Center for Creative Leadership 6 Issues & Observations: VoL Z4, No. I , 1994

A Postscript to “Total Quality for Americans”: Dealing with Organizational Culture

Elizabeth Holmes

In the last MO, in a prelude to my article on the role that cultural assumptions play in total quality management, I asked readers to write down and send to me the fust thing that came into their minds as they read each of the following words: standards, specijkations, control, mainte- nance, pelfection, new, change, possibiliry, opportunity, and breakrhrough.

I received, and continue to receive, many responses, ranging from single words to lengthy definitions. One person designated each respmse as positive, neutral, or negative, and another said simply the first five words are stifling and the last five are intriguing and energizing. As you can see from the sidebar that gives a sampling of readers’ word-associations,

Word-association Responses

Standad Performance; Rules (neutral); High (as in personal woRh, character); Measures; IS0 9OOO; High; Level of achievement; Model

mance; cooperation; Qualities; Expectations; High; Methods/measurements from which systems can be evaluated, monitored, or improved; Standards.. . are often considered mundane-something meets standards (in

other words, “so what!”).

by Which YOU quality and peaOr-

Specifications: Details; Measures (neutral); Desirable parameters-what is right-the right measure-masm up, fit-fitness to use; Costs; Meeting customer’s requirements; Details; Instructions; Tangible requirements for meeting satisfaction; Bureaunacy; Blueprint Requirements; Quality; What something is built or maintained to, require- ments for form, fit or function, a minimum.

Control: Requirements; Bondage (negative); Feedback-staying within limib-skerh g, on tug&; Power; Lhentralized; Freak; Direc- tions; To determine course of actiodbehavior; SJ [from Myers-Briggs]; Dominance; Powerlessness; Mechanism; Maintaining, manipulating or governing situations or circumstances-with machinery or processes

the first five words generated a different energy from the last five. This distinction is consistent with the experience I have had previously when I did this exercise.

comments about the article that often accompanied them, I was reminded that there are at least three factors that affect our response to a quality initiative: the culture itself, how we describe the process, and who we are relative to the organiza- tion. Also, when we talk about the cultural aspects of TQM, the language we use is not simply a reflection of American culture but also of the specific organizational culture.

as the combination of three interlinking

Looking at these responses, and at the

Edgar Schein (1981) describes culture

this may be a positive but with people my experience as a manager and team leader is that this is normally considered in the negative.

Maintenance: Ongoing; Upkeep (neutral); Janitor, Up time; Ianim, Preventative; Dirt, Repair, upkeep; Ongoing care and support to function; Routine; Support; Monitoring; Car, The unglorifed (and un-iated) activity of keeping something going.

Perfection: Quality; Goodness (positive); What others think I want; Impossibility; Smve for. Unrealistic; Unattainable goal; The ideal state of beingldoing; Pareto; Compulsive; Excellence; Love; The ever- elusive goal of co~porate life, to do every- thing right all the time-at h e end of the week, the word often makes me tired just thinking about it.

New: Innovation; Bright (positive); Toy- baby-fresh start; Different; Challenge; Shiny; Without use; Entirely different from before-”fresh out of the bag”; Imaginative; Old; Original; Old; Better, though often just different.

Change: Constanc Life (positive); coins, c h a o s - o v d word; Transition; Con-

levels: artifacts (visible practices), values (testable by actions), and basic assump tions (taken for granted, often uncon- scious). Applying this definition to an organizational context, we can see that when companies impose quality practices and values on top of unexamined and unquestioned assumptions, there is likely to be a mismatch bemeen the founding, underlying assumptions (which have given rise to the current values and practices) and the new set of values and practices being introduced.

For example in an organization in which information is, unconsciously, guarded as a source of power, sharing information horizontally and vertically challenges people’s unconscious belief that sharing information will make them vulnerable.

big part of the task is to learn to assess its particular organizational culture and identify those assumptions which need

For a company implementing TQM, a

tinual; Crisis; Different; To mod@, amend, revise, reconstitute, alter, movement and growth, Exciting; Innovation; Excitement, good; Different, sometimes uncomfortable, retraining may be required, low value-added alternative to current approach.

Pasib*: Vision; Creativity (positive); Seduction of multiple futures without limitation of chosen current path; Probability; Examine and study; Can; One solution; “What $?“-“could be”-”who knowsr’; Creative; Goals; Challenge; Change; A conceived option or outcome that offers value and improvement.

Opportunity: Challenge; Creation (positive); New, fresh, energizing to action; Golden; Pursue; Challenge; Problem; Change, avail- able optiom; Advantage; Chance; Adventure; New; A chance or window of circumstance that offers value and improvement.

BreaMhrough: Discovery; Fun (positive); Sun from clouds, end of winter storm-new paradigm; Demolition ball; Dynamic change; Light; New solution; removing the boulder in the path to understanding and action, reversal of momentum from stall to quick start; Innovation; Innovation; Achievement; Now; A paradigm shift, a quanm leap, something almost entirely new.

Issues & Observations: VoL 14. No. 1,1994 7 Center for Creative Leadership

changing, to develop the skills necessary to ensure the changes are made, and to create processes to continually revisit the the first two steps. These processes, however, are not linear but simultaneous. To surface underlying assumptions, organizations must develop a climate which permits the “undiscussable” to be surfaced and addressed openly, publicly, and yith the intention of each participant, regardless of rank, to learn from the dialogue.

These discussions, however, can be subtly influenced by other cultural factors, such as our response to language. Robert Marshak (1%3), for instance, identifies four images of change that we find in our organizations: Fir & Mainrain (“The processing machine is broken and we have to fix it fast”); Build & Develop (‘We have established a strong foundation; now we need to improve our performance“); Move & Relocate (“It’s time to leave the old system behind and focus on a new approach”); and Liberate & Recreate (“We need to break away from our old habits and thinking and become a whole new organization”).

He stresses the importance of using the appropriate metaphorical language when discussing a given change. When we are implementing total quality manage- ment, I believe that we often use the metaphors of ‘?Fix & Maintain” and “Build & Develop” when in fact we are trying to “Liberate & Recreate.” To make quality part of the organizational culture, we are essentially saying we must transform the culture. To do so requires that we examine the culture from its most significant and impactful level, and identify what mes- sages we are conveying in our choice of verbal and visual descriptors.

this process which I think is often not taken into consideration: how individual levels of development, particularly among senior management, affect organizational culture. Gervase Bushe (1990) believes that many people currently are operating at the “achiever” stage of development in which they define themselves in terms of roles and achievements; strive for quantifi- able, measurable outcomes; strive for “objectivity” in dealing with people; and have a low tolerance for paradox and contradiction. These characteristics fit well with a type of organization he calls

There is another factor that influences

“control-based.” A control-based organiza- tion is characterized, in part, by clear roles and responsibilities; structured, hierarchi- cal relations; a focus on the bottom line; a preference for quantifiable outcomes; and decisions and issues that ire framed in simplistic dichotomies (eithedor, widlose, rationaYemotional, practicallacademic).

Gervase thinks that ‘‘successfd commitment based on work systems” requires leaders who are at or beyond a stage of development he calls “strategist.” Such people can ‘‘function in ambiguity, hold the paradoxes such structures create, don’t project their internal world onto the organization, and can see and work with social processes.” These characteristics fit well with a “commitment-based organiza- tion,” which requires, among other things, that there be: loose roles and multiple, overlapping responsibilities; an ambiguous authority hierarchy; a complex, multi- perspective framing of issues (bothland, widwin); and attention to the irrational, unconscious side of people and organiza- tions in managerial decision making.

I think that current organizational operating assumptions, and the cultures they make up, tend to reflect the control- based mentality. Until we surface and examine these assumptions, transformation to the desired commitment-based quality culture will continue to elude us.

Bibliography Bushe, G. R. (1990). Psychological develop-

ment and organization. Unpublished paper copyrighted by Discovery & Design Inc., Vancouver, British Columbia.

Hohes, E. (1993). Total quality for h e n - cans. Issues & Observations, 13(4), 1-6.

Marshak, R. J. (1993, summer). Managing the metaphors of change. Organizational Dynamics, pp. 44-56.

Japanese management style have a message far American managers? S l m Management Review, 23( 1). 55-67.

Schein, E. H. (1981, fall). S M R Fonun: Does

--- Elizabeth Holmes is a Senior Program

Associate in the Leadership Innovations Group at the Center. She is Program Manager for “Leading a Quality Culture: Beyond the Plateau. *’

Issues & Observations Published by

Center for Creative Leadership One Leadership Place

Post Office Box 26300 Greensboro, NC 274384300

San Diego, 619453-4774

910-288-7210

COlO~dO Springs, 719-633-3891 BI~SSC~S, (32-2) 346-42-01

Walter F. Ulmer, Jr., President and CEO Walter W. Tornow, Vice President,

Research and Publication W. H. Drath, IZI, Publication Director

Editorial Advisory Group Robert M. Bunrride Elizabeth Holmes

Cynthia D. McCadey Leonard R. Sayles

Martin Wilcox, Editor Marcia Horowitz, Associate Editor Ellen Hamman, Editorial Assistant

Joanne Fergusoq Layout and Design John McKeithan, Photographer

The Center is an international, nonprofit educational institution founded in 1970 to foster creative leadership and effective management for the good of society overall. As a part of this mission, it encourages a general process of inquiry and understand- ing in which ideas dated to leadenhip are raised, exchanged, and evaluated. Issues & Observm‘m, in presenting the work of Ccntcr staff and 8SSOCistCS. provib a sample of the Center’s contribution to this process. The ideas presented here are those of the author or authors.

Thc Center for Creative Leadership docs not discriminate with resped to the admission of students on the basis of race, sex, color, national or ethnic origin, nor does it discrimi- nate on any such basis with respect to its activities, programs, or policies.

81994 Center for creative LeDduship All rights reserved

ISSN 1065-464X