Master Qualité - Communication
publique des résultats d'un stage de fin d'études Master Qualité
- UTC - rue du docteur Schweitzer - CS 60319 - 60203
COMPIEGNE Cedex - France - master-qualite@utc.fr
- Téll : +33 (0)3 44 23 44 23
Avertissement
: Si vous arrivez directement sur cette page, sachez
que ce travail est un rapport d'étudiants et doit être
pris comme tel. Il peut donc comporter des
imperfections ou des imprécisions que le lecteur doit
admettre et donc supporter. Il a été réalisé pendant
la période de formation et constitue avant-tout un
travail de compilation bibliographique, d'initiation
et d'analyse sur des thématiques associées aux
concepts, méthodes, outils et expériences sur les
démarches qualité dans les organisations. Nous ne
faisons aucun usage commercial et la duplication est
libre. Si, malgré nos
précautions, vous avez des raisons de contester ce
droit d'usage, merci de nous
en faire part, nous nous efforcerons d'y
apporter une réponse rapide. L'objectif de la
présentation sur le Web est de permettre l'accès à
l'information et d'augmenter ainsi les échanges
professionnels. En cas d'usage du document, n'oubliez
pas de le citer comme source bibliographique.
Bonne lecture...
SPREADING A MINDSET FOR QUALITY (SM4Q):
a Change Management Approach
Référence
bibliographique à rappeler pour tout usage : SPREADING A MINDSET FOR
QUALITY (SM4Q): a Change Management Approach,
Raul Giordano SOTO-ACERO, Université de
Technologie de Compiègne, Master Qualité et
Performance dans les Organisations (QPO), Mémoire d'Intelligence Méthodologique du stage
professionnel de fin d'études, juin 2017, www.utc.fr/master-qualite,
puis "Travaux", "Qualité-Management", réf n° 408
Citation for
this document: SPREADING A MINDSET FOR
QUALITY (SM4Q): a Change Management Approach,
Raul Giordano SOTO-ACERO, Université de
Technologie de Compiègne, Master Qualité et
Performance dans les Organisations (QPO), Methodological
Intelligence Dissertation on the graduate studies
final internship, june 2017, www.utc.fr/master-qualite,
then "Travaux", "Qualité-Management", ref n° 408
ABSTRACT
The High Voltage Cabling Industry provides the
perfect background to develop a mindset- change for
quality improvements, its high-risk nature requires a
quality mature and focused organizational culture.
This work exposes a change management methodology based on
other existing methodologies such as PDCA and professor
John P. Kotter's 8-step change management approach,
developed as a top-management led approach, while strongly
promoting a bottom-down response from middle managers.
The
ultimate objective of this proposed approach is to
launch a change process within any organization for a
strong top and middle management commitment and
leadership towards the establishment of a quality
mindset.
L’industrie des systèmes de câblage d’haute
tension est un milieu idéal pour le développement
d’une démarche axée sur le mûrissement de mentalités,
pour obtenir des améliorations qualité grâce à
l’implication des gens.
Ce travail présente une nouvelle méthodologie basée
sur d’autres approches déjà existantes comme le PDCA
et l’approche de la conduite du changement en 8-pas du
professeur John P. Kotter, afin d'implémenter une
approche portée dans un sens top-down, qu'au même
temps cherche à obtenir des fortes réponses bottom-up
de la part des cadres
intermédiaires.
L’intérêt principal de la démarche proposée est de
démarrer un processus de changement applicable à toute
entreprise dans une situation similaire, pour obtenir
un engagement fort des cadre dirigeants et
intermédiaires avec le développement d'une mentalité
qualité dans l'entreprise.
La industria de sistemas de cableado de alta tensión
es el entorno ideal para desarrollar un proceso de
gestión de cambio organizacional, hacia una mentalidad
que permita mejorar el nivel de desempeño en calidad,
la naturaleza de alto riesgo de esta industria
requiere una cultura organizacional madura bien
enfocada en la calidad.
Este documento expone una metodología de gestión del
cambio basada en otras ya existentes como el PDCA o la
metodología de 8 pasos del profesor John P. Kotter.
Este nuevo método propone una aproximación de tipo
top-down liderada por la alta gerencia, que sin
embargo busca promover una respuesta bottom-up
de la parte de los gerentes y mandos medios.
El objetivo final de este proceso propuesto es poner
en marcha un proceso de cambio dentro de cualquier
organización para obtener un fuerte compromiso y
liderazgo de la alta y media gerencia con la
instauración de una mentalidad de calidad en la
empresa
I would like to express my deep gratitude to
professor Gilbert FARGES and Professor Arnaud DERATHE, my master
degree and dissertation tutors, for their patient support, sincere
encouragement and useful critiques of this work. I would also like
to thank my enterprise tutor and Manager Valerie GALLEGO, for
believing in my professional project and making me a part of her
team, with her invaluable advice and mentorship. My grateful
thanks are also extended to Quality managers Dominique MONTALAN
and Jorice SAMUEL for their patient help and explanations of their
business lines quality standards and practices, and to everyone
else in Nexans for their support and collaboration.
I would also like to extend my thanks to my
parents Martha L. ACERO and Raul A. SOTO, and my brother Daniel A.
SOTO for being my greatest motivation for success, and for their
unconditional support and encouragement throughout my studies.
This work represents a milestone in a process of professional and
personal development that I started nearly two years when I was
accepted to be a part of the Master's degree Qualité et
performance dans les Organizations, “QPO” in the Sorbonne
Universities - University of Technology of Compiègne, in France.
The Master's degree Systems and
Services Engineering: Specialty Quality and Organizational
Performance, has three concrete professional targets. The first
one, “to form effective actors in the implementation or
accompaniment of quality dynamics and changes for the improvement
of performance in public, mixed or private organizations”. The
second one, “to develop competencies on complex organizations
modeling, diffuse information extraction, and value analysis of
acquired experiences, processes and potential of companies”. And
the third one, “to integrate material and immaterial innovation as
a source of profitability for companies or organizations, while
orchestrating the factors of human creativity and dominating the
conditions of its development”.
I joined the master's degree
“QPO” after completing an Engineer's diploma in Mechatronics in
the National University of Colombia, an innovative career where I
acquired and experienced knowledges in basic sciences like
mathematics and physics, as well as its practical application to
the design and development of technological products and services,
integrating mechanical, electronics and software solutions.
This skill structure of an
engineering/technical core, with a layer of organizational and
human factors studies, has allowed me to join the group Nexans via
a 6-month-internship, a world leader in cables and cabling
systems, in which I supported the Quality Direction of the High
Voltage and Underwater Cables Business Group, with the application
and deployment of the knowledge and methodologies I have studied
along my academic training as Mechatronics Engineer and Master's
degree in Quality.
My main motivations for Quality as a profession come from a
personal passion for efficiency and innovation, two central
concepts in the routine a Quality professional who must optimize
by diagnosing and proposing solutions every day to issues and
risks that threaten or diminish enterprises customer satisfaction.
On top of this, from a practical
point of view, Quality is a trade that can generate value across
all industries, as quality is not anything but a synonymous for
“client satisfaction”, which makes this profession an excellent
professional choice that allows to explore diverse industries in a
transverse way, regardless of its products or services focus,
while allowing to capitalize any given industry best practices on
value created through the adaptation and transposition of these
practices as solutions for other enterprises.
The Quality Engineer Internship:
Quality Academy, proposed by the Nexans Quality Direction
attracted me particularly due to the presence of an already
established project, with well-defined needs and goals, which
allowed me to apply, from the beginning of the internship, all the
learned methodologies while at the same time I could acquire
knowledge on the cabling industry with all its particularities,
this opportunity to develop my professional project as a “Learning
by doing” dynamic, along with the vast professional experience of
my of internship supervisor in companies with well-known and
established quality practices (including some of the biggest
actors of the automotive and rolling-stock industries) were very
motivating as they represented an opportunity to begin in a
successful way my post-grad professional project.
Quality has obtained and
consolidated a central place among the priorities of nowadays
organizations. As a profession, Quality has established itself as
a powerful lever to increase enterprises performance, due to its
transverse nature that allows its implementation on different
organizational levels such as external client satisfaction
improvements quests, internal processes performance developments
or management practices change for employee progress.
CHAPTER I: High Voltage Handles Big Risk - A Mindset
Challenge
The High Stakes on the HV Cabling
Industry
The high voltage cables and
accessories industry is projected to grow steadily from 2016 to
2021 [1], in response to the global economy development but
especially because the existent urge for even cleaner, safer and
more efficient energy sources and networks to help reduce global
carbon emissions and slow-down rising temperatures from climate
change [2][3].
Figure 1. Global cable market
value 2012-2019 forecast (USD Billions)[4]
Figure 2. World net electricity generation from renewables,
2012–40 (trillion kilowatt-hours)[5]
Needs for cleaner energy consumption and production are being
addressed in the European Union through a strategy defined in
early 2015 and further endorsed after the Paris COP21 agreements,
the European Energy Union, which focuses on energy security,
decarbonization of the EU economy, increasing energy efficiency
and fully integrating the European energy market, with a target
for electricity interconnection between all member states defined
at a 10% minimum for 2020. This is expected to improve robustness
of electrical grids, and dependability on renewable energy
sources[6].
Figure 3. European energy
market integration[6]
High voltage cables are the links
in electrical grids. By definition “High Voltage” regroups any
voltage equal or bigger than 1000 V, but most high voltage cables
must withstand electrical tension ranging from 10 kV and up to 500
kV, and in some (research and development) projects even more[7],
in order to connect through hundreds of kilometers with obstacles
such as mountains or seas, countries and regions that rely upon
them to satisfy their everyday energy needs[8].
Figure 4. High Voltage
Cable Project example [8]
One example of a High Voltage
project in power transmission is Skagerrak 4, a cable
interconnector from Norway to Denmark, inaugurated in late 2014 it
increased the power exchange capacity between the electrical
networks of both countries. With over 100 km of underground
cabling, and 137 km of submarine cables, the project is a
milestone for Europe’s high voltage transport technology across
very long distances.
Danish wind-farm network can
export excess power generated during windy seasons and store on
the other side of the Skagerrak strait in Norway’s dams as
potential hydro-power which in turn can be imported back in
Denmark whenever wind-farms experience weak winds, diminishing the
total need for fossil fuel (coal and gas) power use.
Figure 5. Installed HV
cable upward trend (length in km)[8]
Projects like Skagerrak
demonstrate that subsea and underground cables have acquired
fundamental importance for national, regional and global
necessities, High voltage cabling grew over 8000 kilometers of
cables installed between 2010 and 2014 alone [8], adapting in a
versatile way as an entire range of solutions for power
transmission and power distribution in both land and sea.
Enterprises belonging to the high
voltage cable industry need to guarantee an excellent level of
quality and compliance to requirements and standards from
clients and international organizations[9], as a consequence of
the challenges undertaken in any high voltage project and by any
cable that will withstand the proof of harsh environments and
time. Ensuring customer satisfaction through their lines of
products and services (i.e. cable installation), to retain and
grow their market share and to assure their mid and long-term
business sustainability and success.
The cable industry is a
heterogeneous environment with different types of companies form
different regions and backgrounds, where most of the industry
leaders like Prysmian, Nexans or General Cable origins date back
to the first decades of the 20th century or even before. In 2013,
the main global players of the cable industry were ranked as
follows [10]
Figure 6. Cable Industry top 10
global companies [10]
Growing total combined revenue
for the leading global insulated wire and cable producers reached
US$100,580 million in 2015 [11]
Among these top players, the French company Nexans SA is one of
world leaders of the cable industry. It supplies cables and
cabling systems and solutions for energy infrastructure,
industrial applications, building and civil works, and networks
(LAN) markets. Covering a wide range of product and service
lines[12]. It is also the sponsor company for the internship in
which this work was developed.
Nexans has an industrial presence in 40 countries with 91 plants
and a commercial worldwide presence, counting around 26000
employees, the company is quoted on the Euronext Paris stock
exchange and is a part of the CAC Mid 60 and the SBF 120 indices
as one of the 100 listed actions with the highest market
capitalizations[13].
The global presence of Nexans is organized through seven different
Business Groups, these groups correspond for the most part to a
reginal segmentation of the world markets, with the exception of
two global-reach business groups (High Voltage Business Group and
Harnesses Business Group) which serve with a consolidated offer of
products and services these two world market segments [7]
Figure 7. Nexans Business
Groups global presence and revenue share. [14]
The High Voltage and Underwater
Cables Business Group (”HVUC”), is a worldwide business group
representing 18% of the group revenue in 2015. Operating three
business lines which correspond to a second level of market
segments which have been defined by families of products and
services which play together to provide the solutions required by
its customers.
Figure 8. The three Business Lines
belonging to the HVUC Business Group. [14]
The HVUC business group
organizational structure corresponds to a full turn-key business
model, where projects are delivered to the customer as a completed
product. A turnkey cabling system is a complete system including
all cabling components sold, designed, manufactured and installed
to satisfy specific customer requirements.
By definition, a “full turnkey”
business model like the one for the high voltage cable industry
puts, for any product or service, all the risk on the side of the
manufacturer. assuming the entire responsibility for the full
project[15].
Additionally, considering the
scale of the projects, so much in terms of dimensions as in terms
of challenges and costs, the resulting intrinsic risk is very
high. The quantification model for risks assessment, proposed by
the methodology FMEA, can be very useful to clearly show the
dimension of the risk level inherent to this industry.
The Failure Modes and Effects
Analysis approach (“FMEA”) is a systematic methodology used for
failure analysis which defines the concept of Risk Priority Number
(“RPN”) as a tool to characterize and prioritize risks by using
the product of three rating scales, Severity rating, Occurrence
rating, and Detection rating, as follows[16]:
ℝℙℕ=𝕆×𝕊×𝔻
Occurrence rating “O” is defined
as a measure of failure frequency, the severity rating “S” is a
measure of failure seriousness (i.e. the effects of the failure),
and the detection rating corresponds to how difficult it is to
detect the failure before it reaches the customer.
Figure 9. The three
factors for a High Risk Rated Product. [source : author]
Applying this to the case of the
High voltage cable industry it is possible to highlight several
specific conditions which would make the assessed risk naturally
high for any HV project:
Occurrence due to redesigns
and modifications:
The first characteristic is the
frequency of re-design and design modifications processes present
on this kind of projects, each HV project is highly customized in
order to fit as suitably as possible each customer project
limitations and requirements, this implies that along the project
lifecycle, the possibilities of needing re-designs or design
modifications is quite elevated, which in turn increases the
opportunities (i.e. the occurrence) to produce defaults associated
with each major or minor modification performed on the original
design.
Defaults consequences severity:
The second specific condition for
HV projects is the costs and dimensions of the HV cabling
projects, typical HV projects like the Skagerrak 4 shown earlier
on this document are very expensive, with contracts values in the
tens of millions of Euros for each project, which for the case of
the Skagerrak 4 project represents a contract over 80 million
euros for the 137 km of cabling made by Nexans [17].
Figure 11. Cost breakdown for Land and Submarine cabling
projects [17].
Further to these figures,
according to the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators,
the mean value per installed km for subsea cables is estimated at
909,910 euros, while for underground cables the estimation was
between 695,704 €/km and 4,905,681 €/km depending on the
voltage/rating of the cable [18].
Consequently, defaults in HV
projects have considerable financial consequences, an interesting
example would be the estimated cost of scraping of a 3 km
non-conform section of subsea cable, detected in tests before
installation, as follows:
Mean Cable Cost per km*kms
Scraped*Materials and Manufacturing Part
of the Cost
≈1,282,973€
Which just from a financial point of view accounts for very large
consequences, even without considering the very concerning risks
for human health and safety that a faulty cabling system could
represent in case of an electrical breakdown.
High intrinsic risk of
non-detection associated to the nature of the high voltage cables
manufacturing processes is the third characteristic present in the
high voltage cabling projects risk rating, high voltage cable
manufacturing processes can be considered as “special processes” a
type of processes that was originally defined in the ISO 9001:1994
standard which defines any manufacturing process where the
resulting output cannot be verified (i.e. directly monitored and
measured) during production and consequently, defaults become
apparent only after the output product has been produced,
delivered or put into service[20]. This is defined in the
standards EN9100/AS9100 section 7.5.2, ISO 9001:2008 section 7.5.2
and the more recent ISO 9001:2015 section 8.5.1-f.
Today the ISO9001:2008 and
further ISO9001:2015 versions of the standard have renamed these
processes as “processes requiring validation”, defining them as
follows:
… “Validation of Processes
for Production and Service Provision The organization shall
validate any processes for production and service provision
where the resulting output cannot be verified by subsequent
monitoring or measurement and therefore, deficiencies become
apparent only after the product is in use or the service has
been delivered[21].” …
Hence, three conditions reunite,
high severity effects of potential defaults, high frequency of
projects modifications and redesigns which imply in turn more
chances to perform a default and thus high occurrence, and the
“special process” nature of the HV cable manufacturing which
entails a high non-detection potential. All of which characterize
the HV cabling as a high-risk rating business model.
The HV industry needs their products and services to be released
smoothly & with no defects, this can be accomplished by
establishing an organization where everyone is customer aware and
customer proactive.
Many quality risks menace each
process in the value chain. And ignoring this risks could mean
resources wasted managing cascading problems, and a potential
exposure to retarded deadlines, lost contracts, revenue,
opportunities and a harmed quality reputation.
The previously described situation requires a robust
methodological approach, to face and deal as effectively and
efficiently as possible with the stated risks. For the sake of
simplifying as much as possible, it is logically conceivable to
split this methodological approach in two steps. A first step
concerning a deep and comprehensive issue analysis, and a second
phase of solution development and implementation where the
information collected in the first phase is used as an asset to
understand and propose a problem-solving strategy.
For the problem analysis “RCA” phase, many different analysis
approaches could be used. Evaluation of different existing
strategies and proposal of new ones is key, to avoid mental set,
which is the predisposition of using only a familiar single
technique or small group of techniques to solve any problem,
despite the possibility of using other simpler or more efficient
alternatives [22].
One of the simpler and most established techniques to explore
cause and effect and analyze problems is the 5 Whys method,
developed within the Toyota Corporation by his famous founder
Sakichi Toyoda, it became one of the fundamental pillars of what
today is known as the Toyota Production System “TPS” [23].
Furthermore, the 5 Whys technique
became the fundamental idea behind Kaoru Ishikawa’s diagram for
root cause analysis, also known as fishbone diagram, which is
widely held today as one of the basic tools of quality control and
quality assurance.
Every cause analysis diagram is
based on cause categories, classifying cause-effect relationships
and variables, developing a hierarchy of identified and grouped
influential factors known as root causes. 5M’s being one of the
most used classifications in manufacturing industries.
The original 5M’s used in the
“TPS” are: material, machine, method, manpower and medium,
although sometimes they’re expanded up to 8M’s to include
categories such as maintenance, management or measurement.
Other examples of root cause
analysis categories used are the 7P’s: product, price, place,
promotion, people, process, physical and package from the
marketing and communications industry. Or the 5S’s: suppliers,
systems, surroundings, standards and scope which is usually used
in the services industry.
In accordance to the stated organizational situation, a new type
of root cause analysis is proposed, one that could be more adapted
to the organizational characteristics and priorities of this
industry organizations, with the following fishbone diagram
categories: Input, Machines, Methods, People, and Mindset.
Figure 14. Risks in the HV Industry 5M Analysis [source :
author]
From this performed analysis, we
can establish two top groups of risks, Methods and Mindset, with
some risks of the Methods part having even a small degree of
Mindset component too.
Additionally, what we have inferred from this analysis is that
organization must work in three fronts, the first can be defined
as the “Process Definition” group, where standards and procedures
must be defined and established across the value chain for
controlling the risks, this first part is the base for a quality
product and it regroups solutions for the blue arms on the 5M
analysis.
A second front can be defined as
People’s Skills, operators, engineers and manager’s qualification
is crucial for the implementation of the methods previously
defined, both from a technical qualification point of view (core
& trade competencies) and from a problem-solving point of view
(quality methods for analysis and treatment). Because if they do
not clearly understand the proposed technical or problem solving
procedures, it’s going to be difficult for them to put them in
practice at every step of the value chain.
But these two fronts of work are
not sufficient by themselves, because an organization can perform
huge efforts in terms of defining its processes, diagnosing the
risks, investigating root causes and defining and organizing a
comprehensive set of standards and procedures that will keep the
process form deriving out of the performance limits, an
organization can also perform trainings, seminars and workshops,
hiring the best qualified professionals in every field and despite
all of that, the risks can still be present and threatening for
the short-term performance and long-term sustainability of the
organization.
To alleviate this situation, a
third set of improvement actions is needed, the mindset-building
oriented actions, they are important to treat the risks coming
from the beliefs and culture of the people in the organization,
because an organization can define and publish the best possible
set of procedures, having the best training and qualification
programs, and if people do not feel compelled to follow, to abide
by the standard, all the qualification and method-definition work
will be wasted.
In the 5M analysis developed, the
Mindset risks are one of the most numerous groups, along with
Methods, if we consider that different quality tools, methods and
standards are already existing and implemented across many
industries, then the strongest problem will be to find or define
an effective mindset improvement process, this is, a change
management process focused on organizational culture improvement.
Having established that the main root causes for the present
quality risks are a matter of having the right mindset across to
deliver quality products, which represents a cultural state of the
organization, the solution approach will be focused on the human
and the transformation process needed to create and develop a
mature quality mindset in the mentalities of decision makers,
plant managers, engineers and so on. This process can be defined
as a Top Down change management methodology.
Among other existing change
management approaches like the well-known Plan, Do, Check, Act
cycle from the professor Edward Deming [25], the one proposed by
the professor John P. Kotter in 1995 is one of, if not the most
popular. Many different authors have quoted and discussed this
approach to prove or criticize its model (according to google
scholar data, his work has been cited by over 6500 other
publications).
In the model proposed by his
book, professor John P. Kotter proposed a series of 8 steps deemed
applicable for any enterprise or organization having trouble to
adapt to changes or establishing lasting modifications to its
culture, routines and ways of working.
The steps proposed by professor Kotter are the following [26]:
(1) establish a sense of urgency
about the need to achieve change – people will not change if they
cannot see the need to do so;
(2) create a guiding coalition –
assemble a group with power energy and influence in the
organization to lead the change;
(3) develop a vision and strategy
– create a vision of what the change is about, tell people why the
change is needed and how it will be achieved;
(4) communicate the change vision
– tell people, in every possible way and at every opportunity,
about the why, what and how of the changes;
(5) empower broad-based action –
involve people in the change effort, get people to think about the
changes and how to achieve them rather than thinking about why
they do not like the changes and how to stop them;
(6) generate short-term wins –
seeing the changes happening and working and recognizing the work
being done by people towards achieving the change is critical;
(7) consolidate gains and produce
more change – create momentum for change by building on successes
in the change, invigorate people through the changes, develop
people as change agents;
(8) anchor new approaches in the
corporate culture – this is critical to long-term success and
institutionalizing the changes. Failure to do so may mean that
changes achieved through hard work and effort slip away with
people’s tendency to revert to the old and comfortable ways of
doing things.
In this case, a new approach for
change its proposed, one adapted for the specific purpose of
establishing a quality mindset in an organization in a top down
manner, this type of approach can be, as the one developed by
professor Kotter, implemented in any kind of organization which
founds itself in a position where a mindset transformation is
needed, to put quality into practice when the organizational
culture is subjected to new or persistent quality risks.
The SM4Q approach comprises seven
phases, primarily conceived as a top down step by step process, it
has however some degree of bottom-up feedback as a crucial part on
some of its phases. The main characteristics for each step on this
approach are further explained and developed on this chapter, as
well as the main differences and resemblances with other
approaches such as Kotter’s 8-step model and Deming’s
PDCA.
Nonetheless, before starting any
organizational change, it is necessary a first phase to clearly
state and show why a change is needed. Men and woman in any
organization have working routines and established procedures,
with power positions and settled relationships, representing a
non-negligible inertia resistance for any change process,
especially one that is not properly justified and demonstrated as
urgent.
In the case of the seven-step
approach stated in this chapter, this preliminary phase of change
urgency demonstration that in Kotter’s model is called:
“establishing a sense of urgency about the need to achieve” it’s
considered as already developed on the first chapter of this work.
This phase can be compared to “create a guiding coalition” only
that more complete as it keeps in mind both groups of supportive
and resistant stakeholders along with their level of influence.
This helps anticipate the negative response to the change process
and formulate possible actions to convince and demonstrate the
importance of cultural change to resistant people.
Figure 15. Stakeholders mapping [source : author]
The three main stages defined for this phase are the following:
• Identify
transformation allies, potential coalition members and change
agents.
• Assemble a powerful and knowledgeful enough
coalition (Quality Board).
• Recognize dissenters as probable sources of
resistance, monitor and prepare for their reactions.
Figure 16. Top management commitment to lead change [source :
author]
The ISO9001 standard devotes an
entire chapter to leadership, and more specifically about the
importance of its commitment with the quality management system,
as well as its central role bearing the quality policy of the
organization [21].
Top management commitment is a
crucial step for any quality assurance endeavor. Furthermore, some
studies and research have shown that organizations with high top
management commitment are more resilient to variations on input
variables such as customer focus and supplier quality,
manufacturing higher quality products despite these variations
while organizations with low management commitment are more
exposed to external situations producing lower quality product
when there are negative variations [27].
Figure 17. The Quality policy statement as a symbol of
commitment [source : author]
A declaration from top
management with a description of what the organization wants to
achieve for its clients it’s the key deliverable for this first
step, it should contain as well a set of defined organizational
core values, stating the main beliefs and attitudes which the
organization wish to establish in its culture across all
employees, and finally but very important, a list of key broad
objectives for main areas of the organization along with general
strategies to achieve, measure and review the accomplishment of
these objectives.
Consequently, the corresponding
main stages for this phase are:
• Define the
set of organizational values that is essential to adopt for
quality improvement.
• Specify the main attitudes which the
organization wants to establish in its culture
• Outline broad improvement objectives for the
whole organization along with a strategy to measure, review and
achieve the change.
• Declare top management commitment with the
implementation of these key quality objectives (Quality Policy).
In this step the idea is to invite key representatives from
different business divisions, functions and levels to brainstorm,
define, classify and develop through discussions, a set of crucial
requirements which will allow to solve the most impactful,
recurrent and costly issues on the organization.
It begins with the “quality
board” assembled reaching out across the entire organization,
looking for people willing to change the status quo by committing
to work towards the new defined vision, these volunteers can be
chosen among the people already known by the members of the
quality board who they consider are more eager for change and who
have the best understanding and experience on how the company and
their business division currently works and where are the most
important struggles that negatively influence quality of delivered
products and services.
More directly, the main steps for
this phase of the change plan are the following:
• Enlist
experienced and product-aware managers from main value-adding
processes among the identified supporters of change.
• Create mixed (division and region) teams to
work on main different strategic areas of change.
Per Team:
• Brainstorm, discuss and share experiences and
lessons from past quality issues and risks.
• Sort by impact situations (potentially)
causing quality issues.
• Specify key concrete objectives to improve
quality in each change area.
Figure 19. Actual example of an organized set of priorities
developed [source: author]
The final deliverable of this
process should be an organized set of stated priorities, built
through discussion and agreement, kept as simple as possible to
avoid creating a never-ending list of requirements that nobody
will read by its own initiative.
This deliverable will be the
input for further discussion and development with the whole group
of middle managers required for the transformation process,
including those who are already been identified as resistant to
change.
Figure 19. Change launch, making it official [source : author]
Use a corporate event to inform
all the industrial sites managers and midlevel executives about
the changes coming, work with them in workshops to review the set
of urgent requirements to get their feedback and thinking about
the pertinence and the perceived degree of positive or negative
impact that these new requirements might have for their day to day
work in each business division.
Then, the following steps outline
the main activities required to complete this phase:
• Schedule a
special event to get all concerned managers together and isolated
from everyday tasks, this will allow them to concentrate on the
job at hand, the urgency of change presentation.
• Present the change process officially,
recalling its urgency and the strong commitment of the whole
organization with it. This must be done with a display of a solid
top management devotion to the process, presenting it along the
quality board.
• Introduce the teams work to all managers,
thoroughly explaining every specified objective.
• Gather all their feedback while keeping in
mind the resistance biasing some statements.
Figure 21. Real example of a change presentation workshop
performed [source: author]
As the photo suggests, the main
objective for this step will be accomplished if every single
middle manager has participated to the workshop of seeing,
reading, getting explanations, holding, understanding and asking
questions about each set of priorities developed, and then at the
end of this interiorization process, giving back their feedback
about the pertinence of the presented priorities.
Figure 22. Current vs. Goal status mapping [source : author]
• Obtaining
middle managers detailed and stated commitment to change is the
main goal of this phase, this can be achieved by following these
steps:
• Update the specific objectives with the change
coalition according to the gathered feedback.
• Request all concerned middle managers to map,
their current dept. status in respect to the updated set of
specific objectives. Analyze all current status received.
• Remind managers about the organization
indisputable commitment with change and encourage them to assemble
local teams and lead change.
• Ask managers for objective targets mapping for
the next year with their teams.
Figure 23. Active and supporting supervision [source : author]
• Request a
complete gap analysis with prioritized current versus target
objectives from each manager.
• Require detailed action plans from each
manager. Including actions, owners, metrics, milestones and
required resources to bridge gaps within the years’ time.
• Supervise data and defined metrics regarding
the expected results for each leader action plan.
• Meet regularly to discuss milestones
completion and help them overcome issues.
Figure 24. Top-down support for bottom-up change actions
[source : author]
• Communicate achievements using all available
tools to demonstrate the importance of efforts and convince
skeptics.
• Improve and update processes and procedures to
better suit the new establishing mindset improving flows and
responsiveness.
• Strengthen formation processes by responding
to skill issues and recurrently weak qualifications detected by
managers.
• Reward constructive initiatives from local
managers and their teams, putting in place a system of bonuses and
recognition for quality mindset sourced improvement and
achievements.
CHAPTER III: Engaged Change Leaders Forging a
Quality-Wise Organizational Culture
For perspectives, a yearly feedback cycle must be performed, where
past year results are gathered both for positive and negative
impacts, analyzed to make clear the cause-effect relations between
executed actions and results.
Figure 25. Inscribing change in a finite number of PDCA continuous
improvement cycles[28].
Lessons learnt and punctual
adjustments to priorities are presented along next steps.
Commitment with change is reassured and demonstrated by presenting
all good results obtained last year.
This is done yearly until the mindset change is achieved and
settled. Until all specified priorities are adopted and become a
part of the organization’s culture: “The Way We Do Things Here.”
The final goal of this change
process is to produce a collective mind for the organization, set
in mode: “deliver quality to customers through minding all the
process risks.”
A
Consolidated Set of Improvement Priorities
Figure 26. A broadly supported set of improvement priorities
[source : author]
Self-assessment capable and built
collectively with the contribution of transverse teams and the
wide feedback from all managers that will later execute the
improvement actions.
Figure 27. Empowered middle managers leading the change [source :
author]
Each value-adding process manager
becomes the leading agent for transformation. Engaging himself and
his team with detailed next-year goals. Developing a detailed
action plan to achieve the vision including material and
immaterial resources needed.
Figure 28. Quality finding its natural supporting function [source
: author]
A central coalition for change (the
Quality Bard) leads and coordinates the whole process from the
highest level of the organization (decision power). Becoming a
supplier of change support resources for every change leader and
its team, while analyzing their results to improve the whole
change process.
[1]
MarketsandMarkets, “High Voltage Cables Market by Type of Use and
Region - Global Forecast to 2021,” MarketsandMarkets, EP 3434,
Jul. 2016.
[2] R. K. Pachauri and A. Reisinger, “IPCC AR4
SYR,” IPCC.
[3] NASA/GSFC/Scientific Visualization Studio,
“NASA GISS: NASA News & Feature Releases: NASA, NOAA Data Show
2016 Warmest Year on Record Globally.”
[4] BCC Research and K. Parkhi, “Wire and Cable:
Materials, Technologies and Global Markets,” AVM072B.
[5] J. Conti, P. Holtberg, J. Diefenderfer, A.
LaRose, J. T. Turnture, and L. Westfall, “International Energy
Outlook 2016.” U.S. Energy Information Administration,
30-Jun-2016.
[6] European Commission, “ENERGY UNION AND
CLIMATE ACTION,” 01-Feb-2017.
[7] “High-voltage cable,” Wikipedia.
16-Mar-2017.
[8] Europacable, “Electricity Transmission of
Tomorrow - Underground and Subsea Cables in Europe.”
[9] T. Lin, “Compliance, Technology, and Modern
Finance (2016).”
[10] “List of biggest cable manufacturers,”
Wikipedia. 13-Apr-2017.
[11] Integer Research, “The Top 100 Insights
from the Top 100 Global Wire & Cable Producers Database 2016.”
[12] Thomson Reuters news agency, “Nexans SA
(NEXS.PA) Company Profile,” Reuters.com. [Online]. Available: http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/companyProfile?symbol=NEXS.PA.
[Accessed: 22-May-2017].
[13] EURONEXT, “CAC 40 family rules.” [Online].
Available:https://www.euronext.com/en/products/indices/FR0003999481-XPAR/market-information.
[Accessed: 22-May-2017].
[14] Nexans, “Company presentation 2016,”
01-Jun-2016.
[15] M. Saad, S. Cicmil, and M. Greenwood,
“Technology transfer projects in developing countries—furthering
the Project Management perspectives,” Int. J. Proj. Manag., vol.
20, no. 8, pp. 617–625, Nov. 2002.
[16] D. H. Stamatis, Failure Mode and Effect
Analysis: FMEA from Theory to Execution. ASQ Quality Press, 2003.
[17] “Skagerrak: Kabler for en lille milliard.”
[Online]. Available: http://energinet.dk/DA/ANLAEG-OG-PROJEKTER/Nyheder/Sider/SkagerrakKablerforenlillemilliard.aspx.
[Accessed: 27-May-2017].
[18] “UIC Report - Electricity
infrastructure.pdf.” [Online]. Available: http://www.acer.europa.eu/Official_documents/Acts_of_the_Agency/Publication/UIC%20Report%20%20-%20Electricity%20infrastructure.pdf.
[Accessed: 27-May-2017].
[19] RTE and H. Laffaye, “100 ans de haute
tension électrique à Paris.” [Online]. Available:
http://www.rte-france.com/webapp/100ansparis/index.html.
[Accessed: 30-Jun-2017].
[20] Standard, “NF EN 9100, Système de
Management de la Qualité, Exigences pour les Organisations de
l’Aéronautique, l’Espace et la Défense.” .
[21] “NF EN ISO 9001- Systèmes de management de
la qualité- Exigences.” Edition Afnor, www.afnor.org,
Oct-2015.
[22] J. Ollinger and Knoblich, Investigating the
effect of mental set on insight problem solving. 2008.
[23] T. Ohno, Toyota Production System. .
[24] F. at de.wikipedia, Ishikawa fishbone-type
cause-and-effect diagram. 2008.
[25] W. E. Deming, Out of the Crisis. MIT Press,
2000.
[26] J. P. Kotter and others, “Leading change:
Why transformation efforts fail,” 1995.
[27] S. L. Ahire and K. C. O’shaughnessy, “The
role of top management commitment in quality management: an
empirical analysis of the auto parts industry,” Int. J. Qual.
Sci., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 5–37, 1998.
[28] C. Roser, Multiple iterative loops of a
PDCA (plan, do, check act) cycle, also known as Deming Cycle. The
loops are repeated until the problem is solved. 2016.
(pdf)
(pdf)
