Could some of you advise where one would start with reading or studying Juran? I am currently going through his book "Quality By Design." I get the impression that I am starting in the middle of his work. Any ideas will be appreciated.

Bill

Bill,

I believe it is as good a place as any. As far as I know, it was one of his earlier books, aside from the Quality Handbook, which is a collection of bits and pieces from his earliest efforts (I believe mostly papers, articles, and the such) and alternate reading sources from multiple authors. It may be the reason why Juran was stereotyped as a borrower of ideas rather than being an originator of them (I don't know what merit that deserves). Either way, he presents a lot of good information, and generally gives the steps involved with solving issues/formulating plans where other authors offer only the idea without clearcut methods (perhaps for good reason as there are many ways to skin a cat).

Regards,

Kevin

Bill,

You may want to try this:

http://www.juran.com - Link Was: /research/articles.html

Regards,
Don

Five years later...

The Deming SoPK thread is doing quite well, it appears. But - What about Juran? How does Juran and his theories differ from Deming?

Five years later...

The Deming SoPK thread is doing quite well, it appears. But - What about Juran? How does Juran and his theories differ from Deming?

You might have missed it but this was discussed a bit inthe SoPK thread at post # 121 here: http://www.elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=71129&postcount=121

I'm not qualified to give an in-depth discourse on their differences because IMO to do so one must know them both very well. On the surface, however, I have found Juran to be easier to read and seemingly coming more from the practical side of things and Deming to be a tougher read and coming more from the philosophical side. As I mentioned earlier, while Deming's books are indeed popular I cannot imagine they have sold more, or been of more help to more people, than Juran's Quality Control Handbook. If I had to choose just one of the two to "follow" and learn from, I personally would choose Juran, but luckily, this is not the case. JMO

If I had to choose just one of the two to "follow" and learn from, I personally would choose Juran, but luckily, this is not the case. JMO

Ah, but Mike I believe that your choice is very close, in that for a "handbook" on the mechanics of a quality program (how to put the quality tools into practice) Juran's handbook is a wonderful resource. But I believe that Deming's books are a better choice for "learning" quality (from the philosophical view, or as a way of answering the why do we do that type of questions). But that's JMHO.
:D

Another measure may be look at how many companies and quality professionals have adopted the qualilty systems and methodologies form Juran versus Deming. I also think Feigenbaum was a big contributor with his TQM.
While I think many companies espoused the Deming philosophy for a time, it was mostly lip service based upon Ford's adoption, and the "White Paper" televised interest. After all Toyota was beating the pants off US automakers, and continue to do so. Corporate thinking usually likes "how to" nuts and bolts, so Juran was widely the preffered guide.

Pesonaly,
My journey inside and outside of the quality circle has been influenced by the full gambit of "so called" quality guru's such as Deming, Juran, Senge and many more.
Deming in my view is more structured in his approach to systems thinking yet Juran certainly expands and compliments upon ideas that have been around for a while.
All of these guru's compliment each other for sure.
Wallace.

I agree, Wallace. Everyone has made a significant contribution and tend to compliment one another's achievements as much as there work complements each others. Juran must have come from some theory to generate his 'how to' books. Fiegenbaum as well. Could it be any other way?

What is lesser known, perhaps, is where Juran learned/developed his theory. Could this be why he is considered the 'how to' guy and Deming the 'theorist'?

Kevin

What is lesser known, perhaps, is where Juran learned/developed his theory. Could this be why he is considered the 'how to' guy and Deming the 'theorist'?

Kevin

Could this be a difference attributable to someone that was left-brain oriented (Juran) -Vs- someone more right-brain oriented (Deming).

Someone that was more left-brain dominate would have a tendency to value and understand the mechanics of a process or system, where as a right-brain dominate person would visualize and value the theory/philosophy behind the process/system.

This is not to say that Juran did not have a theory, but that the theory was not the important factor for him. Of greater import were the results that came from proving the theory. Once these results were proven (at least to his satisfaction) they became new laws of understanding (do this, get this result). And with every variance to those laws, a modification is made to the law to allow for (or recognize) this variation.

Where for Deming who may have in-fact witnessed the same (or similar) results, it was the theory (and gaining a better understanding of it) that remained of importance. And of course as variations in outcome arose, the theory is modified to allow for the variation.

Of course there are many other factors that could explain this, but it was fun to postulate anyway.
;)

Could this be a difference attributable to someone that was left-brain oriented (Juran) -Vs- someone more right-brain oriented (Deming).
. . .
Of course there are many other factors that could explain this, but it was fun to postulate anyway.
;)Deming would have loved your theory, Dave, because it takes individual variation into account!:applause:

Could this be a difference attributable to someone that was left-brain oriented (Juran) -Vs- someone more right-brain oriented (Deming). Someone that was more left-brain dominate would have a tendency to value and understand the mechanics of a process or system, where as a right-brain dominate person would visualize and value the theory/philosophy behind the process/system.

Dave,
Again you've said it in a way that forces clarity.
I agree, when you imply, the need for the left and right brain oriented thinkers. A system needs that balance of the dreamers and the realists.
Wallace.

Dave,
Again you've said it in a way that forces clarity.
I agree, when you imply, the need for the left and right brain oriented thinkers. A system needs that balance of the dreamers and the realists.
Wallace.

Yesterday I was fortunate in having a sit-down with an esteemed colleague, Dennis Anderson. He deeply appreciated the analogy I shamelessly borrowed from Wes, who remembered Kermit's saying "It's not easy being green."

Dennis also remarked that I have come some distance from the black-and-white view I had on quality systems when I worked at a particular machine shop of our mutual acquaintance until a few years ago. Now, I realize (especially outside of manufacturing) that I cannot reasonably expect right brain thinking--even though my premises are based on mathematic, profit-oriented results. I know now I must walk and talk more slowly for them and be patient. I must learn to strike a balance, and to keep looking at events through a long-range, wide-angle lens.

I am not a patient person, so this is challenging. It's hard to keep coming back for silliness when the answers seem so clear. Nonetheless, we are dealing with the same seven human vices that have been in play since before Plato.

So, I agree that I must strive for an appropriate mix between the dreamer and the realist, somehow without becoming a fatalist! :agree1:

Jennifer

How can the right balance be applied?
Is it possible to get to the point where, we have all the right numbers in place being viewed as a big picture?
I've been in many brainstorming sessions where my visual communications skills have been employed. I 've sat back and listened to all of the very skilled statisticians, I've taken notes and formed a big picture as a visual representation.
The screaming stops and I often hear that lone statistician voice say, "That's what I was trying to @#$%^&* say". The team leader turns and say's, let's use this format as a default within these meetings.
Yeah, I'm the big picture member of the team, the dreamer. I remember going through a few Sick sigma courses some years ago and, I had the same issues.
It seems to me, the problem with infusing statistics or numbers in general is that, they are linear by nature while, systems thinking is mostly non-linear by nature.
Wallace.

How can the right balance be applied?
Is it possible to get to the point where, we have all the right numbers in place being viewed as a big picture?
I've been in many brainstorming sessions where my visual communications skills have been employed. I 've sat back and listened to all of the very skilled statisticians, I've taken notes and formed a big picture as a visual representation...Yeah, I'm the big picture member of the team, the dreamer. I remember going through a few Sick sigma courses some years ago and, I had the same issues.
It seems to me, the problem with infusing statistics or numbers in general is that, they are linear by nature while, systems thinking is mostly non-linear by nature.

Here, I think, is the meaning of being "green" and finding that out is surely difficult. For me, it's a life journey. You and I (and so many of our associates) share this abilty to see real-life, 3-dimensional manifestations and events based on mathematic projections, quality costs for example. I can imagine company costs as though they are the spinning number wheels of an old-fashioned pinball machine. They whirl around, dinging frantically... (oddly enough, I'm not good at math)

But truly, most people are not being trained to think this way. Even in business, where finance projections rely heavily on formulae and math-based decisions, managers are, I assert, not being taught to at once see the forest and the trees.

I was struck with a (page 52-53) passage from Peter Drucker (the famed business management guru) in his book "Managing in the Next Society": The problem with service-business accounting is simple. Whether it’s a department store or a university or a hospital, we know how much money comes in and how much money goes out. We even know where it goes. But we cannot relate expenditures to results. Nobody knows how.

What? Lots of us know how. But the fact that Peter Drucker says "nobody" knows how (to know if we have done the right thing) speaks volumes. It means to me there is still a gap between how we (in our field) think and how "the real world" thinks. This is the place where paths must somehow meet.

How and where they will meet is yet to be determined, and I expect this will be a zen-like question for each organization to answer. But answer it they must, for I observe the competitive friction is increasing, not decreasing. For businesses to compete with each other on costs (and inevitably product pricing), they must contend with forces that may be unequal; some will reduce operating costs through offshoring labor, while others will seek to reduce expensive errors and keep their more expensive American employees.

This is the part we can play, and I think it's becoming more of an advisory role. "This is what it would cost to do things this way, and that is the option you have." For corporate leaders to decide their paths among the industry siren songs of gimmicks and inadequately planned contracts with cheap offshore labor, such advice may be their last links to reality.

Their choice, of course, ends up being out of our control. Every horse can reserve the right to die of thirst.

But truly, most people are not being trained to think this way. Even in business, where finance projections rely heavily on formulae and math-based decisions, managers are, I assert, not being taught to at once see the forest and the trees.

Peter Drucker (the famed business management guru) in his book "Managing in the Next Society": The problem with service-business accounting is simple. Whether it’s a department store or a university or a hospital, we know how much money comes in and how much money goes out. We even know where it goes. But we cannot relate expenditures to results. Nobody knows how.
some will reduce operating costs through offshoring labor, while others will seek to reduce expensive errors and keep their more expensive American employees.

This is the part we can play, and I think it's becoming more of an advisory role. "This is what it would cost to do things this way, and that is the option you have." For corporate leaders to decide their paths among the industry siren songs of gimmicks and inadequately planned contracts with cheap offshore labor, such advice may be their last links to reality.
Why do you suppose a modern USA business executive says to himself,
"My costs are too high. It must be my labor costs. I can lower my costs by finding someone who can do the same thing, only cheaper."

What is there about the "siren songs" which make them so much more attractive than reduce expensive errors and keep their more expensive American employees.
I think it is basic greed - the same greed that

makes folks listen to and implement Ponzi schemes,
convinces folks to make money on the backs of unfortunates who lose their homes in foreclosure (I saw one in my mailbox today - "buy homes for 30% to 50% below market value BEFORE the foreclosure. We tell you how to identify the people in money trouble!")
deludes people into spending 10 or 20% of their pay on lottery tickets instead of a sound investment program
I think the saddest thing is that many business "leaders" and executives have the same mindset as addicts in that they need to face their own personal bottoms before they are ready to accept a change in their lives or their businesses. How many times have you heard salespeople (and the folks who "train" them) say,
"Sales is a numbers game; you have to call on 10% more customers to get 10% more sales."

Besides an obvious misunderstanding of statistics, these guys are guilty of failing to examine ALL the aspects of a sale

market demand
competition,
product/service quality
quality of the sales pitch,
clear identification of prospects,
etc.
They engage in mindless superstitions

5 calls before 9:00 am
10 calls after 5:00 pm
no lunch until I make a sale
never leave a prospect without a referral to another prospect
etc.
Are the salespeople any more foolish than the executive who consistently stretches his lunches to two hours (with or without a client in tow) and fires employees or docks their pay when they are ten minutes late?

Ineffective business leaders don't implement change before they lose the company or the job for the same reason many addicts don't kick their habits before they die or go to jail:
because they don't perceive they have a problem, let alone seek a solution.

Ineffective business leaders don't implement change before they lose the company or the job for the same reason many addicts don't kick their habits before they die or go to jail:
because they don't perceive they have a problem, let alone seek a solution.

Perhaps this IS where SoPK comes into play:

1. Knowledge of Variation, that is, a knowledge of common cause and special variation.
2. Knowledge of Systems, that is, understanding that all the parts of a business are related in such a way that if you focus on optimizing one part, other parts may suffer.
3. Knowledge of Psychology, that is, what motivates people.
4. Theory of Knowledge, that is, how we learn things.

By understanding what it takes to motivate these managers "that don't get it" [Could it possibly be as simple as greed? I don't think so. I believe that there is more than a little pride involved as well.] Coupled with understanding what it takes for others to learn, having systems vision, and being able to separate common cause from special variation; shouldn't we have the tools for teaching and motivating people towards the proper goals?

I see the stumbling block that many systems-thinking visionary's face as being the same one that Mike S. was alluding to very early in the SoPK thread, that of understanding how to take SoPK and put it into "action" (i.e. How do I take this knowledge and transfer/relay it to others so that it may be of value to the company?). Maybe this is where some of the tools that Juran, Fiegenbaum, Crosby, et al come into play. The hard part is for us to learn how to make the transition from theory to implementation, instead of "blaming" the others for not "seeing the forest".

Perhaps there IS a bit of "I've seen the enemy, and they are us".
:(

Perhaps this IS where SoPK comes into play:

The hard part is for us to learn how to make the transition from theory to implementation, instead of "blaming" the others for not "seeing the forest".

Perhaps there IS a bit of "I've seen the enemy, and they are us".
:(Walt Kelly's alter ego, Pogo, had a lot of pithy comments. Many other commentators have had similar insights over the years. The reason they are so widely quoted is because they contain an essential kernel of truth that can be instantly recognized and applied to other situations.
One quote I recall
For ye have the poor always with you -Matthew 26:11 seems equally applicable to the named group as well as other groups such as criminals, incompetents, and just plain "clueless."

Dave is correct, our task is to do something to make a change for the better, not just bemoan the status quo.

Another pithy and true quote comes to mind:
"A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step."
-Unknown
In the language of our 6S brethren, we're probably talking about small "kaizen events" rather than "Kaizen blitzes."

My suggestion is to behave like the boy when he failed to see the emperor's new clothes - speak out. Write those suggestion letters to clueless bosses. Write letters to the editor about political or social issues. Join activist groups. Read those proxy statements you get for stocks you hold - if you don't understand them, find someone to explain them to you. Then when you understand those proxy statements, make the informed decision about whether the executives have done a good enough job in the stewardship of your investment before giving them the keys to the treasury.

Even as venerable an institution as Ann Landers often said
"No one can take advantage of you without your permission." Stand up and be counted!

I percieve we've learned at the same household.
Wallace

Duran vs Deming

Personally , I think Duran would take him in the fifth ... :biglaugh:

Sorry, I had to...It was the first thought that came into my head...Don King promotes Duran vs Deming in the World Title

Greg B

Duran vs Deming

Personally , I think Duran would take him in the fifth ... :biglaugh:

Sorry, I had to...It was the first thought that came into my head...Don King promotes Duran vs Deming in the World Title

Greg B

No mas, no mas! :bonk:

Why do you suppose a modern USA business executive says to himself,
"My costs are too high. It must be my labor costs. I can lower my costs by finding someone who can do the same thing, only cheaper."

What is there about the "siren songs" which make them so much more attractive than
I think it is basic greed - the same greed that

makes folks listen to and implement Ponzi schemes,
convinces folks to make money on the backs of unfortunates who lose their homes in foreclosure (I saw one in my mailbox today - "buy homes for 30% to 50% below market value BEFORE the foreclosure. We tell you how to identify the people in money trouble!")
deludes people into spending 10 or 20% of their pay on lottery tickets instead of a sound investment program


I've seen the word "greed" used here in the Cove by several writers, recently as well as in the past. Exactly what is "greed"?

Am I greedy if I shop at Wal-Mart to get the best price on some auto parts or groceries instead of shopping at the local Mom and Pop shop?

Am I greedy if I buy a Kia car instead of a Chevy?


Am I greedy if I automate some of my processes and in doing so have 5 fewer jobs for people in my company?

If I want a raise, even though I already make good money, am I greedy? Does this change if I want the extra money to buy a bigger boat and not to contribute to the less fortunate?

Who exactly is "deluded" into buying lotto tickets, and by whom? Does the buyer not bear any responsibility to investigate the chances of winning/losing?

My point is not to pick on Wes, but to make people think before using such powerful words as "greed", because, like beauty, it often may be in the eye of the beholder.

I've seen the word "greed" used here in the Cove by several writers, recently as well as in the past. Exactly what is "greed"?

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, "An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth: “Many... attach to competition the stigma of selfish greed” (Henry Fawcett)."

With exception of the "I want a raise" example (based on "I want" -Vs- "I need"), I'm not sure that any of your examples would fall into this definition.

Some examples that might define this in business can be seen in the "10 Worst Companies in 2003" thread under "Miscellaneous Topics". Some other examples could be the organization that lets lower-level hourly employees go because of a slowdown in sales, but then lobbies for a raise for senior executives. Or, an organization with a 5 (or more) layer deep upper management structure, that initiates a reduction in force at the production worker level, prior to expending any time reviewing the system for waste.

I do believe a factor that often gets overlooked is that of pride: "I (and I alone), as the CEO, am responsible for the success or failure of my business." Or the "if it wasn't made here, it's can't be good" philosophy.
:mad:

I would further add to ddhartma's comment the following definition:

"Greed has been defined as excessive desire, or avarice, a rapacious desire for more than one needs or deserves. It can take different forms, including: love of money, desire for power or fame, voraciousness for food, drink, sex, and material possessions."

When desire goes to the point of potentially harming yourself (e.g. gambling addiction) or others (e.g. unethical corporate behavior), then it becomes greed.

Dave and Rob have good answers, but Mike's comment deserves a little closer examination.

For the sake of example of a company that will not be too much affected by what I write, let's examine if a greed factor exists with Walmart or the folks who purchase there.

Folks in small towns bemoan the fact that when Walmart builds a big box halfway between two towns, small businesses in each town suffer from the stress on low prices, large variety of goods, and expanded hours of business.

The difference in regard to greed is that the profits from all those sales are siphoned out of the community, never to return.

When a shopper selects Walmart instead of the local stores, does he understand that economic fact and that he is contributing to a cash drain from his community?

Does he understand that instead of having ten or twenty businessmen in each town capable of contributing their time, talent, and money to the local community (ranging from sponsoring little league teams to offering store windows to display high school sports stuff to working diligently in local churches and service clubs), he may have only one or two Walmart managers with sufficient income (but probably not the time) to perform those community services?

Does he understand that many of the goods offered in a Walmart are purchased from manufacturers whose production is outsourced to locations where employees do not receive benefits beyond a wage scaled to the low cost of living in that location (at the cost of jobs in his own town, maybe even his own job)?

Whether we regard it as a political issue or a social issue or an economic issue or strictly a Quality issue, events thoughout the world are brewing to a boil-over point.

Couple that with environmental trends which have scary implications (a report today said the Pacific ocean is heating to a point where it will kill all the living coral in Australia's Great Barrier Reef within 50 years), and we see that doing nothing is the same as actively working against our community and our planet.

I think this might be getting too political now, but I will say this:

In 1975 climate "experts" (reported in Newsweek and elsewhere) said we were facing a global cooling catastrophe.

I assume you never shop at Wal-Mart?

Must everything about them be negative? What about the jobs created, and the money saved by the consumers?

What would you propose we do -- outlaw Wal-Mart, force them to buy from only certain suppliers, or ask consumers to mass-boycott them, or what?

I think this might be getting too political now, but I will say this:

In 1975 climate "experts" (reported in Newsweek and elsewhere) said we were facing a global cooling catastrophe.A lot more data available now than 29 years ago.

I assume you never shop at Wal-Mart?Accurate assumption. Or Sam's Club, either. I'm not a hypocrite.

Must everything about them be negative? What about the jobs created, and the money saved by the consumers? Net jobs? Net salaries? I suppose all the folks who lost their jobs at the businesses in the towns got hired at Walmart? What about the store owners? If you don't have a job, saving money when you don't have any to spend in the first place is sort of a moot point.

What would you propose we do -- outlaw Wal-Mart, force them to buy from only certain suppliers, or ask consumers to mass-boycott them, or what? I only ask that each person thinks through the consequences of his actions. In the same way we advocate performing a FMEA before beginning production, so ought we to advocate a FMEA before beginning production on our lives.

As I wrote somewhere, it is a truism we will probably always have poor people, thieves, selfish people and altruistic people. I can only be responsible for my own actions, but that doesn't mean I can't try to persuade (not force) others to join me. At my age, I'm closer to the end of my life than the beginning, but it doesn't mean I don't care about those who will come after me.

As for politics - we are talking ideas, not partisan politics. Check all of my posts. You will never find mention of a party or a candidate.

When polio vaccines became available, would you have labeled it political to advocate adminstering it to children who might otherwise suffer an agonizing disease? Several of my playmates caught polio. They ended their lives living in iron lungs. As a matter of fact, I can't even remember which party was in power when we did that.

If tomorrow, we discover Toyota is granting free license to produce its hybrid engines to all carmakers which could result in a 30 to 40% reduction in the use of petroleum world-wide, as well as a corresponding decrease in the price of such engines, would you consider it a conspiracy against the petroleum industry and indirectly, against the USA?

Steering us back to the subject of greed as a motivator:

Wes, Are you suggesting that it was Sam Walton's greed that drove him to develop Wal-Mart? I for one believe that it was merely one man's search for "a better mouse trap". So many people put down the so called "big box stores" but aren't they really just capitalism (a free economy) at work (i.e. One person's search for a product that people want, and yes perhaps what drives that search is the desire to make money, but is that wrong?

If the desire to make money is an evil thing, then why do any of us entertain thoughts of working, starting our own business, authoring a book, painting a picture, et cetera? Are all of these desires based on greed?

Additionally, no one has mentioned the hundreds of thousands of dollars that Wal-Mart donates to local communities to such things as literacy groups, churchs, and even a lawn mower for my son's mowing service when he was 10 years old.

I know that in Marion, Indiana we currently have a Lowe's, a Home Depot, and yet we have a few local lumber yards that have not lost business because they have specialty items and services that the big box stores don't provide. The free enterprise system works, if we allow it (and I don't believe that it's all fueled by greed).
;)

Steering us back to the subject of greed as a motivator:

The free enterprise system works, if we allow it (and I don't believe that it's all fueled by greed).
;)

DD,

I can't give you more karma yet, but I can (and will) say "bravo" to your entire post. :agree1: :applause:

As I wrote somewhere, it is a truism we will probably always have poor people, thieves, selfish people and altruistic people.

Why do we come to the Cove? Why do we learn the teachings of Deming, Juran, and others of their kind? Why did Deming and Juran teach what they did? Is it all simply so we can become "better people", or is it also so we can learn to improve ourselves and our companies financially?

If Toyota follows the teachings of some quality guru(s) and comes up with and patents a substantially better, cleaner, more fuel efficient engine than any currently available and because of this they capture 20% more of the auto market, is Toyota greedy and selfish? Should we punish Toyota, or boycott them?

I know that in Marion, Indiana we currently have a Lowe's, a Home Depot, and yet we have a few local lumber yards that have not lost business because they have specialty items and services that the big box stores don't provide. The free enterprise system works, if we allow it (and I don't believe that it's all fueled by greed).
;)

David, I think that there is a lot in your statement. What WalMart, and the other big boxes, are changing in our economic climate is the way that we view our marketplace. Many of the items that we once bought from the mom and pops are now seen as commodities. One thing that I have found in ALL of the big boxes is that, frankly, their service, and often their merchandising, stinks, advertisments to the contrary notwithstanding. In fact, that is exactly why Wally World features "employees" (actors?) in their TV advertising, IMHO.

Now, where does that leave the mom and the pop? Easy, they specialize and offer better service and unique product offerings, which demand a premium. Anyone hear that we are moving to a service economy? That goes double for retailing. People will still pay for "quality". In this case the requirements that equal quality are great service and unique, specialized products.

Painful? You betcha. The question now is: will there be enough demand for specialized services and unique products to give our hard working men and women good jobs? It will take time, but I think that the answer will be yes. I just wish it would happen right now.

As far as greed goes, I like to think of the whole situation as everyone wanting something better - "greed" is a little harsh.

Craig

David, I think that there is a lot in your statement. What WalMart, and the other big boxes, are changing in our economic climate is the way that we view our marketplace. Many of the items that we once bought from the mom and pops are now seen as commodities. One thing that I have found in ALL of the big boxes is that, frankly, their service, and often their merchandising, stinks, advertisments to the contrary notwithstanding. In fact, that is exactly why Wally World features "employees" (actors?) in their TV advertising, IMHO.

Now, where does that leave the mom and the pop? Easy, they specialize and offer better service and unique product offerings, which demand a premium. Anyone hear that we are moving to a service economy? That goes double for retailing. People will still pay for "quality". In this case the requirements that equal quality are great service and unique, specialized products.

Painful? You betcha. The question now is: will there be enough demand for specialized services and unique products to give our hard working men and women good jobs? It will take time, but I think that the answer will be yes. I just wish it would happen right now.

As far as greed goes, I like to think of the whole situation as everyone wanting something better - "greed" is a little harsh.

CraigInteresting additions, all. I once met the old man, Sam Walton, when he was still alive and driving his own pickup truck. Perhaps his heirs have perverted his original concept of bringing "big city variety" to rural areas.

I recall reading Sam used to visit all his stores personally and would take time to talk to each "associate" individually. I wonder how many of the heirs have done that? Old James Cash Penney (his real name) used to do the same with his J C Penney stores. He wore his suits off the rack from his own stores. Do you think any of the Walton heirs wear clothes from their stores?

I often ask myself (cynic that I can sometimes be) WHY there is so much publicity Additionally, no one has mentioned the hundreds of thousands of dollars that Wal-Mart donates to local communities to such things as literacy groups, churchs, and even a lawn mower for my son's mowing service when he was 10 years old.
for hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations out of billions of dollars in profits.

Assume that Walmart donates $1,000,000 for every BILLION in profits. If you make $100,000 in takehome pay, how many folks would get excited about you donating $100?

As for my definition of greed, I'm content with the one from Webster's 1913 editionDefinition: [n] reprehensible acquisitiveness; insatiable desire for wealth (personified as one of the deadly sins)
[n] excessive desire to acquire or possess more (esp material wealth) than one needs or deserves Let me add that profit is nice, but not at the expense of someone's misery (see my comment about buying properties for deep discounts before the actual foreclosure.)

Before you jump in and say, "It's not my fault they're in financial trouble." Think about the consequences of what activities you engage in that could have led to their downfall. Was it the guy who owned the local hardware? How about the family that loses everything because of uninsured illness? Are you the one who approved hiring contract workers with no benefits and therefore no safety net?

Regarding the lawnmower - wonderful! I let my neighbor's kid use mine (electric start) for his business (he does old people in the neighborhood for free.) Who deserves the sainthood, him or me? My vote is on him. Actually, I get superb maintenance on my mower in return. Whenever he returns it to the shed, it looks as good as the day I brought it home from the local hardware.

The point of my post was not to launch an all-out boycott of Walmart or any other business, it is only that we think through the consequences of our actions, from buying a gas hungry Hummer (when we only drive on paved roads) to driving ten miles to save sixty cents on a tank of gas at the Walmart pump.

There are rich people who "get" it and those who don't.

Ray Kroc, the founder of McDonald's, belonged to the same Shrine temple as I. I don't recall any attempt on his part to get publicity for the fact he used to volunteer time to man a Salvation Army kettle during the Christmas season (standing for hours in the cold at a windy Chicago intersection.) His widow remembered - she donated a large portion of her inheritance to the Salvation Army in her will. Could you imagine Donald Trump standing on a corner without a gaggle of TV and print photographers (gathered by Trump's PR people)?

Many of us were brought up in the same atmosphere as some nefarious politicians around the world - they all seem to ask the same ubiquitous question, "What's in it for me?" when asked to put their influence behind a project. My contention is the focus should shift to "What's in it for the community [and the world?]" Does that make me too goody goody?

I often ask myself (cynic that I can sometimes be) WHY there is so much publicity for hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations out of billions of dollars in profits.



Maybe there is "so much publicity" because someone is always bashing them for not giving, or not giving enough, so they publicize it to counter the bashing. Wouldn't you?

I have no association whatsoever with Wal-Mart except that I shop there from time-to-time. But, because of your post I went to their web site and found this (full info here http://www.walmartstores.com/wmstore/wmstores/Mainnews.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@2071302844.1077649308@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccccadcjjgkkfhmcfkfcfkjdgoodglh.0&pagetype=news&categoryOID=-8771&catID=-8248&template=DisplayAllContents.jsp)

(Added later: I'm no finance wizard, but I calculated they gave 1.9% of profits to charity last year. Someone can check me on that. What do other "model companies" give?)

Overview
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. believes each Wal-Mart store, SAM'S CLUB and distribution center has a responsibility to contribute to the well being of the local community. Our more than 3,400 locations contributed more than $150 million to support communities and local non-profit organizations. Customers raised an additional $75 million with the help of our stores and clubs.

Philosophy
Wal-Mart's Good.Works. community involvement program is based on the philosophy of operating globally and giving back locally. In our experience, we can make the greatest impact on communities by supporting issues and causes that are important to our customers and associates in their own neighborhoods. We rely on our associates to know which organizations are the most important to their hometowns, and we empower them to determine how Wal-Mart Foundation dollars will be spent. Consequently, our funding initiatives are channeled directly into local communities by associates who live there.

Implementation
Wal-Mart's approach to community involvement is unique, combining both financial and volunteer support. We encourage our associates to be involved in their local communities and to support the programs that are making a positive difference. In addition, associates conceive and carry out creative fundraising efforts on behalf of local charitable causes, particularly Children's Miracle Network (CMN) and the 170-plus children's hospitals nationwide that receive support from CMN.

Recognition
The American public appreciates Wal-Mart's community-involvement efforts:

In 2003, Wal-Mart was named by FORTUNE magazine as the most admired company in the United States.

In 2002, Wal-Mart was presented with the Ron Brown Award for Corporate Leadership, a presidential award that recognizes companies for outstanding achievement in employee and community relations.

Forbes magazine recognized Wal-Mart in 2002 as being one of the most philanthropic companies in America.

In 1999 and 2000, Americans named Wal-Mart as the company they think of first in supporting local causes and issues, according to Cone, Inc.

Wal-Mart ranked among the top five corporate foundations by giving in 1999 and 2000, according to the Foundation Center.

Some of our giving achievements for last year include:

More than $88 million in community grants. Stores, clubs and distribution centers frequently conduct fundraisers for local nonprofit groups, such as Boys and Girls Clubs. The Wal-Mart Foundation may match funds raised by each location. More than 60,000 grants were awarded through the matching grant program in 2002.

More than $265 million in 15 years for Children's Miracle Network (CMN). Wal-Mart is the No. 1 corporate sponsor of CMN and raised more than $34 million for CMN in 2002. Every dollar raised by each Wal-Mart store, SAM'S CLUB and distribution center throughout the year is distributed to a local CMN-affiliated hospital. These hospitals treat 17 million kids in North America each year.

More than $184 million in 19 years to United Way chapters. The Wal-Mart Foundation matches associate payroll deductions and presents a gift to the local United Way chapter. In 2002, United Way chapters received almost $19 million from the Wal-Mart Foundation.

$80 million in scholarships since 1979. Every store and club awards a $1,000 Sam Walton Community Scholarship to two college-bound high school seniors. In addition, the company offers scholarships to associates and their dependents. Last year, $6.7 million in scholarships were awarded to deserving students. Education-related giving totaled more $11.4 million.

Maybe there is "so much publicity" because someone is always bashing them for not giving, or not giving enough, so they publicize it to counter the bashing. Wouldn't you?

I have no association whatsoever with Wal-Mart except that I shop there from time-to-time. But, because of your post I went to their web site and found this (full info here http://www.walmartstores.com/wmstore/wmstores/Mainnews.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@2071302844.1077649308@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccccadcjjgkkfhmcfkfcfkjdgoodglh.0&pagetype=news&categoryOID=-8771&catID=-8248&template=DisplayAllContents.jsp)

Overview
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. believes each Wal-Mart store, SAM'S CLUB and distribution center has a responsibility to contribute to the well being of the local community. Our more than 3,400 locations contributed more than $150 million to support communities and local non-profit organizations. Customers raised an additional $75 million with the help of our stores and clubs.

From the same website
Net sales for the twelve months ended January 31, 2004, were a record $256.3 billion, an increase of 11.6 percent over net sales of the similar prior year period. Income from continuing operations after minority interest and taxes for the twelve months increased 13.3 percent to a record $8.9 billion or $2.03 earnings per share, up from $7.8 billion or $1.76 earnings per share in the same prior year period.

By my calculation, $150,000,000 is nearly 6 hundredths of 1% of total sales or about 1.7% of profits AFTER taxes. OK - make that a $2000 donation from a guy earning $100,000 takehome pay! (of course his heat, light, mortgage, and real estate taxes haven't been deducted as in the Walmart figures)

(I helped a neighbor one year who had a broken foot drive his pickup truck and all his barbecue stuff to his church's annual picnic. The AVERAGE family in his church donates about 5% of their gross income to charity [not just their church.] They rotate the picnic each year to a different nursing home where all the residents and staff and their families are invited. I was there the whole day and the closest thing to proselytizing was the prayer before the meal. No collection plates either!)

I find it interesting Walmart takes credit for money people drop in a Salvation Army kettle at their store locations.

:topic: For those who are seriously interested in exploring the concept of where unbridled greed can lead, I direct your attention to an essay written at the height of the Viet Nam War, The Tragedy of the Commons by Garrett Hardin, 1968 (a copy is available here: http://dieoff.com/page95.htm) This may help lead you to the conclusion these are not new thoughts, nor are they easily resolved. As I have continually said, "Keep your mind open to new data which can help you expand the depth of your knowledge." (Not too different from SoPK, Huh?)

Wes,

Even if Wal-Mart were the evil empire that is out to ruin us all, it is only one of a horde of big box chains that ultimately will be our undoing.

What is the systemic problem(s) that we need to address? What are our metrics to determine if we have improved the system (in-fact what metrics do we use to ensure that we have identified the right problem/root cause)? How do we educate the masses to change their paradigm and lock in our changes?

So far all we have done is argue the perceived problems/benefits of Wal-Mart, if we are going to "change the world" how do we ensure we are changing the right things, and what steps do we take to begin the transformation?

But, we digress.

Posts 1-21: Juran vs. Deming
Posts 22-24: Greed
Posts 25-34: Walmart (with growing soliloquy)

The oneupmanship is fascinating to behold.

Someone call the diatribal elders! :lol:

(NOTE: Tongue is firmly in cheek)

But, we digress.

Posts 1-21: Juran vs. Deming
Posts 22-24: Greed
Posts 25-34: Walmart (with growing soliloquy)

The oneupmanship is fascinating to behold.

Someone call the diatribal elders! :lol:

(NOTE: Tongue is firmly in cheek)Does it get me points if I say I have used Juran's books when the occasion warranted?

From the same website By my calculation, $150,000,000 is nearly 6 hundredths of 1% of total sales or about 1.7% of profits AFTER taxes. OK - make that a $2000 donation from a guy earning $100,000 takehome pay! (of course his heat, light, mortgage, and real estate taxes haven't been deducted as in the Walmart figures)

As I have continually said, "Keep your mind open to new data which can help you expand the depth of your knowledge." (Not too different from SoPK, Huh?)[/color]

What interests me, Wes, is that you start cynically assuming (obviously not knowing) that Wal-Mart only gave 0.1% of profits to charity and you berated them for it. Now, when it is shown that you underestimated their giving by a whopping factor of 17 you still unapoligetically berate their giving. Do you check to make sure that every business you use gives more than 2% of their profits to charity? What level of giving gets your personal okay? What does your grocer give? What does your hardware store give? I assume you must know.

I did not ask about personal giving, I asked, "What do other "model companies" give? That can be a "model company" in your book or as recognized by the general public. Seems like Wal-Mart is one of the better givers among public companies.

IMO the idea of keeping one's mind open is good advice, though. :agree1:

Small type for a small part of the whole topic:I did not ask about personal giving, I asked, "What do other "model companies" give? That can be a "model company" in your book or as recognized by the general public. Seems like Wal-Mart is one of the better givers among public companies.
IMO the idea of keeping one's mind open is good advice, though. :agree1:You are correct Mike.
One part of my statement seems to have escaped notice
The difference in regard to greed is that the profits from all those sales are siphoned out of the community, never to return.
It is not only the profit dollars allocated to charitable purposes I was writing about - it is the profits that went toward buying goods and services for the owners - dollars that also stayed in the community, but evaporate from the community when the profits go back to the Walmart heirs. Dollars that were deposited in local banks, providing funds to be lent out to other community residents, are now swept up each day and spirited electronically to central holding and investing facilities. Does the local manager of a Walmart, who may soon receive a promotion (and transfer) to a larger Walmart elsewhere have the same attachment and devotion to his community as the business owner? Maybe. I hope so.

A true cynic might label those charitable dollars as a form of advertising. (Especially when someone spends extra money (also deductible) to publicize the fact they gave a donation.) Maybe. Maybe not. Personally, I never thought one way or the other about the motives behind publicizing a donation before this current thread.
Interesting fodder for another thread in the Coffee Break Talk, perhaps.

Rob Nix is also more correct than either of us - we have strayed very far afield from the original Juran vs. Deming. I think the two aspects of Quality represented by Deming and Juran CAN work together. The ideal practicioner is the person familiar with both and the insight to figure out which is more pertinent for a given situation.

Rob Nix is also more correct than either of us - we have strayed very far afield from the original Juran vs. Deming. I think the two aspects of Quality represented by Deming and Juran CAN work together. The ideal practicioner is the person familiar with both and the insight to figure out which is more pertinent for a given situation.

While I have some rebuttals I'll refrain from stating them lest this go on forever, so you got the last word.

Okay, so what did Deming or Juran say, if anything, about the issue of business giving back to the community?

Didn't both men help to improve and even create some mega-companies?

After his death, did Deming leave anything tangible of his "empire" to charities?