Hrm 532 Week 3 Quiz

u GAO

United States General Accounting Office Washington, D.C. 20548 General Government Division

B-249779 March 30, 1993 The Honorable The Secretary Mike Espy of Agriculture

Dear Mr. Secretary: Total Quality Management (TQM) is a management approach that strives to achieve continuous improvement of quality through TQM also organizationwide efforts based on facts and data. focuses business processes on meeting the needs of customers, Although TQM traditionally has both internal and external. been associated with private sector organizations and their efforts to remain competitive and profitable, in recent years have been attempting to implement TQM to federal organizations cope with budget restrictions and better serve the public. We
recently surveyed federal installations to determine the extent of their use of TQM and learned that 68 percent of the surveyed were implementing TQM.* An installations as defined by the Office of Personnel installation, Management, is a unit with a specifically designated head who is not subject to on-site supervision by a higher level installation head and who has been delegated some degree of authority in the performance of personnel management functions. Our survey covered over 2,800 installations, such as Internal Revenue Service Centers, Social Security offices, Two hundred military depots, and Agriculture field offices. and sixty-six installations of the Department of Agriculture were included in this survey, and the purpose of this correspondence is to provide you a brief summary of the results as they apply to Agriculture as well as to compare Agriculture results with the results of all surveyed federal installations. We believe this information--particularly data on barriers to TQM-- can be useful in your planning and as a baseline for judging future efforts.

b

'Qu i Mna mn* 1 (GAO/GGD-93-9BR, Oct.

1, 1992).
GAO/GGD-93-16R, TQM Implementation at Agriculture

B-249779 STATUS OF TOM Figures 1 and 2 show the percentage of government installations and Agriculture installations implementing TQM. As figure 1 shows, about 68 percent of the federal installations responding to our survey reported they were starting or already implementing TQM Figure 2 shows about 36 percent of the Agriculture . installations responding to our survey were starting or already another 36 percent of the implementing TQM. Additionally, responding Agriculture installations reported that they planned to implement TQM (not shown in figure 2). Fiaure 1: Percentaae Imolementina TOM of Government Installations
Never attempted implementation

2%

Other

68%-

-

Starting or already implemented

2

B-249779 Fiuure 2: Percentaae Imolementina TQM of Acxiculture Installations

Never attempted implementation

To obtain a picture of the status of federal TQM efforts, we asked installations to report their efforts in terms of a fivephase maturity scale.
Maturity definitions ranged from Phase 1, preliminary TQM efforts, to Phase 5, institutionalized efforts that are achieving significant benefits (see enc. I for definitions). As figure 3 shows, 51 percent of the total federal installations responding to the survey reported being in Phase 1 or 2, while 61 percent of the Agriculture installations reported still being in these early phases. The fact that many Agriculture installations are in the early phases of TQM reflects the relative newness of Agriculture's efforts; 67 percent of the installations implementing TQM reported beginning TQM efforts within the past 3 years. 3
Y

,

..

B-249779 Ficrure 3:
100

Status

of TOM

Poromt4oloqanbtlamwNhTOYdhwta

50

50

40

20

0 Phm.1 mm1 Phm.2

Ph8na

Phnn4

TotJ in8tdluioM fodoml
Dqwtmant of AgrlaAtun

In our survey of federal installations, we asked respondents about the extent of their involvement in 43 activities commonly undertaken by organizations involved in TQM. Such activities include providing training in TQM tools for employees, establishing quality councils or steering groups, and Installations reported that establishing problem-solving teams. their involvement in these activities increased as maturity identifying themselves In other words, installations increased. as more mature in TQM also more frequently said they were doing the 43 activities commonly associated with TQM.

4

B-249779 Comparing Agriculture installations' involvement in these activities with reported maturity phases, we discovered that Agriculture generally reflected the same trend as in the total survey --that is, as Agriculture installations' maturity increased, they more frequently reported doing TQM activities. For example, 21 percent of the combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 Agriculture installations provided training in TQM tools for employees, whereas 80 percent of the combined Phase 4 and Phase 5 installations provided such training.

BENEFITS OF TOM in two ways: (1) effect on external We considered benefits customers as reflected by overall organizational performance and customers as reflected by internal (2) effect on internal conditions. operating We asked respondents to assess TQM's performance in terms of productivity, effect on organizational reductions in costs, quality of products and services, overall service to customers, customer satisfaction, and timeliness. To depict the overall impact, we developed an index that is the average of responses to our questions on the degree of impact. Figure 4 compares Agriculture and total federal responses and shows that almost two-thirds of the Agriculture installations reported positive benefits, very few saw negatives to TQM, and about a third felt it was too soon to judge benefits. These results are similar to the overall federal survey results.

5

"

B-249779 Fiaure 4: Imnact of TOM on Performance

50

Tot4 fdrml Impllafbno
Dopwtmmt of Agrkulture

We compared Reported benefits increased as maturity increased. the composite index of responses on external benefits with maturity phases and learned that more mature installations reported greater benefits. Figure 5 shows, by maturity phase, the percentage of total federal respondents and the Agriculture respondents reporting somewhat to very positive benefits.

6

‘W :

, ).

;

B-249779 Fiuure 5: Res~o de ts Reportins Oruanizationa 1 PZrfLmance Increased

--

Tad fadad inrtdlatbnci Dwutmont ol A&ulture

we asked the installations to For internal operating conditions, operating identify the impact of TQM on each of 13 internal conditions, such as communications and labor-management we developed an index in relations. To illustrate the benefits, the same manner as for the organizational performance indicators. Figure 6 compares the Agriculture and total federal responses and once again shows that Agriculture installations generally reported about the same benefits as all of the federal installations. Agriculture installations reported positive benefits in internal operating conditions similar to those in their overall organizational performance.

B-249779 Fiuu e 6,.
InteEns Extent of Positive Oneratina Conditions Impact on

,
Id

, Totd fadoral Inrtallatknr hp6nm6nt of Agrkxllturo

In a manner similar to the overall organizational benefits, we compared the composite index of benefits with maturity phases and noted that reported internal conditions improved as maturity increased. Figure 7 shows the percentage of respondents reporting a moderate to very great positive impact, by maturity phase, for both Agriculture and the total federal respondents.

8,

.
B-249779 Fiaure 7: Reswondents Reoortina Internal Operatina Conditions Positive Imoact on

w J

h ai)

--

Tofd fdud lhputmm

insmIlatbna of Agrlculturo

BARRIERS TO TOM We asked all the federal installations we sent our recent survey to about the significance of 21 potential barriers to implementing TQM that had been identified through our research. Nine barriers were said to be moderate to very major problems by 39 percent or more of the total federal respondents. As figure generally the total barriers. from Agriculture respondents were 8 shows, the replies consistent with the category of barriers identified by federal survey and the extent of impact of these It should be noted that many of these barriers are

9

,,

‘,‘.

B-249779 related to employee issues, such as (1) employees do not believe they are empowered to make changes, (2) employees lack sufficient information on how to use TQM tools, and (3) employees lack information and training on TQM concepts and theory. Fiaure 8: Respondents Reportina Barriers Are Moderate to Verv Major Problems to Imolementina TOM

00

40

20
0

hiiii

Total f8d8ral ln8tallaUcm Dapwtmont of Agriu~lturo

In one difference between Agriculture and the total federal survey, 43 percent of the Agriculture installations reported moderate to very major difficulties in measuring customer satisfaction as a significant barrier. This compares to 34 10

B-249779 percent for the survey of all federal installations.

Both Agriculture and total federal respondents reported that the For barriers became less significant as the TQM effort matured. example, 75 percent of the combined Phase 1 and 2 Agriculture installations reported that funding and budgeting were a moderate whereas 43 percent of the combined Phase to a very major barrier, 4 and 5 Agriculture respondents saw this as a significant barrier. Also, 74 percent of the combined Phase 1 and 2 Agriculture installations reported that employees' lack of information on TQM tools was a significant barrier, whereas 29 percent of the combined Phase 4 and 5 Agriculture installations saw this as a significant barrier. Further, 71 percent of the combined Phase 1 and 2 Agriculture installations reported employees' lack of information on TQM theory was a significant barrier, but only 21 percent of the combined Phase 4 and 5 installations saw this as a significant barrier. Agriculture

I

11

,

B-249779

Our survey of federal TQM efforts indicated that as installations invested more time and effort in TQM activities, they matured in the implementation of TQM, found that the barriers became less difficult, and reaped greater benefits. Although some differences were reported between Department of Agriculture TQM experiences and those of all federal respondents, Agriculture respondents' overall message generally appeared to be similar.

We have enclosed a copy of our report Quality Manaaement: Survev of Federal Oraanizations (GAO/GGD-93-9BR, Oct. 1, 1992) to provide information on the background; results; and objective, scope, and methodology of the total survey. We hope you will find this information useful in guiding your quality management initiatives and in improving service to your customers under today's budget constraints. We will make copies of this correspondence available to others upon request. The major contributors to this correspondence are listed in enclosure II. please call me on (202) If you have any questions, 512-8387. Sin,rely yours, ,

Dbrector, Government Business Operations Issues

I / / /

12

Bhl~beF

Budget

Function

Codes

B-249779 [ 1 Check here if fdr Beetricted
Form

feeue Areas/Lines 7902 thia report

of Effort

Assignment W6563

Code

115-R (Dititribution GAO Reports) wed with

Rtpartr t6 recipients with .u anterink (*) will be handcbrrfed by: v
=arli*==----------l----------“-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~----=========~

-____.

initial Dietribution (1. External I tlt2Mat-d Becipients c”fR+ Recipient *The Honorable Mike Espy, Secretwy of Agriculture, Independence Ave. and 14th St., SW., Washington, DC 20250 Mr. Richard Guyer, Chief, Mgmt. and Productivity Improvement USDA, Ra. 3313 So., Independence Ave. b 14th St., SW, Mary Gerald, Mgmt. and Productivity Improvement Div., Independence Ave. b 14th St., SW,

Transmittal Documen (Check one, if applicable) Brief Basic Ltr. I 3 1 1 .E I

House Appropriations Comm,, Attn: House Governleflt Operations Comm., Attn: Senate Appropriations Comm., Attn: Senate Governmental Affairs CoUim,r Attn: Dir,, Office of Management 6 Budget, Attn: Speaker Of the House Preeident of the Senate House (Legislative) Howe Budget Coram,, Attn: Senate ( Appropr iat iotlti) Senate Senate Budget Comm., Attn: Ranking Minority Mbrs, of Colme. b Subcomme. Library of Congress, CR9
Add the

Nonbasic Gtr, GAO P,371 [I [I

Comm. Subcomm, Comm .

Total

100. of Copi&

lieted

in ii]

above:

9 0

(2.

I Enter Tot&l

Ro. of Copiee Lieted

in Part A of Fora 115-1:

OPR:OIuC
! ‘, /‘

GAO 115-U(j/91\ Porn

Ili***rtrbr===trPf+l~~w~~=~===~==~=s~~

ff=r’-------ap=rpyt======---------------------

----W.-I------..

Initirf,biatribution

Continued Recipient
Amt.

Comptroller orrice 0f

General,
P0iicy

Planning

& Reporting Mr, Finch Mr. Steven8

Dir., Ofllice

of Congressional

Relations

Cogniaant

Aesociate

birector

Mr, Leitch

InPorlation Office To participating regional

office8

and audit

sites:

Add the Total [A ] Bnter

No. of Copies Total initial

litlted

in (31 above: b Internal

@j u
(Add item Ill,

*=m*l==t-L”‘--‘-L*====-----*==~==-==------------------------------------=== -----------------I---------------------s ----e-I---

Exterhal

Distribution: Subject

111and IS] &bow)

Subsequent biattibutidn (4. 1 Subject Codea

NO.

t%pi(?B

Codes

lo.

Copiee

.a’ 3 --..4
16. ] Distribution to the Rem Media

-A -A 0
No. Copies

[ti* [B.

1 Bntei

Number of Copies 8ubsequeht

for One-Tire Dietributian:

Uecipiente

(Lirrted

in Part B of Form 115-1): and [6] above.)

0

J Enter Total

wie*rCEllhnliitl+rir~=~=====--,---------------Determining IIumber of Copiee

(Add items [41, t.61, U. --r--r-~-r-------=---------------------------------------------------------

to be Printed Add fA,B,C b Dl B

L

[C. 1 Eeaerve

Stock:

[ 2Jo;

Add No, of Copies on aA0 FoM 115-R 0 [T), 1 Cddml Dopoaltotytibtrtier: 121 l!nt@r Orand Total (Total Ho. Copies to be Printed) Office of Mgrt II Budget: [Xl --rt-‘-====h~“--“‘L-“--------------------------------_----------------_____________I______ ~~grrbprYJui**-r-apbrrr__, m-“-w----m-m Approvale ahd Contact 1nforratian Pal: more infor., contaci Approved byt

id+ 4!6!2@
Date

tin&e
Telephone lumber

0Pll:OMC
I‘

GAO Porl 115-u (;

ENCLOSURE I PHASESOF TOM IMPLEMENTATION PHASE 1 - DECIDING WHETHER IMPLEMENT TOM TO

ENCLOSURE I

Management is researching or deciding whether to implement TQM, but no formal decisions or activities have been initiated by top management. A few employees may have attended quality as a whole conferences or network meetings, but the installation has yet to be informed or involved in a TQM project. PHASE 2 - JUST GETTING STARTED TQM efforts are in the early planning and implementation phase. Management has made a formal decision to start TQM and has The organization's communicated this to the organization. A few quality mission and vision have been articulated. such as quality councils, steering committees, or structures, teams, have been established, and some awareness training has Pilot been given. Preliminary quality planning has been done. programs or newly initiated installationwide efforts to improve quality are included in this phase.
PHASE

3 - IMPLEMENTATION

Specific TQM processes designed to improve quality are in place. TQM training for management and employees is beyond the orientation/awareness stage and focuses on TQM tools and Measures of quality and techniques and team-related activities. productivity have been identified and specific goals have been set. PHASE 4 - ACHIEVING RESULTS The installation has a sustained gchieve and document significant and/or organizational functional, effort have been realized. TQM effort and has begun to Systemic, crossresults. achievements from the TQM

13

ENCLOSURE I

ENCLOSURE I

PHASE 5 - LONG-TERMINSTITUTIONALIZATIOq The installation has incorporated all of the principles and operating practices of TQM throughout much of the organization. The installation has documented substantial improvements in quality and customer satisfaction resulting from these efforts and is making consistent and continuous improvement throughout. An installation in this phase may have been recognized as a Quality Improvement Prototype Award winner or may be a recipient of the President's Award for Quality.

ENCLOSURE II

ENCLOSURE II OR CONTRIBUTORS THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO

GENERA71 GOVERNMENT DIVISION,

WASHINGTON,D.C. Human Resource

John A. Leitch, Assistant Director, Federal Management Issues Domingo Nieves, Evaluator-in-Charge Catherine M. Hurley, Computer Specialist

(966563)

15

.

_’