I've seen a lot of negative discussions and feedback about the ASQ in some threads here and - Well in many places. I myself question the value of the ASQ to many people.

I am starting this thread with the request that negative comments NOT be posted. This is not meant to be a bashing thread. So - PLEASE don't voice your complaints here.

This is my question:

If you were given the ASQ to 'Reform', what would you do? Where would you start? If you're brave enough and can spend the time, explain why you would make any 'Reforms' you propose.

What would be your GOALS?

Thanks for the opportunity!

I have two main issues I would like to "improve."

Reinstate ASQ members as the boss and the paid staff as underlying "infrastructure" of ASQ.
Currently, the top paid staff run the ASQ functions as their personal fiefdom and appear to merely tolerate regular members as a necessary evil to fund the grandiose schemes of the paid staff. The salaries of the top paid staff have escalated while the membership has dropped. The elected ASQ volunteer officials appear to have very little voice in the "money making" operations of the ASQ (publishing and training stand out.) Regular members don't know if the elected officials have abdicated responsibility and authority or if they have been "sidestepped" by the paid staff.
Provide much more visibility and transparency into the inner workings and financial transactions of the ASQ for the members.
Recently, a small step has been made to publish the minutes of Board meetings on the public ASQ website. Many of us are aware of the gulf between what actually occurs in a meeting and what gets transferred to minutes. The most recent example of non-transparency is the by-laws change discussed and passed by the Board ("railroaded," if some of the dissenting voices are to be believed) before any hint the topic was before the Board and with absolutely no request or opportunity for regular members to present views for the Board to consider in their deliberations.

A constantly galling issue of transparency is in the finances of the ASQ. Members currently only have access to the broad points covered in the IRS Form 990, available from the IRS, not offered freely to members by ASQ officials. Form 990 is woefully short on most details, while the details that do show up raise disturbing questions - primary among them the number of paid staffers at ASQ who receive more than $50,000 a year in salary (36 staffers got more than $50,000 in 2002) and the salary and benefits of the top paid official which verges on $343,000 in the year 2002 (most recent available Form 990.) The top five paid officials of ASQ grossed nearly $1,000,000 per year in salary and benefits in 2002.
In addition, these were the top five highest paid independent contractors for ASQ in 2002 (doesn't include lesser paid folk):

Steve Salzman, Eudora KS, got $235,000 in instructor fees in 2002
Michael Jones of Charlotte, NC got $309,240 in instructor fees in 2002
Versatile Visuals of Olathe, KS got $173,917 in instructor and consulting fees in 2002
Andrew West of Burnie, MD got $190,548 in instructor fees in 2002
Six Sigma Engineering of Gold Canyon, AZ got $117,812 in instructor fees in 2002

Not surprising. The disparity of wages continues to widen in every company and organization. Is a 'CEO' really worth 15+ times what an 'hourly worker' is paid?

Don't get me started with who gets paid how much and why.

Not surprising. The disparity of wages continues to widen in every company and organization. Is a 'CEO' really worth 15+ times what an 'hourly worker' is paid?

Don't get me started with who gets paid how much and why.I agree. I am a teacher's aide for middle school special education. I serve 18 "clients" in varying numbers throughout the day.

I'd like to see a CEO come to my school and do what I do. My job is the most stressful I have ever held, for a number of reasons that I shall not divulge for confidentiality purposes. I will say my duties have run from facilitating the most basic of human functions to reteaching chemistry and physics to students who didn't get it during the class lectures.

I get paid just under $14K a year, with a four year degree in Applied Technical Education. I will improve the pay to $28K a year when I get certified (I took the Praxis exams yesterday) and get my own classroom, IF vocational education budgets are not cut and my job disappears again.

Not knowing much about the inner workings, I offer this.

Abolish the HQ. Use the money saved to improve/increase the virtual quality world, including training, and increase funding for the local sections.

Make major paper presentations via webinar.

Increase efforts to show how down-to earth (no hype, please) quality efforts can have a very positive effect on the bottom line.

Recruit and use the abilities of members to teach other members and nonmembers more effectively. If the money spent on consultants and trainers was leveraged in this way, how much more value would have been gained?

ASQ ought to conduct itself as the "shining star" in all things quality. This implies:

1. Good use of statistics in its internal metrics, and in its press releases.

2. Good use of quality management techniques. Granted, this is potentially difficult as their are competing techniques (see 4 below).

3. Good use of surveys of the members and the general public, with open publishing of survey results and what the results were used for.

4. Open diversity. Open discussion of the pros and cons of various quality tools and management techniques.

5. Implement the recommendations from the Partnership Study. This includes opening the visibility of the Board, and developing a "Tylenol Response" to respond to new issues.

6. Implement a formal feedback mechanism, similar to standard Corrective Action Manangement systems where members may raise issues and concerns and have some hope of them being tracked, statused, and feedback provided as to resolution (or why it cannot be acted upon).

I remember my first introduction to the ASCQ. It was from a work associate who asked if I would consider membership. Prior to that I had not heard of ASQC. Each year ASQ has a membership drive to recruit new members but it is, in my opinion, restricted to current members recruiting new members. This means nothing has changed in the past 25 years to promote ASQ in the eyes of the public. Kind of reminds me of the secret societies of the past.

So what I would like to see happen is to start a promotion on national television to let the public know who we are and what we do as well as what we offer. I firmly believe that such a stradegy would work very well to enlarge public knowledge and increase membership. :2cents:

These are some good starters. Any other ideas?

I'd like to see a formal initiative to help community business leaders make relationships with schools. This would help spread the word about ASQ, and help get resources to the schools--I hope.

For both parties, the first step to building partnerships seems to be the hardest to make.

I'd like to know what were the courses some of those guys were presenting? On the average I made about $3500 per week not including expenses when I was self employed, take that and multiply it by 52 weeks it comes to about $182,000 per year (I didn't do 52 weeks of deliver of course, but I did do quite a bit). The #1 listed guy was making over $4500 per week, that ain't chump change! Mike Jones (a former ASQ President was getting nearly $6000 per week).

How can someone get into the ASQ cherry patch?

Let's remember the thread title: If I was given the ASQ to 'Reform', I would...

From Randy's post, I must 'assume' that Randy would provide a way for people to get into some sort of ASQ 'Preferred' Trainers or Consultants list.

I tried but was informed that I lacked "approporiate competence and competencies" by both the ASQ and thier primary provider.

Guess I'm just a dumb ol' Grunt after all.

My suggestion would be to remove snottiness and arrogance that becomes inbread within professional organizations.

Discussion of training fees and such is split and is at: Starting your own school - Training (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=11621)

I think a very real question here is - should ASQ be in the "training game"?

I believe that ASQ should be (and their website states they are) an "impartial resource". Even Paul Borawski (the head staff guy) acknowledges that the minute they give a training contract to one provider, all the other providers can say ASQ is no longer being impartial and ASQ is "in competition" with them.

So that begs the question - should ASQ be in the business of conducting training? No only does it bring up problems with impartiality of suppliers, but impartiality towards specific quality methodologies.

So that begs the question - should ASQ be in the business of conducting training? No only does it bring up problems with impartiality of suppliers, but impartiality towards specific quality methodologies.


And that, no matter what one thinks of Six Sigma, is what IMO has really driven a wedge between many members and ASQ. Not only did they embrace a single school of thought, they put the picture of one of the main trainer/consultants on the front page of Quality Progress. Bye bye impartiality, and bye bye a lot of credibility with it, IMO. I do not have anything against six sigma per say. I have made myself clear on that point elsewhere. But, the way that ASQ embraced it smelled very funny, indeed.

So, what is the reform needed here? Concentrate the training aspect on the internet and the sections. Take the training to the masses, where it is cheaper for them and therefore more likely to be widely attended. Utilize and train ALL of the tools, and refrain from developing philosophy-specific certifications.

There, I feel much better now...