Politics Ahead of Quality

In some organizations, it is not possible to discuss problems that may exist. In fact, mentioning a problem can be a career limiting move. Sometimes this is because acknowledging the problem will reflect poorly on the current leaders, or on revered past leaders, or may reveal that past efforts to fix problems have been unsuccessful.

In some cases, an important person or a powerful faction with an organization will be offended if the problem is discussed, so it is ignored. In other cases, a problem is well recognized within an organization, but its existence is kept hidden so clients, customers, or the public will not learn about it and possibly develop a bad impression of the organization.

All of this flies in the face of Dr. Deming’s admonition to drive fear out of the organization.  Dr. Deming noted that people in an organization need to have the confidence that they can accurately collect and report information without fear of reprisal and that “the economic loss from fear is appalling.”(1)

Consider the ethos of “pulling the thread” that was instilled in the nuclear NAVY by Admiral Rickhover. It is everyone’s duty to point out problems. Onboard a submarine, everyone recognizes that potential horrors that can occur if someone detects a problem but ignores it or covers it up.

Placing political considerations ahead of quality is the antithesis of radical quality. The concept of assessment is driven by the willingness to honestly and proactively examine what is actually happening in an organization. Audits cannot function properly if auditors are watching out to avoid stepping on political land mines.  People will enter false data if they believe they will be punished for telling the truth and will not speak honestly with auditors. Unfortunately, in some organizations, people who have the courage to talk about problems are labeled as whistle-blowers, or chastised for being disgruntled employees, and are often punished in both overt and subtle ways.

One tell-tale sign of an organization’s dysfunctionality in terms of political considerations can be seen in how the organization’s boundaries are managed. In healthy organizations, boundaries are relatively porous in that the organization encourages benchmarking of other organizations and encourages leaders and employees to participate in on-going educational processes that lead to new thinking. Overly political organizations want to control thinking – keep new ideas out and ensure that the ideas that are being expressed do not cause offense.

Political considerations are powerful obstacles to ensuring and improving quality on multiple levels. Within a specific factory, hospital, government agency or school, the local leadership may not want accurate information about processes and outcomes to be known outside of the immediate organization, so boundaries that keep information inside the organization are tight. The local leadership may be motivated by the fear that if the truth were known, their job security might be at risk. And, unfortunately, local political motives might include maintaining privileges that local leadership enjoys, including nepotism, unwarranted travel, and diversion of the organization’s resources to benefit the leadership.

On a broader scale, quality-related data may be suppressed if it shows problems with broad systemic issues such as workforce preparation, public health, environmental degradation, or quality problems involving major public works, such as dams, bridges, power systems, or highways. Large businesses may also attempt to suppress assessment and analysis of quality problems with products or systems that will damage their brand, even though this suppression may put customers and the public at risk.

Political considerations can be particularly problematic when it comes to spending public funds for public works and military contracts. Bribery, kick-backs, sweetheart deals, and awarding contracts to friends and political allies, have all been long-standing problems in many nations for centuries. Efforts to thwart these problems by awarding contracts to the lowest bidder, however, run afoul of the need to procure quality materials and services. Deming noted that large sums are wasted on failed projects and poorly performing equipment awarded solely on the basis of lowest cost. Procurement systems must focus on ensuring that quality products and services can indeed be delivered before contracts are awarded.

When political considerations rule, problems will fester and grow. Loyal people become disillusioned and leave. Those who remain often keep their heads down and do not rock the boat. Those who speak out put their careers on the line, and in some cases, will risk their lives and the well-being of their families.

(1) W. Edwards Deming. Quality, Productivity and Competitive Position. MIT Press, 1982.