As time progresses, we continue to learn a great deal about quality. We have embedded quality in our processes, our measurement systems, and even our relationships. Although we still have much to learn, one cannot help but marvel at the transforming impact of quality.
Organizations have been forced to redefine their quality audit strategies to ensure compliance and render support to their supply base. Over the years, I have been involved with championing three categories of audits: on-site, hybrid and remote audits.
When researching material for my thesis many years ago, I discovered there was no “silver bullet” for the organizational model for a continuous improvement effort. There is no single model that works for everyone; it varies from organization to organization.
Even in today’s constantly evolving world, there remains a truism. Those who are more successful produce better results than many of their peers. They do it better and faster than their counterparts. This is not intuitive for everyone. It has to be developed or redefined.
Continuous improvement activities might be more commonplace today, but how did it evolve? Though not prevalent in all industries, the concepts are widespread throughout many organizations.
In a recent quality management class, group discussion centered on frustration in the workplace resulting from lack of appropriate employee recognition. Several people recounted how disappointing it was to go “above and beyond” only to find there was little appreciation for what was accomplished.