Quality Circles LO29943

From: Roy Greenhalgh (rgreenh@attglobal.net)
Date: 02/24/03


Replying to LO29830 --

At wrote "Perhaps the real reason why QCs have faded, is that although
diversity is a key feature of it, there was in my opinion too little
sensitivity to wholeness ("unity-associativity")"

My experience in both the company I worked for, and most of our clients,
was that QCs were delegated down so far that sponsoring management forgot
about them. The outcomes and results were never fed back to senior
management: no mechanism or pathway had been set up. Therefore, the
changes the QC identified as being necessary were never implemented.

Another case of managers failing to do what they are primarily employed to
do .. to improve the processes for which they are responsible.

Roy Greenhalgh

AM de Lange wrote:

> Thank you for reminding us of Quality Circles (QCs).
>
> QCs were invented by the Japanese in the early sixties, perhaps as a
> result of the work of Dr Deming. QCs can be compared to some extend with
> the LO discipline Team Learning. Both make provision for diversity. In
> both supervising plays a minor role. However, the emphasis in a QC is on
> mutual observation and accountability rather than on learning. The
> feadback cycle in a QC consists of four phases: Plan-Do-Check-Act. In team
> learning it would rather be something like:
> Speculate-Engage-Study-Improve.

-- 

Roy Greenhalgh <rgreenh@attglobal.net>

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>


"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.