Juran vs. Deming - Your Thoughts?

[waberens]

Juran


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

 

[Kevin Mader]

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

 

[Don Winton]

Bill,

You may want to try this:

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

Regards,
Don

 

[Marc]

Deming vs. Juran

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?

 

[Mike S.]

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

 

[David Hartman]

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.

 

[ralphsulser]

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.

 

[WALLACE]

Whoever verses whoever!

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.

 

[Kevin Mader]

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

 

[David Hartman]

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.