(Images snipped to fit in Cove software limits)
Question ...
I'm doing Management Review as per ISO 9001 Std requirement and ... "Upper" Management is doing Strategic Planning on the side ...
Problem is : Quality Manager (me !) is not invited ... causing frustration not to participate ,<image snip>, questionning the competence of people who is participating in it<image snip>, and questions about efficiency of the management review process<image snip>. For me, it's like they have a second (or even worse, a hidden) agenda.<image snip>
Am I right ?<image snip> What do you think ?<image snip> The Human Resources Manager, a real good guy (I'm sarcastic here)<image snip>, has succeed to influence the Upper Management (God that they are naive!)<image snip> that individuals are part of the "Middle Management" eg Production Manager (I'm not kidding you !<image snip>), Quality Mngr.<image snip> and Purchasing Mngr<image snip>. However, each of these persons listed has minimally a bachelor's degree and a Profesionnal title (which some of this "Upper Management" have not) and a minimum of 10 years experience.<image snip>
When asked why I do not participate (not being invited), we're told that it's because they're talking about sales ... Bull****<image snip>. When some details are shown from my boss, we can see clearly that they talk about orientation involving quality, and other issues ...<image snip>
Is it me who does not understand what a strategic planning exercise is ?
I'm asking myself serious questions ...
First, find a quiet place with a comfortable chair, a favorite beverage, and RELAX for a bit. Then come back to review the situation with cold logic, NOT emotion.
Let's parse the points in your post and consider them one by one - priority isn't an issue, because we'll cover them all in a short time.
I'm doing Management Review as per ISO 9001 Std requirement
Great! Who else in the organization is helping you? Who else even knows you are performing such a review? In most well-run organizations, Management Review is a collaborative exercise in which actual top management is in the loop to consider the data gathered and make decisions about any suggestions from staffers and set actions and evaluation processes for those actions. Do you, independently, have the power to implement actions? If not, Management Review needs some more collaborators with such authority.
and ... "Upper" Management is doing Strategic Planning on the side ...
So what? Strategic Planning for future activity can be mutually exclusive from Management Review of existing processes. In fact, in most well-run organizations, it is a separate process of
"If we do this [thing], what's the best outcome? the worst? the most likely?"
and different from consideration of review of existing activities, determining:
"Is this activity proceeding according to our existing plan? Is it giving satisfactory results? Is there a reason we should try to change it? If it's not proceeding according to our original plan, why not? Should we change the plan?, the equipment? the training and evaluation of the training?"
Problem is : Quality Manager (me !) is not invited ... causing frustration not to participate <image snip>, questionning the competence of people who is participating in it<image snip>, and questions about efficiency of the management review process<image snip>. For me, it's like they have a second (or even worse, a hidden) agenda.
<image snip>
I fail to see the "problem" - you talk about the "strategy planning" and not being invited, but you haven't given us info about who is involved in Management Review. If the "top guys" (whoever makes that designation is immaterial) who have authority to implement changes are NOT involved in the Management Review, the Management Review is not Management Review, merely a staff task of auditing (gathering information) for presentation to bosses who have that authority. Maybe EVERYONE (including you) in the organization has a flawed definition of Management Review.
For me, it's like they have a second (or even worse, a hidden) agenda.<image snip>
The top bosses may very well have an agenda separate from what we in the quality profession normally consider Management Review. So what? It is NOT a part of Deming's SoPK that everyone in the organization be involved in planning, only that the actions set as a result of that planning are disseminated throughout the organization.
Am I right ?<image snip> What do you think ?<image snip> The Human Resources Manager, a real good guy (I'm sarcastic here)<image snip>, has succeed to influence the Upper Management (God that they are naive!)<image snip> that individuals are part of the "Middle Management" eg Production Manager (I'm not kidding you !:mg, Quality Mngr.<image snip> and Purchasing Mngr<image snip>. However, each of these persons listed has minimally a bachelor's degree and a Profesionnal title (which some of this "Upper Management" have not) and a minimum of 10 years experience.
<image snip>
The formal education level of bosses has nothing to do with their fitness to be bosses. It is often the case in certain industries that high level staffers have more specialized formal education than bosses. The average quality manager holding a certificate from ASQ has more training and education on statistics than most CEOs. The drug giant in the next town from my home is loaded with PhD and MD staffers, while few of the top bosses have either degree (more likely they have MBA.)
Corporate politics is rarely "fair." In many organizations, it can be very cutthroat. I was lucky in that my skill set included the tools to participate successfully in the battles and usually (not always) win. Even when I didn't win, I managed to survive. Many folks are "nice" and loathe to engage in the bare knuckle fights and backstabbing it often takes to succeed in the upper echelons of corporations. Worse, they go into a deep and inconsolable funk if they are direct or collateral victims of such battles. You may very well be the "naive" one in your organization, not tuned in on the same wavelength as the bosses and purposely omitted from the inner circle. Your decision whether to enter the battle, sit on the sidelines, or withdraw to a different arena is an individual one, depending on the personality and skill set you possess. The one thing you can do is objectively examine the situation and yourself and see if you can determine the real dynamics between the players and decide to avoid bias posited on the formal education levels of the participants.
I've got a high degree and that and $5.00 "might" get me a cup of coffee at my local Starbucks. Degrees, especially when flaunted to non-degree holders, can raise more animosity than respect. They certainly have no verifiable correlation to fitness to be a top executive and in many cases may be a hindrance because the skill set to achieve a degree is far different from the skill set to run an organization. It is merely a happy coincidence when a person has both skill sets (and, of course, the opportunity from an economic standpoint to have pursued a degree.)