Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 4

Similarities and different between William Edward Deming, Joseph M.

Juran and
Philips P.Crosby
 Similarities
o Quality requires a strong upper management commitment
o Quality saves money
o Responsibility is placed on managers, not workers
o Quality is a never-ending process
o Customer-orientation
o Requires a shift in culture
o Quality arises from reducing variance

 Nature of Organizations
o Deming: Social Responsibility and moral conduct; the problems with
industry are problems with society
o Juran: Focused on parts of the organization, not whole
o Crosby: Organization-wide, team building approach

 Implementation Processes
o Deming: no roadmap is available; nowhere to start; no steps
o Juran and Crosby: Very user friendly; prescriptive; obvious starting
points

 Ability to do piecemeal
o Crosby and Deming: approach is holistic. Deming requires a radical
shift in values
o Juran: can be done piecemeal in isolated parts of the organization

 Ability to handle resistance


o Deming: very dogmatic and uncompromising; depends on facts,
however, not gospel
o Crosby and Juran: resistance is normal and need not be an obstacle.
Depend on facts to unseat criticism.

 Initial acceptance by management


o Deming: a threat to most managers. Requires an admission of
incompetence.
o Juran: since focus is largely on shop floor with support, managers are
very comfortable
o Crosby: requires very little shift in view
of workers and managerial roles.

 View of Workers

o Deming: variance is largely unaffected by workers’ activities.


Organization exists in large part to develop and provide for workers.
o Juran: workers are important because of being close to the activities
impacting quality.
o Crosby: workers can be motivated to improve quality and not produce
defects.

Final Comments
 No one pathway is ideal for a company.
 Most companies create their own unique pathway

 Many companies evolve from Crosby to Juran to Deming

o The reason: Crosby is not definitive


about improvement methods; Juran
is not sufficiently comprehensive

 Each of the three hated each other.

o Deming and Juran would hardly speak to one another, probably


because of egos and who got credit for saving Japan.
o Deming and Juran agreed that Crosby
was a superficial charlatan; referred
to his organization as “The University
of Hot Air”

 Deming’s approach is very, very difficult for organizations to


embrace; the changes required are immense.

 Deming’s approach is regarded as ideal by most quality


experts, if ever instituted properly.

 No US company has yet to institute a

Deming system completely.


Table 1 - A comparison of Deming, Juran, and Crosby
W. Deming J.M. Juran P. Crosby
Basic orientation Technical Process Motivational
toward quality
What is quality? Nonfaulty systems Fitness for use; Conformance to
freedom from requirements
trouble
Who is responsible Management Management Management
for quality?
Importance of Very important Very important; Very important
customer customers at each
requirements as step of product life
standard cycle
Goal of quality Meet/exceed Please customer; Continuous
customer needs; continuous improvement; zero
continuous improvement defects
improvement
Methods for Statistical; constancy Cost of quality; 14-point
achieving quality of purpose; continual quality trilogy: framework;
improvement; planning, control,
cooperation between improvement
functions
Chief elements of 14-point program Breakthrough 14-step program;
implementation projects; quality cost of quality;
council; quality quality
teams management
"maturity grid"
Role of training Very important for Very important for Very important for
managers and managers and managers and
workers employees employees
For additional The W. Edwards Juran Institute Philip Crosby
details, see web Deming Institute Associates II
site:
Table 2 - A comparison of Garvin, Felgenbaum, and Taguchi

D. Garvin A.V. Felgenbaum G. Taguchi


Basic orientation Strategic, Total, systemic Technical, proactive
toward quality academic
What is quality? Competitive What customer Customer's performance
opportunity says it is requirements
Who is responsible Management Everyone Engineers
for quality?
Importance of Very important Very important Very important
customer
requirements as
standard
Goal of quality Pleasing Meet customer Meet customer
customers; needs; continuous requirements; continuous
continuous improvement improvement
improvement
Methods for Identifying quality Total quality Statistical methods such as
achieving quality niches control (TQC); Loss Function; eliminating
excellence-driven variations of design
rather than characteristics and "noise"
defect-driven through robust design and
processes
Chief elements of Eight dimensions Statistical and Statistical design of
implementation of product quality: engineering experiments; quality teams
performance, methods across
features, the company
reliability,
conformance,
durability,
serviceability,
aesthetics,
perceived quality
Role of training Important but not Very important Important but not defined
clearly defined for managers and
supervisors
For additional --- --- ---
details, see web
site:

Похожие интересы