Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 04/06/23. Copyright ASCE.

For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ESSENTIAL TOOLS O F TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT

By Melville Hensey, 1 FelLow, ASCE

ABSTRACT; The literature on total quality management (TQM) has described the
various concepts, philosophies, benefits, needs, value, and experiences associated
with TOM. ttowever, little has been offered in the everyday management tools so
necessary to make TQM work. Also, most of the available literature ignores con-
sulting and design engineering, procurement, construction, and operation of facil-
ities or infrastructure of interest to civil engineers. This paper will attempt to fill
some of these needed areas, providing essential management tools for data gath-
ering, process improvement, and problem solving. These tools are essential in the
many aspects and applications of TQM in general for use in civil engineering and
construction.

INTRODUCTION

A b o u t 95% of what is available in current literature on total quality

management ( T Q M ) focuses on: (1) Necessities, benefits, and advantages;
(2) philosophies, concepts, and principles; (3) cultural and operating changes;
and (4) successful strategies and firms. The assumptions seem to be that
the how-to tools must be l e a r n e d from consultants, experience, or both.

PRESUPPOSITIONS OF TQM
T Q M is based on several presuppositions, in my view, which then require
certain simple tools for the successful a d o p t i o n and application of T Q M in
most fields of work, including engineering and construction.

1. W e must manage by fact w h e r e v e r possible, not by guesses or opinions.

2. T Q M must focus on work process i m p r o v e m e n t , not on problems.
3. It is important to m a p our basic work processes, if it has not been
done already.
4. Those most k n o w l e d g e a b l e a b o u t actual w o r k processes are those who
use them.
5. All staff can and should be actively involved in process i m p r o v e m e n t
as well as in delivering quality w o r k products and services.
6. Process i m p r o v e m e n t s are best d e v e l o p e d by teams who know the
work areaS and processes well.
7. Process i m p r o v e m e n t teams n e e d two things to be maximally effective:

9 Skillful leaders or facilitators, at the top of organizations and within

teams.
9 U n d e r s t a n d i n g and experience with several simple, basic group
processes (tools).

The seventh presupposition is the topic of this paper. Specifically, it will

lMgmt. Consulting Engr., Hensey Assoc., 8776 Long Lane, Cincinnati, OH 45231.
Note. Discussion open until March 1, 1994. To extend the closing date one month,
a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript
for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on July 14, 1992.
This paper is part of the Journal of Management in Engineering, Vol. 9, No. 4,
October, 1993. 9 ISSN 0742-597X/93/0004-0329/$1.00 + $. 15 per page. Paper
No. 4415.

329

J. Manage. Eng., 1993, 9(4): 329-339

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 04/06/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

focus on facilitator skills and group processes. Both are essential to TQM
success in the long term and cannot be separated in actual practice. For the
sake of clarity, however, they will be treated separately here.

WHY ARE THEY IMPORTANT?

In the writer's experience, facilitator skills and group processes are the
two items that can contribute the most (or become the biggest hurdles) to
the successful implementation of TQM in organizations of all kinds, public
or private, large or small, service- or product-focused.
To say it another way, TQM requires much more internal communication,
often in the form of team meetings. If these meetings continue to be as
ineffective as is "normal" in most organizations, TQM will wear people out,
interfere with operations, run overhead costs up, make managers even less
accessible, and ultimately defeat TQM. So, successful TQM requires skillful
facilitators to either assist quality-team leaders or be the team leaders.
Successful TQM also requires quality teams (at least) to be skilled at
some simple and basic tools (processes) that improve their collective effec-
tiveness.

FACILITATOR/LEADER SKILLS
Few references, if any, address facilitator skills. One of the few and one
of the best is by Rees (1991). (The second half of that work is particularly
valuable.)
Over the years, the writer has developed a short list of the physical and
mental skills necessary to learning about and being a useful, helpful facil-
itator of work groups and teams. Here, then, is the bare minimum list of
facilitator skills for managers and leaders:

1. Stand or sit where you can see everyone.

2. Speak clearly and slowly.
3. Keep the meeting objective in mind.
4. Assist the group in amending the agenda.
5. Remind the group of time and schedule.
6. Listen carefully enough to paraphrase contributors.
7. Solicit clarifications when the message is not clear.
8. Write down all comments: do not ignore contributors.
9. Encourage the total group to participate.
10. Avoid being judgmental about contributors.
11. Keep the discussion moving; avoid tangents and ruts.
12. Acknowledge the ownership of ideas.
13. Be sure your writing is readable.
14. Focus on what is important and/or urgent.
15. Go where the group's energy leads you (consistent with the meeting
objective).
16, Focus mostly on process (how we are working), not content (topics
or issues).
17. Highlight tangents and help the group get back on track.
18. Look for signs of teamwork, leadership, fatigue or disinterest, and
energy and excitement.
19. Try to sense when you need to:
330

J. Manage. Eng., 1993, 9(4): 329-339

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 04/06/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

9 Challenge the group.

9 Support the group (or individual).
9 Ask the group for help (for yourself).

20. Develop an understanding of task and maintenance roles: task is

moving the group forward, and maintenance is nurturing relationships.
21. Sense when best to use

9 Large groups: data gathering, brainstorming, voting or choosing,

and reviewing a draft or proposal.
9 Subgroups: giving free air time, doing a study, defining or analyzing
a problem, and developing a draft or proposal.

22. Develop several ways to help the group choose high-priority items
from a long list (of anything):

9 Approval voting: Have each member vote for all items he or she
supports or wants and take the high vote getters.
9 N/3 method: Give each member the number of votes equal to one-
third of the list and take the high vote getters.
9 Lobbying: Have each member lobby (speak for) his or her favorite
items, for no more than 1 min per person and let consensus emerge.

23. Develop facility with several group problem-solving aids or guides

such as force field (helping and hindering forces), cause-and-effect diagrams,
Venn diagrams, and the problem-options-plan (POP) process. (These are
covered in the next section of the paper).

Beyond actual facilitator skills, attitude is also important. An attitude

appropriate for facilitators is perhaps best described by Greenleaf (1977).
Greenleaf makes many helpful points, but probably the most vital is that
the facilitator must lead by being a servant of the group, enabling the group
to do its own best work on its own agenda.

GROUP PROCESSES (TOOLS)

While there are dozens, perhaps even hundreds, of useful group pro-
cesses, this paper will offer only the 10 most useful in addressing frequent
needs in the engineering and construction industry.

Problem Finding
The first group of five tools covers problem or opportunity identification:
(1) Flowcharting (or work-process mapping); (2) client-feedback surveys;
(3) other client feedback; (4) staff-feedback surveys; and (5) brainstorming
for focus. (The second group of f6ur, which cover problem analysis, will be
addressed later.)

Flowcharting
Flowcharting of existing basic work processes is essential to TQM for
several reasons:
331

J. Manage. Eng., 1993, 9(4): 329-339

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 04/06/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

9 Most actual work processes differ considerably from so-called stan-

dard procedures, if there are any written standards available,
9 It is vital to know what is happening now before any "improve-
ments" are even considered.
9 Firms that have pursued International Standards Organization (ISO)
9000 certification have found significant benefits from this step alone
(flowcharting).

Fig. 1 is a fowchart on how to construct such charts in the most simple

way. Flowcharts have been useful for years in such fields as construction,
computer analysis, process engineering, and mathematics. Flowcharting, at
its simplest, only requires showing events or activities of any process in
logical sequence. (The charting in Fig. 1 is for work processes as they exist
now,)

Client-Feedback Surveys
Several of our clients, consulting engineers, design engineers, and con-
structors have developed their client-feedback surveys and process to an art
form because it provides valuable information for improving services; it
provides helpful ideas for expanding services; it is an early warning system
for client problems; and it helps maintain client contact and rapport.
Fig. 2 shows a simple but useful form developed by Lockwood, Jones &
Beals. This is one example of many that are brief and easy for clients to
use.
Firms that use such surveys find them valuable to use either annually or
at project (or phase) completion with active clients.

Other Client Feedback

At least three other processes are effective for gathering useful feedback
from clients--feedback that helps in the same ways as in client surveys.

Project postmortems: These meetings with clients at the end of a

project (or phase) are often led by the project manager, the principal
in charge, or the director of marketing (or business development).

FIG. 1. Example of Simple Flowchart

332

J. Manage. Eng., 1993, 9(4): 329-339

 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 04/06/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

HOW DID YOU FIND OUR SERVICE? OVERALL ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY CIVIL STRUCrlJRAL
54321 4321 54321 54321 54321
PERCEPTION OF YOUR NEEDS
RESPONSIVENESS
TECHNICAL COMPETENCE
Dear Client:
SOLUTIONS
COST EFFECTIVENESS (PROJECT)
Please take a few minutes to VALUE FOR FEE PAID
fill o u t a n d r e t u r n t h i s e v a l u a t i o n
c a r d ( p o s t a g e p r e p a i d ) . It Is Ira- COMMENT
porMnt to us to Isom about your
expodences with our firm. Your
HOW WERE WE TO DO BUSINESS WITH? 5 4 3 3 1
feedback will help Improve our
service. PROJECT MANAGEMENT ~ I RATING:
SUPPORT STAFF (TELEPHONE, ETC.) ~ 5 - Excellent 4 - Good 3 - Average
ACCOUNTING I I I I I I 2-Fair 1-Poor
A l s o , if y o u w o u l d like t o
discuss anything concerning COMMENT
your project, please feel free to
CO call m e . O u r p h o n e n u m b e r Is
WOULD YOU USE/RECOMMEND OUR FIRM FOR ANOTHER PROJECT? [ ] YES [ ] NO
(513) 293-6967.
COMMENT
Thank you,
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THE LEVEL OF OUR SERVICE IS:
[ ] IMPROVING [ ] SLIPPING [ ] UNCHANGED [ ] NIA
W.D. L ~ c l ~ o ~ l WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY COMMENTS ABOUT YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH OUR FIRM AND ANY IDEAS THAT
COULD HELP IMPROVEOUR SERVICE.IF ANY MEMBERSOF OUR STAFFWERE ESPECIALLYHELPFUL AND RESPON-

J. Manage. Eng., 1993, 9(4): 329-339

SIVE TO YOUR NEEDS, PLEASE INCLUDE THEIR NAME/NAMES SO THAT WE CAN RECOGNIZE THEIR EFFORTS,

COMMENT
Note: Refold card with our
address on outside.

NAME OF PROJECT DATE _ _

NAME OF COMPANY SIGNATURE

FIG. 2. Example of Client-Feedback Form (Used with Permission from Lockwood, Jones & Beals)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 04/06/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The focus must be on our client's feedback and not on our own
excuses, defensiveness, and other problems.
9 Partnering (team) meetings: Such meetings are usually focused on
building more of a team relationship (instead of a client-contractor
relationship). They are appropriate at any time the parties feel or
want the trust and benefits it may bring. The agenda for these
meetings should be developed by both parties and may take several
days to accomplish. Often they find it helpful to use outside facil-
itators and neutral territory.
9 Client focus groups: Here the client group may represent one client
or several who have similar needs and interests in a particular type
of facility or service. Such meetings should be well planned, well
led, and supported so that clients' time is clearly appreciated.

Staff-Feedback Surveys
Being the closest to the actual work of providing services, and often being
closest to clients, technical and support staff members as well as key man-
agers can often make strong contributions.
Surveys need to be brief and well organized. It may be helpful to test a
draft survey on a small sample before using it more broadly. Sample size
is important: Too few and quality suffers; too many and data summarizing
becomes a massive job. Signed surveys are best because the data and ideas
can be followed up with one-on-one interviews when more clarity or more
information is needed.
Fig. 3 shows a one-page survey developed by the writer and Harch Gill
of Dames and Moore Consultants, Tampa, Fla. It covers a lot of topics
easily in a simple format and in a small space.
(Caution: Staff surveys tend to raise expectations that management will
use and follow through on some things. People will expect change. If nothing
apparently happens, they will be disappointed and morale may decline.)

Brainstorming
This group process has been around for a long time, yet is seldom used
well. Few realize that brainstorming is as useful for problem finding as it is
for solution finding.
Applied to problem finding, the same ground rules apply as to generating
creative solutions:

1. Focus the group on a clearly stated question. For example, what are
all the possible causes, symptoms, or aspects of our poor performance on
remediation projects?
2. Strive for quantity of responses from all participants.
3. All responses are welcomed, including the unusual.
4. No responses are rejected, criticized, or discounted.

If some participants appear to drown out others, take contributions one at

a time by going around the group one by one. (It is okay to pass if no
contribution is available.)
After the list is built, it should then be discussed and critiqued. During
that discussion, there may be additions to the list. As a last step, ask the
group to identify, by consensus or by approval voting, the top candidates
from the total list as the key problems (or aspects of the problem).
334

J. Manage. Eng., 1993, 9(4): 329-339

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 04/06/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ORGANIZATION EVALUATION SHEET

EVALUATOR ORGANIZATION UNIT

(NAME). EVALUATED
RATING
ASPECT P A G* COMMENTS
1. General Management

2. Project Management

3. Office or Unit
Management

4. Marketing, Sales and

Business Development
5. Teamwork

6. Human Resources

7. Financial Performance

8. Competitiveness

9. Productivity

10. Quality of Work

11. Morale/Climate

12. Recognition/Rewards

13. What are our Strengths?

14. What are our

Weaknesses?
15. What are our Threats?

16. What are our

Opportunities?

17. Where should we be

headed?

18. Other Issues or Concerns?

*P/A/G = Poor/Average/Good

FIG. 3. Example of Staff-Feedback Form

Problem Analysis
The second group of four tools covers problem analysis or diagnosis, once
problems are identified. They are, from simplest to more complex:

1. Pareto principle
2. Force-field analysis
3. Venn diagrams
4. Cause-and-effect diagrams

None of these require statistics or even mathematics. Their value lies in

helping a group organize or account for the various symptoms, causes, or
aspects of process problems.
335

J. Manage. Eng., 1993, 9(4): 329-339

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 04/06/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Pareto Principle
At its simplest, the Pareto principle suggests that 80% of problems are
caused by only 20% of factors, in broad terms. The principle is applied in
many ways, all of which aim to help the group sift the vital few (of anything)
from the trivial many.
The principle can be applied by discussing factors, voting approval, reach-
ing consensus, and tallying occurrences and other factors.

bbrce-Field Analysis
Lewin (1951) developed the force field. This offers a convenient way of
identifying the various helping and hindering forces that seem to hold a
particular situation or problem in equilibrium. The force field then clarifies
what forces can be most easily changed to improve the situation.
The following shows a typical way of depicting these helping or hindering
forces. The example used is from university facility management, with the
goal of maintaining or improving cleanliness of classrooms, halls, buildings,
and grounds.
The helping forces are:

9 Teamwork with users

9 Positive, can-do attitudes
9 Raising of user awareness
9 Improvement of staff skills
9 Improvement of existing methods
9 Better tools and materials

The hindering forces are:

9 Institutional budget cuts

9 The process beginning at a low level (existing conditions)
9 Lack of cooperation from other departments
9 Adjacent construction that creates litter

Improvement of the situation can be considered by reducing hindering

forces and by adding or strengthening helping forces, as appropriate.

Venn Diagrams
Most of us have used Venn diagrams without being aware of it. They
consist of using circles or ovals to show how several items relate to one
another, i.e., what is included or excluded in various sets and subsets. Based
on set theory, they assist in defining such elements as overlaps, main parts,
and subparts.
Fig. 4 gives an example based on a department of transportation, including
funding, design, construction, and maintenance activities.
The value of Venn diagramming is in its ability to show relationships
quickly and clearly--exclusions and inclusions, or super- and subordinates.
Lists or equations can do the same thing but are seldom as clear or quickly
understood.

Cause-and-Effect Diagrams
Cause-and-effect diagrams, also called fishbone diagrams or Ishikawa
analysis, are most helpful when problem causes or contributors are many
336

J. Manage. Eng., 1993, 9(4): 329-339

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 04/06/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 4. Example of Venn Diagram for Department of Transportation

#,#,
FIG. 5. Example of Cause-and-Effect Diagram Applied to Roof Construction

in number and possibly interrelated. For situations like these, cause-and-

effect diagrams provide a very effective way of clarifying a situation--to
identify all likely factors related to a problem or goal--using information
that is both verbal and visual. Fig. 5 provides an example of this.
This process begins by first identifying the problem or situation, then
drawing main branches and items on main branches that are or could be
contributors. Following that, linkages between items can be easily shown
with lines, asterisks, or other symbols. A more recent development makes
use of vertical branches, so the items can be written more easily horizontally.
This also facilitates adding more (vertical) branches on other sheets of paper.
337

J. Manage. Eng., 1993, 9(4): 329-339

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 04/06/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

APPLICATIONS
The writer has worked with many groups over the years on such issues
as quality, productivity, planning, management problem solving, and change
management. The tools discussed here have been field-tested in many ways,
and have been useful to groups by focusing effort, reducing frustration,
reducing time waste, developing clarity, getting commitment, leading to
action, and enhancing teamwork.
The writer has found brainstorming and the Pareto principle to be the
most frequently useful. These two tools can be combined in the POP process
(Hensey 1992).

POP Process
The key to the use of the POP process is a chart pad on an easel and a
human recorder. The recorder must be able to listen well and capture the
essence of what he or she hears with a clear, fast hand.
Many feel that this process (or any problem-solving process) must be
linear and sequential. Much research shows that human creativity is often
nonlogical. The POP process allows for this; it guides without getting in the
way of the group.

Problem Notes
Actually, the group should begin with the problem and force itself to
spend significant effort there. It is very tempting to duck this step, and we
habitually give it too little effort. Take a brainstorming approach (no crit-
icism allowed) and push the group to list all aspects of the problem.

Options
At some point it is okay to begin working on the options list. Leave the
problem list open-ended in case more can be added there.
The group should avoid early closure on the options list; it takes time to
allow the group's full creativity to blossom. Again, take a brainstorming
approach (no criticism allowed).

Plans
As the group runs out of steam on options, ask them which options are
most likely to make a large difference if implemented. After a time of
balanced discussion, when all members are heard from, it may be necessary
to do some choosing.

Approval Voting
A way to choose that avoids or reduces polarization in the group is called
approval voting. Here, each member votes (by raised hand) for all options
that he or she can support, whether or not those options are the best in his
or her view. Jack might vote for five options, Phyllis for three, Sam for
seven, and Jane for four; that's fine. From this will emerge one or several
clear preferences of the total group.
The POP process works well for most groups or teams, because:

9 It provides minimal guidance to the group.

9 It collects the collective wisdom in a visual format.
9 It allows for jumping back and forth from the problem to options
to plans.
338

J. Manage. Eng., 1993, 9(4): 329-339

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by CEPT - Centre for Environmental Planning & Tech University on 04/06/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

9 It focuses on creativity rather than arguments, nit-picking, and po-

sitions being taken.
9 It is simple enough to remember, use, and produce results without
any special requirements other than a chart pad.
9 It requires at least one member (or leader) to focus on the process,
not the content.

CONCLUSION
This paper has focused on two areas of T Q M that have been, generally,
poorly understood and explained, and particularly so for engineering and
construction: group facilitator skills and group process tools. While not as
relevant to engineering and construction, two other good sources of infor-
mation on these topics are Rees (1991) and Scholtes (1988).

APPENDIX. REFERENCES
Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership. Paulist Press, Ramsey, N.J.
Hensey, M. (1992). Collective excellence: Building effective teams. ASCE, New York,
N.Y.
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. Harper, New York, N.Y.
Rees, F. (1991). How to lead work teams: Facilitation skills. Pfeiffer & Co., San
Diego, Calif.
Scholtes, P. R. (1988). The team handbook: H o w to use teams to improve quality.
Joiner Assoc. Inc., Madison, Wis.

339

J. Manage. Eng., 1993, 9(4): 329-339