"The paradox of Quality"

A couple months ago, Anthony Lenarz of GE Vernova posted an article in LinkedIn called "The Paradox of Quality." His point was much like that of an Innovation Manager I once worked with who joked, "You and I are mortal enemies, because we pull the company in opposite ways. You work in Quality, so you want to eliminate variation; I work in Innovation, so I want to inject change everywhere." 

This is exactly what Lenarz says:

"Quality is a profession that thrives on confusion. It's like being told to walk in a straight line while doing the tango. On the one hand, we're told to standardize everything, make it all uniform, reduce variation to a whisper. It's a bit like telling a jazz band to play the same note over and over again—consistently—until they all fall asleep.

"But on the other hand, in the same breath we say, 'Take the initiative, drive change, and continually improve.' It's as if we want our jazz band to suddenly break into a solo, each musician playing a different tune but somehow making it all sound like a symphony."

It's funny, of course. And I love the image. But in the end I disagree with the basic point. And I think it misrepresents (no doubt unintentionally) what Quality is all about. 

Part of the error is that Quality isn't really about standardization, or reducing variation, or any of those things—any more than profitability is "really about" eliminating waste. Those are just means to an end. The real heart of Quality is a lot more basic: Quality means getting what you want. And all the rules and procedures in the whole Quality toolchest are just gimmicks to get you there.

Maybe it looks like I'm playing games by drawing this distinction, because we all know that in practice implementing a Quality system means doing work in a consistent way and guaranteeing a consistent output. You can say that's just a technique, but it's still what we do every single day.

Yes that's true, but there's an issue of scale. To the extent that Quality does involve reducing variation, it means making each widget like the next in the same production run, which in turn simply means executing the design correctly. If you make one-foot rulers, Quality means (among other things) that Customer A doesn't get an 11-inch ruler on the same day that Customer B gets a 13-inch ruler. It means that when you sell a one-foot ruler, that's what you deliver.

This doesn't impede innovation, because innovation isn't about shipping rulers that might randomly be 11 inches long, or 13 inches long, or somewhere in between. Innovation is about developing new kinds of rulers, to meet new needs: yardsticks, meter sticks, other kinds of measuring tools. 

It's true that there is no foolproof procedure for designing brand-new ideas, any more than there are any other foolproof processes. But when you succeed in designing these new measuring tools, Quality ensures that your design gets to the customer correctly, as you planned it—and not mucked up by a bunch of random accidents.

Of all Lenarz's tantalizing images, I think the one that best captures the true interrelation between Quality and Innovation is the symphony. A symphony is only possible if there is a score, if each musician is using the same score, and if each musician is well-enough trained to produce a consistent melody from that score, without fail, during every single performance. Also, each instrument has to be tuned (calibrated), and good enough for orchestral work (fit for purpose). Standardization, the reduction of variation. and the other traditional Quality tools go so far.

At the same time, there is a level of craftsmanship and mastery that comes in below the level of the score, where each musician has to make subtle accommodations to get the best sound out of each instrument. This craftsmanship depends on individual skill and cannot possibly be standardized. Therefore Quality systems impose requirements for training and expertise. 

The conductor interprets the piece in ways that are always consistent with the score but that nonetheless express a personal spirit or vision. This vision and interpretation are part of the job of Leadership, which is one of the principles undergirding Quality management.

And Innovation? Well after all, who writes the score? This is the role of the composer, be it Mozart, Beethoven, Wagner, Copland, or Salonen. Without innovation—without a score—the members of the orchestra sit idle and have nothing to do. But it takes all of the orchestra's Quality processes to deliver that score to the audience.

   

__________