Column by Richard Randall
A business can’t improve if its leaders don’t want to know about its performance problems. It can’t improve if leaders don’t have the discipline to discover root causes of problems and follow through on solutions. That’s why formal quality management systems like ISO9001 include requirements for systematically documenting discrepancies and corrective actions. Still, a surprising number of leaders continue to bury their heads in the sand.
Documenting discrepancies and corrective actions is a two-edged sword. On the plus side, it facilitates a formal process to diagnose and correct all kinds of problems. It also provides for measurement and reporting of the volume, type and cost of problems. And it gives you a history you can rely on if the problem happens again.
On the minus side, at least in some leaders’ eyes, it creates a paper trail of problems created in different areas of an organization. It puts leaders whose departments create problems in the spotlight.
I recently learned of a problem at a business involving a maintenance activity. It was a cleaning process on a piece of equipment that is important to maintaining the quality of certain products. Maintenance is supposed to be done on a strict schedule and to be logged each time it is done. This was not happening on the schedule required.
A manager discovered the problem and decided to document both the problem and the corrective action. He was overridden by a superior who did not want that done. That person did not want a paper trail of problems in the department.
I once worked with a director of sales and marketing who insisted that we should not allow customers to have access to a complaint logging system on our website. He wanted customers to give their complaints to his people who would filter them, logging only the “legitimate” ones. Of course, in his mind the only legitimate complaints were those directed at departments other than his own.
A good corrective action process requires documentation of all failures of processes to produce the required results. Think of processes that produce defective products or unacceptable customer service. The same goes for all failures of people carrying out processes in the way they are specified. That’s the cleaning example, people not doing what they are supposed to do.
When a problem is logged, the next step is finding the root cause. What is causing the defects or why aren’t people doing what they should? In the cleaning example, is it a training issue, is it negligence or poor supervision, or is it insubordination? Each will have a different corrective action.
Once the corrective action is determined, it is logged along with the person or persons responsible for implementing it. Tracking continues until the corrective action has been completed and the results have been shown to be successful.
A good corrective action process raises the visibility of discrepancies in products and services and in internal processes like our cleaning example. It supports a disciplined approach to diagnosing these problems, determining their cause, implementing corrective action, and ensuring that the corrective action works.
Richard Randall is founder and president of management consulting firm New Level Advisors in Springettsbury Township, York County. Email him at [email protected]. He coaches and advises leaders in businesses and nonprofit organizations. Email him at [email protected]
Executive Insights is a recurring feature from biznewsPA that provides local business executives and leaders a platform for sharing advice and perspective with the business community of Central Pennsylvania. If you are interested in contributing an executive insight, email [email protected].
