posted 13 June 2000 02:31 PM               

Hummmm. I really do not know the source of the request, but I will answer as best I can (exactly which question do you need answered)?

Personally, TQM is a misnomer that probably should have not been used in the first place. It was, in the 70's, a mis-translation of the Japanese term in use at the time, I believe (but am not sure) that it was taken from Feigenbaum's book title (perhaps Kevin could shed some insight).

Myself, I have a certain philosophy that I think should be followed in business and personally. Those are the thoughts I try to convey here when the opportunity presents itself. Thus, they are my thoughts that may (or may not) be prevalent among others here. I do try to share, and enjoy the feedback.

If you are reading my posts and responses, I assure you they are mine and mine alone. I just hope that if one, just one, has benefited, I am grateful.

posted 14 June 2000 08:23 AM               

When I read the question, the first thing that popped into my mind was the information presented in Masaaki Imai's "Kaizen". In his book, he is very deliberate in mentioning TQC (or CWQC) in Japanese thinking is very different than in Western cultures. This is in keeping with Don's recollection. When the Japanese think of Total Quality Control, they are not thinking of things like Inspection Technologies as is often the case here in the States. We relate Quality Control practices with Detection quality practices. Japan correlates TQC with Kaizen. When you read about TQM, they often describe the Seven Statistical Tools. In Japanese Kaizen, these same seven tools (and seven new ones) are described. The philosophy is also the same. IMHO, our definition of TQM is the same as Japan's definition of Kaizen (TQC or CWQC).

The roots of Kaizen as near as I can tell go back to the post WWII days in Japan. Influence of Deming and Juran helped to reshape the Japanese businessman. Sometimes overlooked, Feigenbaum's influence was also quite impactful.

His book Total Quality Control was released in 1951, and in it he details all aspects of Total Quality practices. He does not limit his book to the traditionally thought of Quality Control Practices (I have reread this book several times and find it to be the best source of information, especially for the novice Quality professional). Armand spends a good deal of time dealing with Process related topic and Process Control Engineering. This is definately in keeping with Kaizen.

Imai's book gives a great deal of credit to many notable Japanese figureheads in Quality. My best recollection is that he tended to give Kauru Ishikawa the greatest amount of credit in the TQC push. Ishikawa, a contemporary of Deming, Juran, and Feigenbaum was influenced by these men, and, these men were equally influenced by him. It could be that TQM as we know it was compiled by several great Quality gurus who, knowingly or not, contributed to it.

Well, just some thoughts coming out of my head. I think Don's comments are appropriate. TQM is a misnomer. It is perhaps a Western acronym for Kaizen.

Regards,

posted 24 June 2000 06:01 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul Morrow:
Either that or I'm so old I'm losing my memory

---

1. I blew out my memory during the heady days of the late 1960's and the early 1970's. (Here - smoke some of this...)

and

2. I have old timers disease. Leave me alone - I'm an old man.... What did you say???

posted 24 July 2000 09:18 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul Morrow:
Gary
Do you now work in Hollywood? I can remember being exposed to the term TQM before the mid eighties. Either that or I'm so old I'm losing my memory

---

I thought mid-80's was about right. I was in school and co-oping when they started the QC circle thing, "EIG" Employee involvement groups and then I remember the TQM acronym. Could be we were behind the times, but I thought that TQM was the jump from "Quality department is responsible for quality" to "Quality is everybody's job"....I must admit, prior to the 80's I wasn't in industry so I don't have a Quality memory prior to about '83.

Laura

posted 24 July 2000 03:13 PM               

I was actually first 'exposed' to the TQM thing in the mid 70's. Of course, the employer at the time did not have a clue as to what it was or how to deploy the philosophy (needless to say, I did not either). It was not until the mid 80's that my exposure was completed (although in the wrong and most useless way).

These days, my thoughts are my own and I do not much care for the TQM guru's around now. Seems most are only interested in making a name for themselves.

posted 28 July 2000 10:21 AM               

I agree also, Roger. I am neither impressed with nor tend to agree with these so-called 'quality' gurus of present day. They seem to spend more time trying to reinvent the wheel than pass on tried and true theories. While I disagree with Deming, Juran, Slater and others on some minor points, if you take their theories as a whole, combine and adapt them to your current situation, learn from their example, you should be successful.

To anyone who wishes the 'quality' path, I have a little ditty I use to help separate the wheat from the stalk:

Do not read what people say and interpret of Deming (or the others), read what Deming (and the others) actually said!

It remains to be seen who makes the next big step in TQM. My bet is that it won't be someone in the U.S. - again

My bet is on those developing countries that need innovation and cannot find it. When a world economy is running as this one is, it is those that are in the most need that innovate the best. Just MHO.