The Summit: A Quality Management Systems Blog

Applying QMS Principles to everyday life, or how the Eagles can finally win a Super Bowl part 7

Pat Scott — Tue, 15 May 2012 01:10:49 GMT

We are nearing the end of our exploration of the QMS essential principles and are now on the seventh principle, factual approach to decision making, which states, “Effective decisions are based on analysis of data and information.”

During this exercise, I have looked at many aspects of the Eagles’ on-field performance and my analysis of the data and other information suggests that the biggest issues facing the team are a lack of attention to the defense and a poor sense of continuity or integration of new pieces to the team. The root cause for the former issue has been demonstrated to be Andy Reid’s offensive coaching background, and the latter is a result of the short 2011 offseason and a new defensive coordinator. If these are the facts I am starting with, then this offseason my plan would be to bolster the defense with new additions, but also make sure these additions are not disruptive; so, I would be looking for tweaks rather than a complete overhaul.

In any given year, there are two main periods of player acquisition for teams: free agency and the draft. In 2011, the Eagles had an active free agency period and brought in numerous established players to the team. However, not having time to ‘gel’ clearly had an impact as the team struggled to a 4-8 start. On the flip-side, the Eagles 2011 draft resulted in few players who contributed last season. Of the 11 draft choices, the sum of their contributions included two total sacks, one rushing touchdown, and three primary starters. The biggest impact probably came from Alex Henry, a placekicker drafted in the fourth round. When a kicker is your best new addition to the team, it was not a successful draft … unless he kicked the game winning field goal in the Super Bowl.

This season, the team was not as active in free agency and the biggest move was the contract extension given to DeSean Jackson. This shows a decision by management that if the team was going to improve, it would be through the draft. (It should be noted that the Eagles tend to take a third route to player acquisition – trading players instead of just draft picks – more than any other team in the league. Will this become a trend?)

The results—at least for now—seem to be spectacular. The team entered the draft with a clear idea of where their needs were and made the necessary moves to address those needs. As mentioned previously, the Eagles have demonstrated a keen knowledge of the draft by acquiring additional picks. This year, they previously used some of those picks to answer the long lingering problem at linebacker with the previously discussed trade for DeMeco Ryans.

At the draft it appeared the Eagles saw the same needs that I did after taking an objective look at the team’s performance. In the first round, the team used a few of their stockpiled picks to trade up three spots and draft Mississippi DT Fletcher Cox. Cox was widely regarded as one of, if not THE, best defensive tackle prospects in the draft and a player ready to make an instant contribution. This helps to immediately improve the Eagles pass rush and run defense, two areas in which they struggled notably in 2011. The cost to move up three spots (the 15^th, 114^th, and 172^nd overall selections) was minor for the potential pay-off.

From previous trades, the Eagles had two second round picks this year. With them they added two additional strong defensive presences in California LB Mychal Kendricks and Marshall DE Vinny Curry. Again, these were great choices based on my analysis of the Eagles 2011 weaknesses. The team had to improve in these areas, and these players should address this need.

The later rounds of the draft can be good for adding potential complementary pieces but there is less pressure for the teams to perform here. After concentrating on defense early, the team spent the last three rounds adding players to the offense. It remains to be seen what sort of contribution they can make, but clearly the decision was made to use the draft to revamp the defense. Admittedly, it is impossible to accurately judge a draft class without the benefit of a few years of perspective. While the Eagles graded well with many pundits, it will take time to determine if they made the right moves this year.

From an objective perspective, it seems that to improve on their 2011 season the Eagles need to shore up their defense but keep a sense of continuity so the team does not regress from its strong finish. Although keeping Juan Castillo as defensive coordinator may not have been popular with fans, it at least ensures a minimum of disruptions for the team as it will be running the same system. Additionally, by chiefly addressing defensive vulnerabilities through the draft rather than free agency, the team will be better off by having players they can develop as professionals instead of trying to force an established performer into a new scheme. Simply put, it looks to me that the Eagles have taken a factual approach to decision making, and arrived at the same conclusions I have. Of course, every team assumes the players they draft will make an impact (or else why would they draft them?) but it does appear the Eagles drafted potentially outstanding players for key positions. While it will take time, we will eventually find out if these are the missing pieces that will help push the Eagles over the top to finally become Super Bowl Champions.

Applying QMS Principles to everyday life, or how the Eagles can finally win a Super Bowl part 6

Pat Scott — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 15:30:00 GMT

At this point in this series of blog posts looking at the Philadelphia Eagles and how they can use the principles of a quality management system to finally get over the hump and win a Super Bowl, it is clear that patterns are emerging regarding where the team needs to improve. This continues to be the case as I come to the sixth principle, continual improvement.

Simply put, the sixth QMS principle states, “Continual improvement of the organization’s overall performance should be a permanent objective of the organization.” This goal is both obvious and of paramount importance. Whether you are an established industry leader or a nascent start-up trying to break in to the market, you should always strive to do better. Complacency has no place in the business world, and you should always be looking for ways to improve every aspect of your operation. If you aren’t moving forward then you are most likely falling behind.

In any given year, only one of the 32 NFL teams will achieve the ultimate team goal. The whole reason for this series of blog posts is that the Eagles have never had that undeniably successful season and won the Lombardi trophy. As this blog has pointed out several times previously, there are numerous ways the team can improve over last season. The most noticeable place is on defense and protecting late game leads. However, in football there are myriad metrics to analyze and find room for improvement. Two areas in which the Eagles need to improve in 2012 are penalties and turnover margin. In both of these categories, the team ranked below the NFL average and as a result put themselves in a more difficult position to win games.

An offensive penalty can absolutely kill a promising drive and prevent a team from scoring, and on the flip side a defensive foul can give your opponent new life. Last season, the team averaged 6.7 penalties per game that resulted in a loss of 53.3 yards per contest. Both of these numbers were worse than the NFL average. The Eagles’ penalties resulted in an additional two first downs for their opponents per game, meaning that at least twice a game an opponent was able to continue a drive that should have ended.

What is most telling about the Eagles’ fouls in 2011, however, is that while they ranked 23^rd in the NFL in penalty yards per game, they averaged 8.0 yards per penalty which was good for 7^th best in the league. What I take from this is that the team is committing a lot of “mental mistakes” resulting in 5-yard penalties such as offside or false start. Such infractions can be particularly frustrating, as it reflects a lack of discipline and cohesiveness among the players. Here is an opportunity for a Pareto analysis to determine what specifically needs to be addressed.

Turnover margin is one of the easiest and most reliable predictors of success in the NFL. Simply put, if you can take the ball away more often than you give it away, you are likely going to win. The Eagles struggled immensely with this last year, with a turnover margin of -0.9 per contest that ranked 31^st in the league. The offense gave the ball away nearly two and a half times a game. The biggest culprit was Michael Vick and the other quarterbacks, as the team threw 1.6 interceptions per game. This was the worst rate in the league. Again, this is a result of poor play and nearly a full turnover more than the team averaged in 2010.

On the other side of the ball, the defense had 1.5 takeaways a game. This left the team ranked 20^th in the league for the year, and was down considerably from 2010 when the Eagles were 4^th in the NFL with 2.1 takeaways per game. This statistic serves to reinforce what I have already observed in terms of the changes in defense (and pass defense in particular) and the negative impact it had on the 2011 season. The regression from the previous year is troubling and should be addressed.

The Eagles’ subpar performance in penalties and turnover margin in 2011 demonstrates a degree of undisciplined, unfocused, and overall poor play that the team must remedy to be successful. If Andy Reid and the rest of the coaching staff can help the players cut down significantly on the mental mistakes they exhibited last season, the team will be in much better position to compete for the Super Bowl.

How does this translate to your business? Always look for ways to improve. Success is not simply a matter of production and sales, so try to find what other areas your team lags behind the competition or shows a lack of discipline. Are customer communications always returned promptly? Have you selected the right vendors for your needs? What else can you do to improve? Keep a keen focus on the entire operation and you’ll reap the rewards down the road.

Applying QMS Principles to everyday life, or how the Eagles can finally win a Super Bowl part 5

Pat Scott — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 14:18:49 GMT

At the beginning of the previous post, I pointed out the interrelated nature of the fourth and fifth ISO 9000 quality management system (QMS) principles: process approach and the systems approach. As a reminder of the fifth principle, a system is a collection of interdependent processes that are harmonized to achieve a particular set of results. Your manufacturing system is a series of processes that result in the production of products for sale.

You hear the term system used quite frequently in football to describe the offensive and defensive schemes a team utilizes. This makes it a great fit for this post. Previously, I looked at the importance of maximizing the NFL Draft process to stock your roster. Now, I am going to look at how the Eagles have used the talent acquired in the draft to work within their systems.

The Eagles operate what is known as the West Coast Offense. Without getting too deep into specifics of the scheme, the West Coast Offense shuns the traditional NFL offense by utilizing short outlet passes and screen plays to stretch the field horizontally to allow for big plays. The system was popularized by Bill Walsh and has been passed down through his “coaching tree” (which includes Andy Reid).

Reid’s use of the West Coast Offense is the reason former running back Brian Westbrook is the third leading receiver in Eagles history. During his eight seasons with the team, Westbrook averaged over 53 receptions a year including 90 in 2007. That season was certainly Westbrook’s most productive as he had 771 receiving yards to go along with 1,333 yards on the ground. Of course, Westbrook’s most memorable play from that season was probably when he took a knee at the 1 yard line late in a Week 15 victory over Dallas to preserve a 10-6 victory rather than score an easy touchdown. By taking a knee he kept the clock running and prevented a tired defense from coming out to take the field again.

The Eagles grabbed Westbrook in the third round of the 2002 NFL Draft. He was lightly regarded coming out of college. He played for a Division I-AA school, was considered small, and had injury issues. However, Reid saw his potential as an ideal fit for his offense, took a chance, and it paid off. It was a perfect case of effectively using the draft process to find the right tools to run his offensive system.

For a business to operate successfully, all systems must be treated with equal importance. As I have previously demonstrated, it does not appear that Reid — and by extension the Eagles — regard their defensive system as important as the offensive. Since the passing of Jim Johnson, the defense has lost its edge. Johnson was known for his creativity and numerous blitz packages that consistently frustrated the opposition. His system was aggressive and disruptive. Reid had complete faith in Johnson, and he was rewarded with a top-notch defense. The subsequent defensive coaches in Philadelphia have failed to regain that status.

For any defensive system to be successful, it must have the right personnel. While Reid’s offense has been replenished with new talent as the various cogs aged, the same cannot be said with the defense. When the Eagles traded Donovan McNabb, it seemed like a questionable decision but McNabb’s performance over the last two years have proved it to be the right one. However, in letting Brian Dawkins go in free agency following the 2008 season the team lost their defensive leader and a player who was still immensely productive as evidenced by his two subsequent Pro Bowl appearances. Clearly, the Eagles have failed in evaluating talent for the defense when compared with the offense.

Here’s my take on this: despite having a solid offensive system in place along with the necessary processes to keep that system running efficiently, the apparent imbalance regarding effort and resources invested in the defensive side of the ball has been an issue for the Eagles. Since the offensive and defensive systems are equally important to the ultimate goal of winning, this approach is suboptimal. In your business, all systems (Development, Production, Marketing, etc.) must be given sufficient and consistent attention for sustained success. Look at how you spend your time and ask yourself if this is the right balance for the business. If you find yourself paying too much attention to Operations but insufficient attention to Sales, then your organization is going to perform suboptimally. Just like the Eagles.

Applying QMS Principles to everyday life, or how the Eagles can finally win a Super Bowl part 4

Pat Scott — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 14:39:14 GMT

As I continue with our in-depth look at the Philadelphia Eagles and how they can use the core principles of the ISO 9000 quality management system (QMS) series to win the Lombardi trophy, it is necessary to introduce the fifth principle to help define the fourth. The fourth principle, the process approach, is the building block for the fifth principle, the system approach to management. At first glance the two concepts seem nearly identical with only semantic differences. To simplify things, however, we will consider processes as the routines put in place to achieve the best results for the system. The system is a collection of interdependent processes that are harmonized to achieve a particular set of results. For your business you may have processes to order and receive materials, assemble the materials, and test the finished product. This set of processes constitutes your production system in a well-run business.

In football, the product you are trying to produce is “Wins.” To do so, you must score more points than your opponent during a game. So, as a team you have two main tasks: a) score and b) do not let the other team score. Everything that goes into scoring points (offense) and everything that goes into preventing points from being scored (defense) are the two core systems for achieving wins. I would consider player acquisition, talent evaluation, and game preparation as processes for the offensive and defensive systems executed to win games. In this post we will look at one process that is considered key to sustainable success in the NFL: the NFL Draft.

Perhaps more than in any other major sport, in football the draft is the single most important way for teams to acquire the necessary talent to put a winning team on the field. An organization that can maximize value in the draft is generally put in a position to win while those who whiff on the annual event often find themselves as perennial losers. If you need proof that the draft is important in the NFL, consider that the Indianapolis Colts released Peyton Manning – easily one of the best quarterbacks in league history – to bring in and presumably start a player with tremendous potential but no actual professional experience.

In any given season, a team should expect to have about eight draft picks (Rounds 1-7 plus any compensatory picks). Looking at the Eagles draft history, you will find that since Andy Reid’s first draft as coach in 1999 the team has averaged nine picks per draft with a high of 13 selections in 2010 (extra picks are acquired through trades with other teams). This demonstrates that the Eagles understand the importance of the draft and as a result have gained an advantage over their competitors. In contrast, the Redskins have averaged 6.69 picks per draft over the last 13 seasons, including just seven selections COMBINED in 2003 and 2004. On the Eagles current depth-chart, the team drafted seven starters on the offense and six on the defense.

However, just because the team comprehends the importance of that draft that does not mean they are using their picks wisely. Of the Eagles 117 draft selections under Reid, only 40 (34%) have come in the first three rounds. Though the theory of looking for hidden gems in late rounds makes economic sense, the unavoidable truth is more talent will be found early in the draft. While the Patriots drafting Tom Brady in the sixth round is a great story for underdogs, the reality is the last seven Super Bowl winning teams have been led by quarterbacks selected in the first 32 picks.

Perhaps not surprising given what we have previously observed, the Eagles have had less success drafting defensive players than offensive. The last time the team took a defensive player who made the Pro Bowl in any subsequent season was 2005 with fifth round pick Trent Cole. You have to go back to Lito Sheppard in 2002 to find the last time they took a Pro Bowl defensive player in the first round.

At the NFL combine in Indianapolis, Eagles general manager Howie Roseman took some time to speak at length with members of the Philadelphia media about the 2012 draft and the Eagles general draft strategy. Though most of his answers were as non-committal as expected, Roseman was pressed about the lack of production from the defensive players in the Eagles draft and at linebacker in particular (a position that has long been a weakness for the team). Roseman admitted that the team does not value that position as much as others, but insists they have never passed on a prospect they loved because of it. Rather, they have not found the right person at the right time.

Looking through the last decade of Eagles’ drafts, it is hard to argue with Roseman and find a time the team blatantly overlooked a great linebacker prospect. However, this offseason the Eagles have already used the draft to address this issue. As a result of previous trades, the team has 10 picks in the draft this year. They have used one of those picks (a fourth-round pick) to acquire former Defensive Rookie of the Year and two-time Pro Bowl LB DeMeco Ryans in a swap with the Houston Texans. This is an excellent use of an asset the Eagles gained through their understanding of the importance of the draft process.

In considering the NFL draft as an essential process to the success of the Eagles, it is clear the team understands the importance of the draft but has some shortcomings. My analysis says that the defensive system has suffered because the draft process does not adequately address defensive requirements – though the team has recently made a strong effort to address this with the DeMeco Ryans trade. The front office has done an excellent job of acquiring additional draft picks to bolster the team, at an average of an extra selection per year over the last 13 seasons. However, the majority of those picks have come late in the draft where there is less talent to be found. The processes the Eagles have in place have brought success, but they need to be fine-tuned in order to get the team to the finish line and win a Super Bowl.

So here’s the takeaway from this. How you make your processes “fit” within your business is what distinguishes you from your competitors and it also creates the value proposition that you offer to your customers. You should strive to optimize the outputs from the processes that you have in place. If you are not getting the results you want, take a critical look at the underlying processes and determine if you can make changes that will lead to continuing improved performance and the outcome you desire.

Applying QMS Principles to everyday life, or how the Eagles can finally win a Super Bowl part 3

Pat Scott — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 19:47:57 GMT

Today I am moving forward with our case study applying a quality management system (QMS) approach to the Philadelphia Eagles by looking at the third ISO 9000 series quality management principle: involvement of people . As with the principle of leadership, this is another interesting topic to look at from both the business level and “on-the-field” level of professional sports; somewhat analogous to management and workers.

From the ISO 9000 QMS perspective, involvement of people stresses that “People at all levels are the essence of an organization and their full involvement enables their abilities to be used for the organization's benefit.” In a practical sense, this means exploiting the natural talents of your staff to your advantage so no one is underutilized or feels marginalized or taken for granted.

When it comes to employing talented individuals, the Eagles have done an excellent job. In addition to the 66 Pro Bowlers since 1999, the staff has been equally impressive. Andy Reid has seen six of his assistants take head coaching positions with other NFL organizations. That is not to say, however, that all of Reid’s coaching hires have worked out. Let’s look at this a bit deeper.

Since the unexpected retirement and subsequent passing of long time defensive coordinator Jim Johnson following the 2008 season, the Eagles defense—regularly ranked among the best in football during Johnson’s tenure—has been a weak point. In 2008, the Eagles ranked third in Defensive Efficiency, according to Football Outsiders. In fact, during Johnson’s decade leading the defense the team finished outside of the top ten only three times. Sadly for the Eagles, the defensive team has finished outside of the top ten in two of the last three seasons.

Johnson was initially replaced by Sean McDermott, who at the time was the Eagles’ secondary coach. McDermott was fired following the 2010 season, and Reid made the controversial move to promote offensive line coach Juan Castillo to the post. The move was questioned at the time because, and his bio clearly shows, the last defense Castillo led was Kingsville (TX) High School in 1989. Heading into the season, the Eagles had an embarrassment of riches with three Pro Bowl cornerbacks on the roster and also added standout defensive end Jason Babin. Unfortunately, the team started the season flat and the pass defense was noticeably weaker than the sum of its talented parts. Though the Eagles rallied to an 8-8 record and finished the year with the 10^th best pass defense, the damage to the team’s playoff hopes had been done.

It would be easy to give Castillo and Reid the benefit of the doubt and argue the team simply needed time to acclimate to the new coach and new parts because of the shortened offseason. The results were understandable, but that doesn’t make them acceptable. Reid chose to bring Castillo back for the 2012 campaign, and he believes a year of on-the-job training will pay dividends. Regardless of next year, the decision to make an offensive line coach defensive coordinator is a questionable use of talent and experience. My speculation is that defensive football is not as interesting or understandable to Reid as the offensive side and so he does not give it sufficient attention. In this instance, Reid’s practice of “involvement of people” was misguided and backfired on the organization as he did not properly gauge and utilize Castillo’s core strengths.

Involvement of people is not only about making the best use of your staff’s talents, but also making sure your employees feel valued for their contributions. When it comes to the Eagles, I have to think about how this principle would apply to wide receiver DeSean Jackson. Since being selected by the team in the second round of the 2008 NFL Draft, Jackson has been one of the most talented and athletic Eagles in memory. His contributions as a receiver and punt returner have been tremendous. In fact, in 2009 he became the first player in NFL history to be named to the Pro Bowl at two positions in the same year!

However, Jackson has notably been unhappy with his compensation. Prior to the 2011 season, he held out briefly from camp while petitioning for a new contract. During the season, he was benched for a game because he missed a team meeting, which was apparently a culmination of many small indiscretions. Despite this, Jackson was still the leading receiver for the Eagles, and since the season ended he seems humble and contrite about his actions, and hopes for a return to the team with either a new contract or by being franchised.

With a mere four years of service, Jackson is already working his way in to the Eagles record books. Though he is an immensely valuable asset to the team, his $600,000 salary last year makes him underpaid for his contributions. If Jackson is franchised, his salary will be in excess of $9mil. While he has certainly been involved and his talents exploited to the advantage of the team, the management now should endeavor to be sure DeSean Jackson feels appreciated.

So here are some observations. If there is an important part of your organization (such as defense is to a football team), be wary of hiring an inexperienced manager. Like a football team, organizations can only be as effective as the weakest element allows. Also be sure your staff feels appreciated for what they do. Don’t wait until they tender their resignation to bring their salary up to market. Organizations function best when everyone is using their talents and are happy to be part of a winning team.

Applying QMS Principles to everyday life, or how the Eagles can finally win a Super Bowl part 2

Pat Scott — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 19:00:00 GMT

In part one of this series examining the eight quality management principles of the ISO 9000 series, I looked at the principle of customer focus and how it applies to the Philadelphia Eagles. Now I am going to shift my focus to the second principle, leadership. Athletics and leadership are a natural fit, but applying it to the overall business is a bit more complex.

The second quality management principle is summarized thusly: “Leaders establish unity of purpose and direction of the organization. They should create and maintain the internal environment in which people can become fully involved in achieving the organization's objectives.” With an NFL franchise, you can delineate between the organizational leaders and the team leaders. The organizational leaders include the owner, GM, and other members of the front office responsible for business decisions while the team leaders are the players and coaches directly involved in on-the-field results.

Since 1994, the Eagles have been owned by Jeffrey Lurie. By almost any measure the team has been a model franchise during this time. The Eagles have been to the playoffs 11 times since Lurie took over, which is only slightly less than the 14 times they reached the post season in their first 62 years of existence. The construction and opening of Lincoln Financial Stadium is further proof of Lurie’s commitment to the team. The organization he purchased for $185 million is now worth $1.16 billion, so he has clearly proved himself to be a strong and positive leader.

Arguably the second most important figure with regards to the success and leadership of the Eagles is head coach Andy Reid. Hired following the 1998 season, Reid is now the longest-tenured coach in the NFL. In addition, Reid has served as Executive VP of Football Operations since 2001 (giving him the final word on football matters for the organization). Reid’s time with the Eagles has been the most successful in franchise history. He has compiled a record of 126-81-1 in the regular season and 10-9 in the postseason. Those 136 total victories are more than twice as many as the second most accomplished coach in franchise history (Greasy Neale had 66 wins from 1941-50).

Stability under the stewardship of Lurie and Reid has been a perfect recipe for success for the Eagles. However, during this time Eagles have not won a Super Bowl. In the first decade of the 21^st century, the Eagles won more games than any other team in the NFC (103) and played in five conference championship games. Sadly, this resulted in a single Super Bowl appearance: a 24-21 loss to the New England Patriots in Super Bowl XXXIX.

From an on-the-field personnel perspective, talent has not been an issue for the Eagles. Since 1999 the team has sent 66 players to the Pro Bowl. Was the problem simply former quarterback Donovan McNabb, who despite being the franchise leader in every meaningful passing category just couldn’t seem to inspire his teammates and fans like Tom Brady, Drew Brees, or even Eli Manning? Despite all the success McNabb had, I fondly recall his substitute Jeff Garcia’s “Merry Christmas Philadelphia” game in 2006 as my favorite win of the decade.

Or is it Reid, who as head coach has a reputation (well deserved) for botching end-of-game clock management? New England’s Bill Belichick is the second longest tenured coach in the league after Reid and he has led his teams to five Super Bowls and three championships. Those two Super Bowl losses came at the hands of the New York Giants and Tom Coughlin, who this year coached his team to their second championship in four years with a roster that seemingly has no discernible advantage over Philadelphia in terms of the on-the-field product. What is missing for the Eagles?

Leadership has repeatedly brought the Eagles to the brink of the Promised Land but failed to push them over the edge. Reid will be back next season, so hope for an intangible change lies with quarterback Michael Vick (who, it should be noted, was on the other side of the Eagles’ lone NFC Championship victory of the last decade). This past summer, elite players flocked to the Eagles for the chance to play with Vick. Though the results from his first season were disappointing, I’m eager to see if his leadership – perceived or real – is what the Eagles have been missing.

So what can we learn from this and how does it apply to you? Businesses with strong leadership find ways to align their team’s performance with the organization's vision. Do you understand your vision, have you communicated this to your team, and have you aligned your team’s activities to help achieve your vision? If you have then you may not reach or win the Super Bowl of your industry, but you will probably consistently contend for it.

Applying QMS Principles to everyday life, or how the Eagles can finally win a Super Bowl part 1 of 8

Pat Scott — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 20:55:38 GMT

As noted on this blog previously, having a functional Quality Management System (QMS) in place is simply good business. The ISO 9000:2008 standard is based on eight quality management principles, which are:

1) Customer Focus                                                          5) System Approach to Management
2) Leadership                                                                  6) Continual Improvement
3) Involvement of People                                            7) Factual Approach to Decision Making
4) Process Approach                                                       8) Mutually Beneficial Supplier Relationships

These broad categories represent the most basic tenets of a successful QMS. While there is not a single universal QMS model that will fit all businesses, the main principles should always be considered. Today, I am going to start a new series of posts that takes a deeper look at the basic principles of a QMS and applies them to an unusual business, but one that is near and dear to my heart – the Philadelphia Eagles. Why should a sports team consider quality management principles? One big reason is that although a professional sports team’s product is primarily entertainment it is still a business. The performance of the business year in and year out can have a substantial effect on revenue from various sources for itself and its economic ecosystem (i.e. the city where it’s located).

As noted above, the first principle of a QMS is customer focus. A business does not operate in a vacuum, but rather it must fill a need. A great business will fill that need better than its competitors. The most tangible product of a successful operation is happy customers. As the principle states, all “Organizations … should understand current and future needs, should meet customer requirements and strive to meet customer expectations.” In professional sports, it is easy to determine how you are doing compared to the competition because performance is literally measured in wins and losses. The win/loss record in turn drives a secondary yet critical measure of success and that is customer satisfaction, which can be expressed through ticket and merchandise sales, web boards, or local radio call-in shows. In the case of the Eagles, the roughly 6.5 million residents of the Delaware Valley – as well as numerous ex-pats throughout the world in places like Los Ranchos, NM – are happy to let management know how they are doing.

In some areas the the 2011 Eagles can show evidence that they were a customer focused organization. The team acquired several players during the off season with the goal of having a team that would play in the Super Bowl. Unfortunately for fans, the team that started the year with high aspirations needed a late season surge to attain a mediocre 8-8 record. So while you can make the case that the Eagles were customer focused as evidenced by their investment in new personnel, the team failed to effectively manage customer expectations since they completely missed the play-offs. The team repeatedly frustrated fans with their inability to play competitively for four quarters on a consistent basis.

The Eagles were not a bunch of scrappy ne’er-do-wells with little chance or expectation of success. Their roster included ten former Pro Bowl players. If they had managed to hold just one fourth quarter lead, they would have won the NFC East with a still underwhelming 9-7 record and hosted a play-off game. With four consecutive wins to end the season, who can say how the Eagles would have fared once they reached the post-season?

What is the bottom-line impact of the Eagles’ poor performance this season? According to the Philadelphia Convention & Visitors Bureau, it starts around $10 million. At least, that is the amount of money that a single home play-off game is estimated to bring in to the city. Furthermore, there is the lost goodwill and support for the customers. Instead of cheering the team on through a post-season run and buying championship merchandise, some fans are instead putting their efforts (through chants, mobile billboards, and t-shirts) towards calling for the firing of head coach Andy Reid.

So the bottom line for your business is are you making the right investments in your product or service offerings, do your customers know what to expect from you, and do you have a means of determining how well you are fulfilling your customer’s expectations? These questions might not be easy to answer, but you should ask and answer them nonetheless. Periodically you should reassess your answers as you collect new data, and use the information to continuously improve on this important QMS principle of being a customer focused organization.

Meanwhile I will have to wait until next year when the Eagles will have another chance to meet and hopefully surpass my expectations.

Why Do Companies Become ISO Registered?

Pat Scott — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 15:25:47 GMT

If you ever wondered why companies choose to register their quality management systems with international standards then you may be interested in this. The most recent issue of ISO Focus+ details the results of a far-reaching survey launched last year to gauge current and potential user interests in the Quality Management System (QMS) series of standards, chiefly ISO 9001 and ISO 9004. The survey responses were demographically diverse, with returns coming from 122 countries and covering small-to-large companies and as well as representing the service, manufacturing, and software industries. With nearly 12,000 responses, the results give a clear understanding of the benefits of implementing a QMS.

From a total of 11,722 respondents to the user survey I’ve selected the top three reasons. A total of 4,222 companies cited customer satisfaction as the key influencing factor behind certification; 3,689 indicated “market need”; and 3,290 stated it was a customer mandated requirement. I found these results quite interesting. While the ISO standard is focused on improved operations the reality is that the primary benefit, at least initially, is more closely tied to a marketing advantage.

Digging deeper into the survey results show several additional tangible benefits for QMS users. These include increased management commitment, better supply chain management, and improved financial performance. Finally, the survey shows that for users looking to integrate ISO 9001 with another management system standard the most feasible option was an environmental management system, which is covered under the ISO 14001 standard.

Treeline Consulting is positioned to help you achieve the benefits of the adoption of ISO 9001, AS9100, ISO 13485, and ISO 14001. We have already shepherded industry-leading companies in New Mexico through the certification process. It may not be too long before your customers require that you register to one or more of these standards, so it may be in your best interest to take a proactive approach and look into this sooner rather than later. Contact Treeline today at (505) 508-5161 for more information.

Why Do You Need a Quality Management System?

Pat Scott — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 21:20:32 GMT

Current State

Business owners and managers all agree that quality is an important part of a successful business. Whether your Quality Management System (QMS) conforms to a recognized international standard such as ISO 9001, or whether you have developed and implemented your own program, every successful business needs an effective QMS. By investing in a quality program you can avoid the expense associated with product recalls or missed sales from customers lost as a result of quality system failures. More importantly you have better control over the day to day operations that define your business.

The Problem

In a small business it is often impractical to budget for a full time quality department. A common solution is to double or triple “hat” your existing staff and add “quality” to their assigned responsibilities. Your staffs are already stretched thin though, so the effectiveness of your quality program can be compromised despite the fact that everyone is putting in extra hours to keep up with the needs of the business.

A Solution

Sometimes outsourcing the responsibility for your Quality Management System makes good sense. It allows you to focus on your core competencies, while still deriving all the benefits from an in-house quality department. The tasks are performed by a subject matter expert, and there is the proper organizational separation of the quality function. Another benefit is that you can adjust the level of involvement from basic conformance with quality standards to full integration of the quality management system with every aspect of your business. For more information or to find out how a quality management system or outsourcing your quality function can help your business, please contact us at 505/508-5161.

Treeline Consulting, LLC

www.treelinenm.com

Welcome

Pat Scott — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 23:16:19 GMT

Welcome to my blog. Please check back soon for new entries.