Schedule Ahead of Quality

When quality processes are in place, schedules will be met. But many organizations do not believe they can take the time to do things right the first time, so they subsequently spend a great deal of time on rework and response to customer complaints. Many organizations succumb to meeting deadlines, even when they know they are not providing a quality product or service.

Being schedule driven causes quality problems to be ignored, inevitably leading to an inability to meet schedules. This, in turn, ultimately drives up the cost of products and services since there will be increases in waste and rework and can result in penalties and lost sales caused by missing schedules. Being controlled by the schedule causes people to take short-cuts that jeopardize the mission and create problems with quality, safety, and protection of the environment.

There are several important aspects of radical quality that influence an organization’s ability to achieve schedules and to shorten cycle times. As Dr. Deming noted, “Kanban or just in time follows as a natural result of statistical control of quality which in turn means statistical control of speed of production.”(1)

First is the benefit of constant on-going assessment – the metacognitive dimension of radical quality. Feedback from customers, internal process measures, and benchmarking can set off the alarms that unwanted change is occurring with processes, leading practitioners to shift into diagnosing the immediate causes related to failures in meeting schedule and their potential root causes.

Assessment likewise motivates organizations to be on the lookout for both improvements and innovations that impact schedule. Continuous improvement of processes will identify actions that further streamline an existing process, allowing products and services to flow more smoothly. Reducing rework allows the outputs to reach customers in a more timely manner, so sometimes the benefit of a Six Sigma project or a Kaizen event is faster delivery of products and services.

Assessment also stimulates innovation – either in a proactive manner or in response to a new necessity. One dimension of assessment includes the need to constantly look outside of the organization for new technologies, or the new potential combinations of existing technologies. These innovations can lead to radical changes in how services are provided, how energy is produced, and how manufacturing is carried out.

A second reason that focusing primarily on quality ends up helping achieve challenging schedules concerns the need to create a sense of urgency. Focusing on quality as the sine qua non does not mean having a lack of urgency. Achieving agility and urgency comes about through forthright and open discussion of what truly needs to be accomplished, and the challenges and problems that will be associated with achieving the objective. A focus on quality requires a realistic and accurate understanding of facts, information, and alternatives while being mindful of customers’ requirements, competitors’ capabilities, and other realities such as seasonal demand.

An urgent focus on quality means quickly obtaining any technical expertise that may be required, involving senior leadership directly in projects to make sure no internal barriers are being put up, and meetings that are quickly scheduled and bring together all of the major contributors.

A third benefit of focusing on quality instead of focusing on schedule first is that being schedule-driven causes people to compromise and settle for less than they could achieve if the schedule being imposed is truly arbitrary. Take the drive for a manned mission to the moon by the close of the 1960’s. Von Braun’s well thought-out plan for starting with an earth-orbiting space station that would be used to assemble and launch crafts in space for exploring the moon and Mars was scrapped in favor of a dramatic and urgent approach that was brave but un-sustainable.  A short-term goal was met, but the long term goal of space exploration was set back by decades.

Even in crash programs, such as the Manhattan Project, well defined quality processes were vital to moving rapidly in design, construction, and operation of experimental facilities. Stringent quality control processes and procedures were in place even as brand new technology was being invented and deployed.

Unfortunately, this root cause that focusing on putting schedules ahead of quality has been encouraged by national consultants who have advised organizations to move hastily and not to take the time for adequate planning and assurance of quality. A superficial approach to reducing cycle times and helping an organization’s agility in adopting new ideas and technology has led to many problems. “Ready, fire, aim” has been the practice of troubled organizations, along with mantras such as “faster, better, cheaper.” Radical quality insists that you aim before your fire and that you focus on getting better first, in order to become faster and cheaper. Ready, Aim, Fire is the right sequence. The trick is to be skilled in the quality disciplines so that you can aim quickly.

(1) W. Edwards Deming. Out of the Crisis. MIT Press, 1982. (page 344)