make it relevant as per need. It can be called in various names and adopted in different forms but the spirit of it remains the same.

Quality Circles suggested by W. Edwards Deming in Japan in1950’s, they became active in the early 1960’s in Japan. In 1960, Kaoru Ishikawa and the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers presented the Quality Circle concept. It reached the United States when Lockheed introduced Quality Circles in 1974. The Quality Circle refers to the set of individuals who meet on a regular interval to discuss the work-related problems. The quality circles are small in group which is led by the manager or the supervisor who presents the solutions to the management. The purpose of this Quality circle is to motivate employees to voice out their problems which is affecting their work area. Help them to improve the performance as well as the organization as a whole. Mostly the focus will be on Occupational health, safety, improvement in the working environment and manufacturing process. The size of the quality circle will be six to twelve employees from the same work area come together to form these circles. These employees receive good training in problem solving, group process and statistical processes Quality circles are formed to fulfil the following. · Contribute towards the organization growth. · Provide healthy work environment for the employees · Explore the hidden strength of the individuals and depict the infinite opportunities. · Improve the product quality as well as the productivity of the organization. · Improve the team skills, Confidence, Capabilities, and Creativity through trainings and participation of volunteers in the circles. Quality Circle concept still relevant in Organizations practicing Lean Six Sigma? In fact not much as per my opinion. Quality Circles is a TQM (Total Quality Management) concept. Quality Circle contains representatives from all the departments who communicates the Quality problems to the organization to resolve the same. It is an old concept, because only members of Quality Circle will participate and discuss about issues and improving the Quality Process. Only higher management members of QC can take decisions. In Six Sigma, unlike TQM, even the employee at the every level of the organization can participate as team members in the Six-Sigma projects in improving the quality process. There is no hierarchy or designations can take decisions. Advantage is that the employee who is actually doing the job is involved in the process improvement and obviously no one knows the process better than him. Six-Sigma is more focused on a particular issue or pain area that needs to be addressed and resolved immediately whereas TQM quality circle focus more on the positive improvement in quality, but by how much it never says.. Six-Sigma is known to deliver better and effective results as compared to total quality management

Quality Circle is also coined as Quality control circle which is participatory management technique where small circles are formulated who meet up periodically to evaluate the Quality or to solve the problem at hand. The concept came into picture in 1950 and later formalised in 1962 & then widely propagated and further structured by Kaoru Ishikawa. The Quality Circle had 4 steps to identify & solve a problem Plan- Do- Check -Act The concept is existing now with Kaizen and Six Sigma methodologies , as Quality circle have the advantage of continuity & the circle remains intact from project to project The Quality circle used 7 quality tools which are even now in use and helps understand RCAs better and help control and improve Quality Ex : Cause & Effect diagram, Pareto charts. Process Mapping , Graphical tools ( Histogram, frequency diagram, pie charts), Run Charts & Control charts, Scatter plots , Correlation , Flow charts As the aspects of Six Sigma would be Define, Measure, Analyse , Improve, Control for any gaps identified in the existing process & thereby fixation , recovery & control, Likewise from a Quality circle prerogative , now we have separate Process management, Process excellence teams who evaluate quality time to time & thereby try to run simulation and help business to improve efficiency . Few Advantages of Quality Circle 1. Detection of Quality Deviation 2. Acceptance by Customers 3. Timely delivery 4. Improve productivity Hence the concept is even relevant now !!

Quality circles was introduced by Kaoru Ishikawa also known as “Father of Quality Circle” Quality circle is where small group of employees that meet regularly to plan and carry out process changes to improve quality. In other words, these Quality circles were empowering employees for open communication to identify, analyze and solve problems. Recently, organizations have adopted various techniques to solve the business problems and we always hear that Lean Six Sigma has become outdated. However, we will have to be aware that Lean Six Sigma is still a successful approach and only thing we may experience the difference in the approach. May be not an end to end approach like DMAIC, DFSS rather we keep using the different tools wherever applicable in our projects Similarly, Quality circles. In most of the organization Quality circles have fine tuned the approach to suit their needs. Concept is practiced across industry, but we hear out with different program names. Before we talk about relevance of the concept, Lets understand the characteristics of Quality circle: The problem-solving groups who connect in the Quality circles often have authority to make and implement decisions that affect their area of work. In general, Quality circles follow PDCA cycle for continuous improvement projects PDCA: The Plan, Do, Check, Act process These are good examples of large organizations using quality circles. Below are some examples on how a typical quality circles can provide benefits to the workplace. Pointing Out Issues - Employees often know of lots of minor and major issues, but they assume that someone else is working on getting them fixed. When a quality circle meets, they can discuss these types of issues, and take ownership of them to move forward with a positive result. Collaborating on Solutions - One of the biggest examples of how a quality circle can help is that it is the actual employees who are working to come up with solutions to problems. Those who deal with the problems are typically the best people to fix it. Brainstorming Ideas – In a Quality circle meets, everyone will be familiar with the position so they can more easily propose their ideas to each other. Brainstorming ideas is a great technique to arrive at the best possible solution to a problem Quality circle tools: Quality circle can us any type of the tools to improve their roles. Some of the tools are used to discover the root cause of the issues and how to fix them Flowcharts Scatter Plots Run Charts Graphical Tools Process Mapping Tools Pareto Charts Fishbone Diagrams Example of alternative Quality circle approach: We know that industry has adopted various quality methodologies and one among them is ACE (Achieving competitive Excellence) from UTC organizations. Where these Quality circles are named as Quality Clinics. · Quality clinics is to encourage groups for open communication around quality issues · Quality clinics analyze product and process nonconformance, determine root causes and ensure changes to the standard work is in place · Real time triage investigations performed Overall Quality circle is used in every organizations but in a different means.

A quality circle or quality control circle is a group of workers who doing similar work, voluntarily meet together on a regular basis to identify improvements in their respective work areas using proven techniques for analyzing and solving work related problems for achieving and sustaining excellence leading to mutual upliftment of employees as well as the organization Quality Circles Characteristics : It is a method of continuous quality improvement by direct involvement of employees in quality Operate on the basic principle to drive employee participation in decision making and problem solving improves the quality of work Voluntary group of persons and the group consists of three to twelve members in number. Meet on regular basis and work on similar tasks Share area of responsibility and solve problems related to work History : Quality Circles have been around for approx. 60 years. It was suggested by W. Edwards Deming in Japan during the 1950’s, which became active in the early 1960’s in Japan. In 1960, Kaoru Ishikawa and the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers introduced the Quality Circle concept and flourished in Japan By 1974, it was picked up by the United States when Lockheed introduced Quality Circles In India Quality Circles is promoted by QCFI - Quality Circle Forum of India and was introduced initially into the healthcare arena. Quality Circle Tools Ishikawa Diagram displays hierarchies of causes contributing to a problem The Pareto Principle or the 80/20 rule, analyses different causes by frequency to illustrate the vital cause PDCA or Deming wheel describes as Plan, Do, Check, Act, as described by W. Edwards Deming PDCAW. Relevance of quality circles where there is scope for group based solution for work related problems Manufacturing firms Factories Firms Schools Hospitals Universities & Banks

A quality circle is a group of people who do the same or similar work, meet regularly to identify, analyze and solve the work-related problems. Quality circle is a people building philosophy based on the fact that an employee doing a particular job is biggest expert of that field and thus is in a better position to identify, analyze and resolve the work related problems through their ideas. In reality, Quality Circle is a practical application of McGregor’s theory ‘Y’ which says that people enjoy and take pride in their work if they are given the right environment with a decision making power. Generally, It consists of minimum 3 and maximum 12 members in number. Quality Circle Groups are usually small in numbers and led by a supervisor or manager and they present solutions to management and also implement the solutions themselves to improve the performance of the organization and also to motivate the employees across the organization. These groups were most popular in 1980s but today also such groups exists in the form of Kaizen Groups etc. Typical areas of interest for Quality Circle members are improvement in Product design, Processes, Occupational Health and Safety and workspaces etc. These are the formal groups in organization who meet regularly to discuss the problems and they are by competent people and Industry experts in problem identification, analysis, basic statistics and solving the problem in a structured way. Origin of Concept : The foundation of this concept was put in by Dr. W. Edward Deming during his working with Allied Occupation of Japan in 1950s and then Professor Kaoru Ishikawa built upon the work done by Deming and defined this term in detail in his book “What is Total Quality Control ? The Japanese Way” and later on it was circulated across the Japanese Industry by JUSE (Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers) in 1960. Nippon Wireless and Telegraph was the 1st Japanese company to deploy the Quality Circle concept in 1962. Key Elements of Quality Circles : Mechanism of Quality Circle : Do Quality Circles Exist Today as well ? Yes, Concept of Quality Circles exist even today (though the wave was more prevalent in 1960s and 1980s) as it’s a philosophy that uses the wisdom of the people on Ground to solve the problems. In Manufacturing Sector, the knowledge and experience of people on ground or at Gemba like operators and workers, foreman and line managers is used to get an idea and same is considered in problem solving / arriving at the final solution as they are the best judge or witness of the problem happening at the ground day in and day out and their thoughts must be given considerable importance even if we are using other techniques like Six Sigma / Lean (Lean also Focus on importance of Gemba / Genchi Genbustu). Normally in Morning / Evening meetings with the workers, this approach is promoted and asked to look at the problems with the help of 7 QC tools and training is also given in line with that. In Service Sector as well, people on Ground discuss the problems in huddles, team meetings and work together to fix the same at ground level. Though the concept is not so formal in Services Industry but initiatives (Like Idea generation / A3 / Kaizen / SPS / Lean Workshops / Solution Programme / Hackathons / War on Errors / Power of Zero etc.) are taken in the organizations and participation from people on ground is encouraged in solving the problems as small – 2 ideas sometimes cause big improvements at the organization level. In Agile way of working also, development team is given the total ownership for development of the softwares guided by the Product Owner and this development team acts as a Quality Circle Only (<10 members team) and this team acts in a self organized way, solve problems with collective wisdom and take decisions independently keeping Product Owner in loop to improve the product quality. Companies where this Concept is working : BHEL, Kirloskar Oil Engines, Mahindra & Mahindra, Bajaj Auto, HMT, Maruti, Modi Xerox. SBI, Hindustan Aluminum, Modi Rubber, TELCO, LUCAS-TVS, etc.

MoSCoW method MoSCoW method is a prioritization method that was developed by Dai Clegg in 1994 for use in Rapid Application Development (RAD). It is also known as MoSCoW prioritization or MoSCoW analysis. The term Moscow itself is an acronym from the first letter of each of four prioritization categories: M - Must have S - Should have C - Could have W - Won't have The interstitial Os are added to make the word pronounceable. While the Os are usually in lower-case to indicate that they do not stand for anything, the all-capitals MOSCOW is also used. The Moscow method is a prioritization technique used in management, Project management, new software development, business analysis to align with stakeholders on the importance they place on the delivery of each requirement. MoSCoW Method is often used where a deadline is fixed so that the focus must be on the most important requirements, and as such is a technique commonly used in software development (agile) approaches such as Rapid Application Development (RAD). Scrum and Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM). Source: www.kecg.co MoSCow Method plotted on Kano Model of Customer Satisfaction MoSCoW Method Example: Project: Creation of a Professional website for a Law firm Purpose: People can register and track their court cases Below are some of the drawbacks or criticisms of MoSCoW Method: · Does not help to decide between multiple requirements within same priority bucket · Subjectivity on how to rank competing requirements: No explanation on why something is ‘must have’ rather than ‘should have’. · Ambiguity over timing, example- Won't have category: whether it is not in this release or won’t be considered for ever · Huge room for Bias- New features over technical improvements

MoSCoW Method While creating a product or running a project there are lot of specifications and solutions which the project team can drive to achieve the outcomes or the desired objectives. While it is desirable to get all the recommendations or specifications implemented but practically is not feasible to achieve availability of resources and time available in hand. Running and Managing a project is all about making a choice and managing what you will, and you won’t get done in the given schedule. Without prioritization a project can become a list of endless tasks and no control over the timelines and benefits may shrink due to inclusion of non-critical deliverables being prioritized. There are different approach and methods to prioritize deliverables. One of such method is MoSCoW method. It is used for defining and managing requirements, tasks and deliverables in a project. Under MoSCoW method requirements/deliverables are categorized into 4 buckets: Must-Have Deliverables/Deliverables · This is the minimum outcome which a project must deliver. Even if the project has to undergo changes or cut due to other business requirements or demand these are the minimum deliverables which the project must deliver on the target date for the project to be closed as successful. Delay on these deliverables will jeopardize the project. It is either going to take the project off track and may not meet the end goal. Question to be asked while reviewing “must have” requirements- Will this project be successful without this feature? If answer is no then the requirement or feature is “must to have”. Example Implementation of a Sourcing system- It should provide a functionality to raise purchase requisition, create or amend purchase order Should-Have Requirements/Deliverables · This type of deliverable is almost as important as a Must Have, but it’s not vital to the success of the project. The project doesn’t solely depend on this deliverable. As a project leader you might not want to leave it out, as it has a significant impact on the project, but in the end, it can be done if the need arises. Again, leaving out this deliverable from scope means a lot of work⁠ from managing stakeholders to finding alternate solution as it may have dependency on must have goal. Question to be asked while reviewing “should have” requirements- Is this requirement important and this requirement wait and picked up later or in subsequent release? If answer is yes, then the requirement or feature is “should have”. Example Should provide a workflow or vendor portal where purchase order can be shared with vendor and all the queries between vendor and procurement happens over the vendor portal Could-Have Requirements/Deliverables · The difference between a should-have requirement and could-have requirement is just the degree of benefits it delivers or alignment to the overall goal. A could-have deliverable is something which is nice to have, and you may like but is less important than a should-have. In case of contingency could have deliverables and requirements can be dropped easily. Question to be asked while reviewing “could have” requirements- Is this requirement necessary for the core function of the project or product? If answer is no then the requirement or feature is “could have”. Example E invoicing to happen from the tool itself via PO flip Will Not Have · These are all the requirements and deliverables those are collected at the brainstorming stage but are not finalized due to priorities or are not feasible to be picked up for implementation. These are all noted down so that can be attacked during subsequent releases. It is important to place all these requirements under “will not have” to ensure teams and stakeholders know that these are not a priority for this project and if these come up later can be shown that they are kept out. This allows team to focus on the requirements that are important to the project. Question to be asked while reviewing “will not have” requirements- Will this requirement has any importance to be prioritized with the current release? If answer is no then the requirement or feature is “will not have”. This is Wishlist for the team. Example Catalogue purchase through the system or implementation of P Card which can be picked up as next release or addition Another approach for prioritization while gathering requirements or defining deliverables for a project is Kano Model. Again these requirements can be categorized into Delighters, Wants and Musts. Here Delighters are good to have, Musts are Must Have and Wants are Should have.