Fa l l 2 013

The Quality Management

Vo lume 39, Numb e r 3

AS

Quality
Management
Division

www.asq-qm.org

A Peer-Reviewed Publication of the Quality Management Division of the American Society for Quality

Inside This Issue

Certified Manager of
Quality/Organizational
Excellence Exam:
Development Process . . . . . 1
Chairs Message . . . . . . . . . 2
Communities of Practice:
From Self-Organizing to
Purposeful Creation and
the Role of Leaders . . . . . . . 6
A New QMD Sub-Group
on Linkedin! . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Book Review . . . . . . . . . . 10

Certified Manager of Quality/

Organizational Excellence Exam:
Development Process
By Jerry E. Rice
Introduction

This is the third installment of a three-part

series on the revised Body of Knowledge
(BOK) for the Certified Manager of Quality/
Organizational Excellence (CMQ/OE). The
ASQ exam team completed an update of the
CMQ/OE BOK in January 2013. The Quality
Management Division of ASQ, as sponsor of the
exam, supported this effort by providing subject
matter experts at every step in the process.
There were approximately 46 volunteer subject
matter experts recruited from various industries
throughout North America to help with
this Body of Knowledge revision. There are

hundreds of other volunteers who have helped

with ongoing development of the exam over
the years. Recruiting subject matter experts is
a continuous task for the exam subcommittee.
All the volunteers involved in the development
process enter a confidentiality agreement
with ASQ to ensure there is no conflict of
interest and that the proprietary aspects of the
development process are not divulged.
The exam development process is a robust
series of workshops and reviews that ensure
the exam is fair to the candidates sitting for
it while not diluting the prestige of those
holding this certification (see Figure 1). The
development process is designed to reflect the

Book Review . . . . . . . . . . 11
Quality Management

Start

Job Analysis
Survey

Journal Preview . . . . . . . . 12
Job Analysis
Workshop

QMF Book Summary . . . . . 17

Coach's Corner . . . . . . . . . 19

Telephone and
One on One
Interviews

Yes
BOK
Scheduled
for Review?

New/Revised
Body of
Knowledge
Published

Exam
Specifications
Workshop

No

Enough
Items in
Pool?

No

Yes
Notify
Candidates of
Pass/Fail

Item Analysis

Cut
Score Study

New Body of
Knowledge?

No

No
Yes

Constructed
Response
Scoring

Articles published in
The Quality Management Forum
may not be reproduced without
consent of the author(s).

Item Pool
Maintenance
?

Yes

Item Pool
Maintenance
Workshop

Item Writing
Workshop

Exam Review
Workshop

Exam
Administration

Camera Ready
Review

Item Review
Workshop

Figure 1: CMQ/OE Exam Development Process

(C ertified Manager of Q uality/O rganizational E xcellence

E xam: Development Process , continued on page 4)

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

Chairs Message
By Milt Krivokuca
You may be receiving the Fall 2013 edition of the Quality
Management Forum (QMF) just as you have finished reading
the Summer 2013 edition of QMF. As most of you know, it
is unusual for the Quality Management Division (QMD) to
deliver our summer edition so late. But the summer edition was
somewhat larger and more complex to produce than previous
issues, and additional efforts were necessary to revise and edit
articles from global authors for whom English is a second
language. The solicitation of articles on global perspectives
of quality has been one of the strategic goals of QMD, and
our success in this area required additional time to prepare
that issue for publication. As systems thinking experts, we
have learned from this experience, and we have implemented
changes to ensure future versions of the QMF will include
global perspectives related to practical applications of quality
methodologies and theories.
An enhanced QMF is only one of the strategic goals being fulfilled
by QMD to increase membership value. I have commented
in previous messages how QMD is reaching out to members
by participating in several local section events. The events of
these past 20 months have provided me an opportunity to meet
hundreds of QMD members and to learn how QMD can continue
to assure members a positive learning experience. For 2014, we
will continue our efforts to engage members through various
activities such as local quality events and technical publications,
the Quality Management Forum, and select conferences where
a direct correlation to the elements contained in the Body of
Knowledge for the Certified Quality Manager/Organizational
Excellence are appropriate.
Members of QMD, as well as the entire membership of ASQ,
will find 2014 to be an exciting year of change. The entire
ASQ organization will be implementing some major revisions
to the operational structure for both sections and divisions.
ASQ will be holding sections and divisions accountable for
developing activities and events to engage members and to
provide additional value to the membership experience. Many
of the Voice of the Customer surveys recently administered
have gathered significant information about our need to listen
to members and to take actions that meet their needs. The
Performance Awards and Recognition (PAR) program has

been in development for almost one full year. The PAR team
was comprised of representatives from large and small divisions
and sections. Sections and divisions will be provided criteria for
planning and budgeting activities to enhance the membership
experience. To provide more information about PAR to all
ASQ members, a formal marketing communication program is
scheduled for implementation this fall.
For QMD members, not much change in our operations or
strategic objectives will be evident. We have already been
engaged in many of the member value activities contained in
PAR. I was honored to be invited to be a PAR team member.
Many of the QMD activities have been adopted into the best
practices of PAR to be shared with sections and divisions.
Although we are proud of being benchmarked, this recognition
creates a new challenge for us. The PAR awards are for achieving
above and beyond the normal compliance activities required
of any section, division, or business. We have set a high level
of performance, but raising this performance level will be the
challenge for the 20142015 leadership team.
The QMD 20142015 strategic planning meeting will take place
in Tucson AZ on October 12, 2013, and our annual business
meeting is planned for October 10th. Both of these meetings are
open to all QMD members. During these meetings, PAR, the
strategic goals of ASQ, and the QMD resources required to meet
these goals, will be finalized. Any QMD member who would like
to be more involved or to learn more about how the leadership
team of QMD functions, the week of October 912, 2013 is an
excellent opportunity! QMD members are welcome to attend
the leadership team meetings, which will be taking place at the
conference hotel, El Conquistador, in Tucson.
Conference week provides a unique opportunity for quality
professionals to participate as attendees, observers, and
contributors to the quality management process. Conference
attendees can meet and speak with authors, attend presentations
by subject matter experts, and observe the strategic planning
process in action. This event is more than just a typical
conference. The take-away for attendees include observing the

Fall 2013

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

quality-focused business practices required by quality management

systems. For more information, please see the conference link in
this QMF or on the QMD webpage at www.asq-qm.org.
The Fall 2013 issue of the QMF includes a lineup of articles on
topics that have been identified as critical to the 21st century
quality professional. Recent surveys conducted by ASQ of
senior leaders from over 30 countries identified eight elements
affecting global business today. One of the these eight issues
related to global organization success, as identified by global
leadership, innovation is featured this month. In addition,
the topic of communities of practice and their relationship to
leadership is included. Leadership, the basic element for success
in any organization or activity, is an ever-evolving area of study
to assure a continuous supply of effective leaders who can

successfully meet the challenges to organizations in our global

society. The continuing series of articles written to prepare
professionals for the CMQ/OE exam in this eddition discusses
the CMQ/OE exam development process. Candidates for CMQ/
OE certification will benefit by learning the behind-the-scenes
thought process utilized by subject matter experts to develop
the exams.
The QMD leadership team hopes you find the information
contained in this edition of the QMF of value to you and your
professional career.
I hope to see many of you in Tucson in October.
Milt Krivokuca DBA
ASQ-QMD Chair 20122013

Visit the new

QMD website at
www.asq-qm.org

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

(C ertified Manager of Q uality/O rganizational E xcellence

E xam: Development Process , continued from page 1)

current practices in quality management and to represent what

employers are looking for with regard to senior leadership in
quality management.
Job Analysis Survey

The development process starts with a job analysis workshop.

During this workshop, subject matter experts (SMEs) use various
proven techniques to identify and group all knowledge and task
areas that could be performed by someone within the quality
management field. With the exception of one exam subcommittee
member, none of the subject matter experts in the job analysis
workshop have ever participated in the ASQ exam development
process. The outcome of this workshop is a job analysis survey.
A job analysis survey is emailed to approximately 2,000 ASQ
members. (Three hundred eighty-one quality management
professionals responded to the job analysis survey during this
revision of the BOK.) The survey results are used as input
for identifying changes in quality management practices.
The outcome of the job analysis survey is to determine what
knowledge and skill areas are appropriate to test for the CMQ/
OE exam program. The responses to the survey are monitored
to ensure a statistically valid sampling of practicing quality
management professionals. The ASQ exam staff also conducts
telephone interviews and receives communication from other
quality management professionals during this time to gain
further insight into the typical responsibilities of quality
managers and directors from a wide range of industries.
Test Specification Development

Once the survey results are compiled, a test specification workshop

is scheduled to begin development of the Body of Knowledge
revisions. Some of the volunteer subject matter experts participated
in the job analysis workshop while others SMEs in this workshop
are completely new to the exam development process. The test
specification team identifies all topics that meet certain criteria for
inclusion in the BOK. The test specification is developed based on
task and knowledge statements from the job analysis.
The tasks and knowledge areas are assembled into an outline
with topics and categories that form the BOK. Once the
major topics are identified from the job analysis, and the BOK
outline is created, the SMEs develop explanatory subtext that
clearly describes the particulars of each subtopic. The number
of questions and the time limit for taking the exam are also
reviewed and recommendations for any changes are made at
this time.
Publishing the Body of Knowledge

Once the Body of Knowledge recommendations are made, the

ASQ Certification Board reviews and approves the changes, and
the revised BOK is published. The ASQ exam staff reviews the
current item (question) bank against the new BOK. An itemwriting workshop is scheduled to create questions in areas where
the number of questions in the bank is determined to be low.
4

This ensures an appropriate number of items are available for

the exam developer to produce a number of exams that meet the
technical requirements of the Body of Knowledge.
Item Writing

An item-writing workshop consists of 24 subject matter experts

who are trained to develop exam questions and understand
basic test assessment issues. The subject matter experts write
questions on specific areas in the BOK, and all questions are
referenced to the approved source material for the exam. In the
case of a BOK update such as this, the areas of focus are those
where the questions in the item bank are low. For the CMQ/
OE exam, this includes constructed response (essay) questions
as well. Each question developed at this meeting must have the
following characteristics:
Only one key (correct answer) that must have
team agreement
A reference to support the key (from a list of approved
reference materials)
A rationale for the question that explains what the question
is testing, why the key is correct, and why the other options
are not correct
Classification to the most detailed level of the BOK
The ASQ Certification staff work with the subject matter
experts to review and edit questions for grammar, style, and
other assessment-related characteristics. Constructed response
questions have an exposition explaining the rationale of the
question and a scoring rubric drafted. Item-writing workshops
typically produce 200300 items over the two-day period.
Item Review

Once a question makes it through the reviews in the item-writing

workshop, it must be independently reviewed again by another team
of subject matter experts before it is approved for use on an exam.
The item-review workshop team has no members from the itemwriting team, to ensure a review independent of those who wrote the
questions. The result of the item-review workshop is to ensure there
is only one key (answer) and that the question is clearly written and
accurate. These subject matter experts also confirm the reference,
classification, and rationale for each item. The item-review workshop
is where the questions are approved for use on the exam.
Pre-meeting work at the item review consists of reviewing and
keying (answering) approximately 200 items. Each workshop
team member spends between three to five hours on preparation
for this workshop. When the subject matter experts come
to the workshop, they are trained on a variety of assessment
issues. Once all components of the item are verified, the item is
approved and can subsequently be selected for use in an exam.
Exam Review

Once the raw items have been reviewed and approved, an

exam can be developed. Each item is reviewed one more time
before it makes it to the exam. The exam-review workshop is
where the questions on each exam are reviewed prior to exam

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

administration. The ASQ Exam staff creates a draft exam in

accordance with the test specifications, reviews it for overlap or
cueing between items, and creates a two-column version to send
to the exam review team. The team consists of 12 subject matter
experts who, prior to coming to the workshop, take the exam
just as a candidate would. Half of the subject matter experts
in this workshop have no previous experience with ASQ exam
development, while the other half have previously participated in
exam development workshops. Pre-meeting work requires about
four hours from each team member. Care is taken to ensure a
good mix of experienced and new exam reviewers, as well as
diversity in geography and industries represented.
As in the item-review workshop, the team members are asked
to comment on the items and send those comments to the ASQ
Exam staff, which compiles them for the workshop. At the
workshop, the committee members are trained in a variety of
assessment issues and then asked to focus on items identified as
problematic from the at-home review. After all the issues in
the exam are resolved, the committee approves the exam, and it
can be administered. The exam-review workshop is part of the
ongoing exam development process. It is conducted once or twice
a year, depending on need.
Camera-Ready Review

After the exam review workshop, the exam is formatted for

exam administration. There is one more review of the exam
before administration. The camera-ready review is performed
by the exam subcommittee and ASQ Exam staff. This review
is conducted to eliminate any grammatical errors or readability
issues. Exam content is not altered.
Exam Administration

Once the camera-ready review is completed and any grammatical

and readability issues resolved, the exam is ready to be administered.
The CMQ/OE exam is administered per ASQ exam and proctoring
guidelines. Global administration occurs in March and October of
every year, with special administrations of the exam done at various
conferences and events such as World Conference on Quality and
Improvement. The first administration of the CMQ/OE exam using
the new body of knowledge will be in March of 2014.
Constructed Response Scoring

The CMQ/OE Exam has an additional workshop that other

ASQ exams do not. Constructed response scoring is done by a
team of 16 CMQ/OEs twice per year to score the constructed
response (essay) portion of the exam. Smaller teams are
formed throughout the year on an as-needed basis to score any
constructed responses from special administrations. Prior to
scoring, the team reviews and adjusts the scoring expositions
and rubrics for each constructed response question offered on
the exam. Each paper is then scored by two people. Consensus
between the scorers is required for scores that differ by more
than one point. Because no single scorer can score both responses
submitted by any one candidate, it takes four scorers in order to
score the two constructed response answers from each candidate.

Item Analysis

An item analysis is performed by the ASQ exam staff and exam

subcommittee after exams for which there was no change to the
BOK. The statistics for each of the questions are reviewed for
any anomalies. Items that scored poorly based on exam statistics
are queued for additional review, sometimes a score all (all
candidates receive credit for a correct answer) is warranted for
items that tested too poorly.
Cut Score Study

The cut score study is performed after the first administration of

an exam or, as in this case, the first administration of the exam
after the Body of Knowledge is updated. The role of the cut score
panel is to function as advisors to the ASQ Certification Board.
Discussions center upon recognition of the minimally competent
borderline candidates. The BOK is used as a guide when
outlining the minimum standard expected of a borderline CMQ/
OE candidate. The group also takes the diversity of CMQ/OE
candidates into consideration during these discussions. The cut
score panel must be familiar with both the typical candidate
who will be taking the exam (people) and the knowledge
requirements of the borderline CMQ/OE candidate (content).
The outcome of the cut score study is a recommended passing
score for the exam to present to the ASQ Certification Board.
Conclusion

The CMQ/OE exam is a professionally developed exam facilitated

by a very professional and experienced exam staff at ASQ
headquarters. The Quality Management Division is proud to
sponsor this exam and even prouder of the volunteers on the exam
sub-committee who make it all happen. It is a demanding task to
recruit and fill the various workshops with capable and competent
subject matter experts. Many thanks to outgoing exam chair Karen
Abrosic-Tolf from Abbot, incoming exam chair Michael Hirt from
ADAC Automotive, and Miles Littlefield from Portage, Inc., as
well as all the others who have served on the exam subcommittee
over the past 18 years. Last but not least, none of this happens
without the subject matter experts who volunteer their time and
talent in order to make this one of ASQs premier exam offerings.
They are the ones who ensure the exam is administered fairly while
upholding the standards that make the CMQ/OE designation
valuable to both the individuals who obtain certification and the
employers and clients they work for. Visit the ASQ.org website for
more information regarding the full lineup of ASQ certifications.
Jerry Rice is the Vice-Chair of Operations for the Quality
Management Division of ASQ. He has spent over a decade
assisting with the development of the CMQ/OE in various
volunteer roles. He has served in various member leadership roles
with ASQ throughout the years. He holds ASQ Certifications
in Quality Engineering and Quality Auditing and has been a
CMQ/OE since 1996. He has almost 30 years of manufacturing
experience filling various roles in quality engineering,
manufacturing engineering, quality management and operations
management. He is currently the process quality engineer for
the Rail Group of Trinity Industries, Inc. in Dallas. He can be
reached at rice_jerry@sbcglobal.net.
5

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

Communities of Practice: From Self-Organizing

to Purposeful Creation and the Role of Leaders
By Marla J. Hetzel
It is argued that the traditional
bureaucratic orientation is no longer
appropriate in todays knowledge
economy and increasingly complex
environment and, rather, that a learning
orientation is needed (Jamali, Khoury
& Sahyoun, 2006). In a learning
orientation, it is important that leaders
accommodate the collaborative, intraorganizational dynamics of working in
a knowledge economy, but the models
of leadership appropriate for the past
century may not accommodate such
dynamics (Avolio, Walumbwa &
Weber, 2009; Dodgson, 1993; Garvin,
Edmondson & Gino, 2008; Gruman
& Saks, 2011). Therefore, for many
organizations, implementing a learning
orientation is significant change (Jamali,
Khoury & Sahyoun, 2006; Yukl, 2009).
An intra-organizational form increasingly
being used by organizations as change
agents in support of a learning orientation
is the community of practice (CoP)
(Borzillo, 2009; Iqauinto, Ison & Faggian,

2011; Khan & Smith, 2009; McDermott

& Archibald, 2010; Rashman, Withers
& Hartley, 2009; Wenger & Snyder,
2000). A CoP is generally work-related
and focused on a professional activity,
skill, or topic and is more specifically
defined by Wenger, McDermott, and
Snyder (2002, p. 4) as a group of people
who share a concern, a set of problems, or
a passion about a topic, and who deepen
their knowledge and expertise in this
area by interacting in an ongoing basis
(Dub, Bourhis & Jacob, 2005; Iqauinto,
Ison & Faggian, 2011). There are three
dimensions to a CoP as described in
Table 1 below: domain of knowledge,
community, and shared practice (Wenger,
McDermott & Snyder, 2002). A CoP
can be face-to-face or virtual and is not
limited to an intra-organizational form
since it could include other organizations,
especially in a case of open innovation. For
purposes of this article, a CoP is defined
as face-to-face and intra-organizational.

A History of Communities of
Practice: An Emerging Tension

Communities of practice were originally

conceived of as grassroots and selforganizing structures with minimal
management involvement (Dub,
Bourhis & Jacob, 2005; McDermott &
Archibald, 2010; Swan, Scarbrough &
Robertson, 2002; Wenger & Snyder,
2000). Attributed to the characteristics
of spontaneity and freedom from
organizational constraints (Swan,
Scarbrough & Robertson, 2002, p. 478),
CoPs are known to promote learning,
enable knowledge-sharing, and help an
organization achieve its goals, especially
in innovation (Iqauinto, Ison & Faggian,
2011; Swan, Scarbrough & Robertson,
2002). Indeed, it has been suggested that
in an environment of change, CoPs define
what leaders are sometimes unable to
articulate clearly to the members of the
organization (Khan & Smith, 2007).

Table 1: The Dimensions of a CoP (Wenger, McDermott & Snyder, 2002)

Dimensions of a CoP
Domain of Knowledge

Defining Attributes
A domain of knowledge defines a set of issues and the sense of members identification with a topic or practice.
Creates a common ground and a common sense of identity that enables members of the community to participate and contribute
towards learning and organizational change.
Legitimizes the CoP by affirming its purpose and value to the organization, stakeholders, and members.
Inspires members to contribute and participate.
Enables relevant knowledge sharing and the pursuit of appropriate activities.

Community

A community of people includes members who care about the domain of knowledge.
Creates the social fabric of learning and a process of mutual engagement.
Fosters relationships based on mutual respect and trust, reciprocity, and belonging.
Encourages willingness to share and openness to inquiry.

Shared Practice

A shared practice is the practice the members of the community develop to be effective in their domain of knowledge.
A set of frameworks, ideas, information, documents, styles, and stories members share.
Whereas the domain of knowledge denotes the topic the community focuses on, the shared practice is the specific knowledge the
community develops, shares, and maintains, which, in time, enables the members of the community to use the knowledge acquired to
affect their work efficiency and effectiveness.

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

In recent years, management has become

more aware of CoPs and their value to
organizations (Iqauinto, Ison & Faggian,
2011). As a result, CoPs are being
integrated into formal management
structures with specific goals,
accountability, and executive oversight
to ensure they are making contributions
and operating efficiently (Koliba & Gajda,
2009; McDermott & Archibald, 2010;
Swan, Scarbrough & Robertson, 2002;
Wenger & Snyder, 2000). However, it is
argued by some that the initial concept of
a CoP is in opposition to the prescriptive
ambition to manage CoPs for improved
performance (Probst & Borzillo, 2008,
p. 336) and that controlling them for
purposes of improving performance
displaces the emancipatory aspirations
of the original notion [of a CoP] (Swan,
Scarbrough & Robertson, 2002, p. 478).
As such, there is a tension as to whether or
not organizations can purposefully create
CoPs and, more importantly, how leaders
can intentionally establish them for
organizational advantage (Dub, Bourhis
& Jacob, 2005; Iqauinto, Ison & Faggian,
2011; Koliba & Gajda, 2009; Probst &
Borzillo, 2008; Wenger & Snyder, 2000).
The Purposeful Creation of
Communities of Practice and
Leaders Effects on Followers

I had the opportunity to study the

purposeful creation of CoPs and, more
specifically, the impact of leaders on
establishing them for organization
advantageto examine this so-called
tension. The research setting was a nonprofit organization experiencing a decline
in organizational performance. The
CEO initiated change to create what can
be described as a learning orientation.
He recognized that, as described
above, a bureaucratic orientation was
insufficient to meet the demands of
todays environment and would put the
organization at risk of further decline. A
number of CoPs were being purposefully
created to serve as change agents in
support of the CEOs initiative.

For more than six months, I used a

qualitative grounded theory methodology
in my research, which consists of
systematic yet flexible guidelines
to discover theory and an iterative,
inductive, and interactive process for
data collection and analysis. It is well
suited to the study of behavior that has
an interactional element to it and focuses
on how the subjective experiences of
actors can elicit information on the social
situation under examination. Therefore,
it involves numerous data collection
techniques, and I used literature reviews,
unstructured and structured observations,
and direct, semi-structured interviews.
The population I studied included
13 individuals from throughout the
organization who were selected to manage
the CoPs (chairpersons) and were
differentiated from the leaders who were
defined as those in positions of formal
authority and whom the chairpersons
acknowledged as sources of guidance
during the process of purposefully
creating the CoPs (leaders).
Although there are numerous definitions
of leadership, it was conceptualized as
an emerging effect of interaction and,
to account for the models of leadership
that accommodate a learning orientation,
it was appropriate to understand
leadership effectiveness by understanding
leaders effects on followersthat
is, the chairpersons (Bass, 1990; van
Knippenberg et al., 2005). Therefore,
leadership effectiveness was based on
follower attitudes and perceptions, leaders
contributions to the quality of group and
organizational processes, and achieving
the purposeful creation of the CoPs.
Chairpersons Establish Group
Identification but Leaders
Not Engaged

The chairpersons were excited about the

potential for CoPs to serve as change
agentsthe opportunity to make change
facilitated strong group identification.
Within a few days of an offsite meeting

to begin the work, relationships developed

and a vibrant community among the
chairpersons began to emerge.
The chairpersons were committed to
their task and recognized the importance
of learning since the CoPs were new to
them and new to the organization. Over
the first few months, they interacted and
dialogued in a way that facilitated shared
experience and learningand that made
group identification stronger. However,
leaders were not engaged and, more
importantly, not sharing in the experience
and the learning.
The chairpersons perceived leaders as
being very important to the purposeful
creation of CoPs because it represented
change for the organization and they
were disappointed by the lack of
engagement, which connoted a lack of
importance. They believed that, at the
organizational level, leaders needed to
communicate the value of the CoPs and
help others understand their potential for
serving as change agents. Furthermore,
they perceived leaders as not having an
appreciation for learningincluding
learning how to adapt their leadership
style to accommodate the different way
of working associated with the change
espoused by the CEO.
Leaders Lack a Participatory
Style and Chairpersons
Empowerment is Compromised

As the chairpersons learned, they

generated questions and asked leaders
for direction. However, leaders were
unable or unwilling to provide direction.
The strong group identification enabled
informal leaders to emerge among the
chairpersons. These individuals were
trusted to address the gap in leadership.
They made recommendations to the
leaders but, again, leaders were unable or
unwilling to respond and did not share

(Communities of Practice: From S elf -O rganizing to

Purposeful C reation and the Role of Leaders,
continued on page 8)

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

(Communities of Practice: From S elf -O rganizing

Purposeful C reation and the Role of Leaders,
continued from page 7)

to

decision making. As a result, the informal

leaders were unable to influence the
leaders or make progress.
The lack of a participatory style of
leadership impeded progress and the
chairpersons realized that they were
not empowered. In fact, an important
determinant in empowerment is a
participatory style of leadership (Yukl,
2010). In addition, the chairpersons
began to question leaders intentions in
purposefully creating CoPs.
Leaders Not Managing Change
and Chairpersons Perception of
Support is Compromised

Over the months, the chairpersons

perceived leaders as having failed in their
responsibility to manage change at the
organizational level. In addition to a lack of
direction, the change path was not evident,
and buy-in had not been established. The
chairpersons questioned the ability of the
CoPs to serve as change agents, and their
concerns were valid because CoPs are
known to be vulnerable if not integrated
into the organization (Wenger & Snyder,
2000). More importantly, the chairpersons
themselves questioned their ability to act
as change agents. They did not perceive
leaders as being supportive or having a
commitment to the CoPs, which was also
demonstrated by their lack of engagement.
Leadership Effectiveness
Through the Lens of
Social Identity

The chairpersons asserted that there is a

role for leaders in the purposeful creation
of CoPs. Indeed, it is a role that is all the
more important in an environment of
change. However, they did not perceive
leaders as being effective. I propose
that the effectiveness of leaders can be
better understood through an emerging
theory called the social identity theory
of leadership.

According to the social identity theory of

leadership, it is important to recognize
that leadership is enacted in the context
of a social system (Cicero, Pierro & van
Knippenberg, 2010; Uhl-Bien, 2006;
van Knippenberg et al., 2005). More
specifically, it is argued that as followers
identify more strongly with a group, the
extent to which their leader is perceived
to be group prototypical (i.e., representing
the collective attitudes, behaviors) becomes
more influential in determining leadership
effectiveness (Uhl-Bien, 2006; van
Knippenberg et al., 2005). In addition,
with increasing group identification, group
members are more likely to endorse leaders
who are perceived to be group-oriented
that is, acting in the collectives interests
(van Knippenberg et al., 2005). Therefore,
identification with a group can mediate
or moderate leadership effectiveness (van
Knippenberg et al., 2005).
In the case of the non-profit organization
I studied, there is evidence that the
leaders did not display group prototypical
or group-oriented characteristics. For
example, leaders lack of participation in
the process of learning was considered
uncharacteristic to the group and thus
not group prototypical. Some of the
chairpersons highlighted that leaders
make choices about how to allocate their
time and with whom to interact and
adapt their behavior accordingly. Thus
the lack of participation also connoted
unimportance to the chairpersons, which
was not considered to be group-oriented.
It is also argued that efficacy is a precondition for group identification to be
translated into action (van Knippenberg
et al., 2005). The concept of efficacy can
be generally described as the extent to
which a group believes it can effectively
accomplish a goal (Mulvey & Klein, 1998;
van Knippenberg et al., 2005; Yukl, 2010).
There is evidence that perceptions of
efficacy are compromised by leaderships
lack of contribution to group-level and
organizational-level processes. More
specifically, at the group level, the lack

of a participatory style of leadership

compromises the chairpersons perceptions
of empowerment, which is positively
related to efficacy (van Knippenberg
et al., 2005). In addition, the lack of
change management taking place at the
organizational level compromises the
chairpersons perceptions of support, both
as individuals and as a group. Likewise,
supportive behaviors demonstrated by
leadership are positively correlated with
efficacy (van Kippenberg et al., 2004).
A Call to Action

So, back to that so-called tension. At

the conclusion of my research, I came
to agree with a sentiment shared by
internationally renowned academic and
author Henry Mintzberg, who states,
Community requires a more modest
form of leadership that might be called
engaged or distributed management
(Mintzberg, 2009, p. 141). Indeed, I
would argue that leaders need to confront
their loyalty to the legacy practices
associated with the models of leadership
that fit the traditional bureaucratic
orientation and to adopt models of
leadership and learn the practices that
will encourage a learning orientation
and the purposeful creation of CoPs. But
what does that look like in practice?
To better describe the role of leaders in the
purposeful creation CoPs, I referenced a
classic model used to analyze leadership
effectiveness and found to be particularly
effective in the context of organizational
change (Battilana et al., 2010; Yukl,
2009). It includes two competencies:
person-oriented and task-oriented
(Battilana et al., 2010; Yukl, 2009). The
person-oriented skills are described as
behaviors that include promoting trust
and collaborative interaction among
organizational members and establishing
a supportive social climate (Bass, 1990;
Battilana et al., 2010; Yukl, 2009). Personoriented behaviors build identification
with a team, which is relevant to
group identification (Yukl, 2010).
The task-oriented skills are described

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

as behaviors that include improving

efficiency, establishing routines to achieve
organizational goals and objectives,
and coordinating activities (Bass, 1990;
Battilana et al., 2010; Yukl, 2010).
I recommend that leaders use three
approaches to produce group identification
and perceptions of efficacy when
purposefully creating CoPs. First, leaders
should use direct forms of leadership
characterized by interaction in order to
display group prototypical and grouporiented attitudes and behaviors and thus
engender group identification. Second,
they should use person-oriented behaviors
at the group level to facilitate perceptions
of empowerment. Third, they should use
person-oriented and task-oriented behaviors
at the organizational level to facilitate
perceptions of support. It is especially
through the latter two approaches that
perceptions of efficacy will be facilitated.
In the absence of group identification and
perceptions of efficacy, the purposeful
creation of CoPs may be compromised.
At the close of my research study, the
CoPs were officially launched in the
organization. However, the chairpersons
were uncertain about the future. They
did not perceive the purposeful creation
as having been completed and did not
think that two of the dimensions, domain
of knowledge and shared practice had
been established. They speculated that
the CoPs may become informal networks
and, therefore, have a limited role, if any,
in serving as change agents.
References
Avolio, B., Walumbwa, F., & Weber, T. (2009). Leadership:
Current theories, research, and future directions. Annual
Review of Psychology, 60, 421449.
Battilana, J., Gilmartin, M., Sengul, M., Pache, A., &
Alexander, J. (2010). Leadership competencies for
implementing planned organizational change. Leadership
Quarterly, 21, 42238.
Bass, B. (1990) Bass and Stogdills handbook of leadership
theory, research, and managerial applications (3rd ed.).
New York: The Free Press,
Borzillo, S. (2009). Top management sponsorship to
guide communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge
Management, 13(3), 6072.
Cicero, L., Pierro, A., & Van Knippenberg, D. (2010).
Leadership and uncertainty: How role ambiguity affects
the relationship between leader group prototypicality and
leadership effectiveness. British Journal of Management,
21, 411421.

Dodgson, M. (1993). Organizational learning: A review of

some literatures. Organization Studies, 14(3), 375394.
Dub, L., Bourhis, A., & Jacob, R. (2005). The impact of
structuring characteristics on the launching of virtual
communities of practice. Journal of Organizational
Change Management, 18(2), 145166.
Garvin, D., Edmondson, A., & Gino, F. (2008, March). Is yours
a learning organization? Harvard Business Review, 311.
Gruman, J. & Saks, A. (2011). Performance management and
employee engagement. Human Resource Management
Review, 21, 123136.
Iqauinto, B., Ison, R., & Faggian, R. (2011). Creating
communities of practice: Scoping purposeful design.
Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(1), 421.
Jamali, D., Khoury, G. & Sahyoun, H. (2006). From
bureaucratic organizations to learning organizations, an
evolutionary roadmap. The Learning Organization, 13(4),
337352.

Uhl-Bein, M. (2006). Relational leadership theory: Exploring

the social process of leadership and organizing.
Leadership Quarterly,17, 654676.
Van Knippenberg, B., Van Knippenberg, D., De Cremer,
D., & Hogg, M. (2005) Research in leadership, self, and
Identity: A sample of the present and a glimpse of the
future. Leadership Quarterly, 16, 495499.
Van Knippenburg, D., Van Knippenberg, B., De Cremer, D., &
Hogg, M. (2004). Leadership, self, and identity: A review
and research agenda. Leadership Quarterly, 15, 825856.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating
Communities of Practice. Boston: Harvard Business
School Press.
Wenger, E. & Snyder, W. (2000, January-February).
Communities of practice: The organizational frontier.
Harvard Business Review, 139145.
Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in Organizations (7th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education.

Khan, Z. & Smith, N. (2007). Driving change: Use

communities of practice. Leadership Excellence, 24(7).
1011.

Yukl, G. (2009). Leading organizational learning: Reflections

on theory and research. Leadership Quarterly, 20, 4953.

Koliba, C. & Gajda, R. (2009). Communities of practice as an

analytical construct: Implications for theory and practice.
International Journal of Public Administration, 32, 97135.

Marla J. Hetzel is an innovation

professional based in Washington DC. Her
interests include community, emerging
theories of leadership, innovation,
organizational learning, change
management, and employee engagement.
In 2012, she earned an MS in managing
organizational performance from
Cranfield University in England. She can
be reached at hetzelmj@hotmail.com.

McDermott, R. & Archibald, D. (2010, March). Harnessing

your staffs informal networks. Harvard Business Review,
8389.
Mintzberg, H. (2009, July-August). Rebuilding companies as
communities. Harvard Business Review, 4043.
Mulvey, P. & Klein, H. (1988). The impact of perceived
loafing and collective efficacy on group goal process and
group performance. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 74(1), 6287.
Probst, G., & Borzillo, S. (2008). Why communities
of practice succeed and why they fail. European
Management Journal, 26. 3537.
Rashman, L., Withers, E., & Hartley, J. (2009). Organizational
learning and knowledge in public sector organizations: A
systematic review of the literature. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 11(4), 463494.
Swan, J., Scarbrough, H., & Robertson, M. (2002). The
construction of Communities of Practice in the
management of Innovation. Management Learning, 33(4),
477496.

A New QMD Sub-Group

on Linkedin!
Having just launched in 2012 the Organizational Excellence Technical
Committee, the OETC Linkedin Group now has over 350 members
from 42 countries participating in rich, experiential discussions on various
Excellence Frameworks.
Are you interested in the use of excellence criteria such as Baldrige, EFQM, and
others to help organizations of all types attain higher levels of performance?
Then join the QMDs Organizational Excellence Technical Committee (OETC)
on Linkedin. The OETC goals are to be a reference point on excellence
frameworks and models; to contribute to a body of knowledge on excellence
models; to promote the use of international, national and local excellence
programs; to share case studies, lessons learned, and success stories about
performance; to make assessment tools available; and to show how quality
methods and tools integrate with excellence models. Also visit our webpage for a
list of resource materials at http://www.asq-qm.org/organizational-excellence.

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

Book Review
By Milton Krivokuca, DBA
Implementing ISO/IEC 17025:2005: A Practical Guide
Bhavan Bob Mehta
Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press, 2013
Implementing ISO/IEC 17025:2005: A Practical Guide, by
Bhavan Bob Mehta, is the most recent ASQ Press publication
authored by a subject matter expert with extensive practical
experience in ISO and Quality Management Systems (QMS).
ASQ: The Global Voice of Quality is an organization recognized
for publications that reflect current quality theories and
methodologies. This practical guide provides a combination of
theory and practical examples to assist with implementation of
ISO 17025, a laboratory-specific certification standard universally
recognized as a QMS for laboratories.
For a manager or organization not familiar with the ISO (QMS)
standards, considering implementation can be an overwhelming
experience. The format and complexity of the actual published

IMDS DATA
We can create your data
and submit within 72 hours!
We do the work and invoice you
References found on our website
Based in US

Call (734) 205-8874

or visit imdsdata.org

IMDS DATA

Member of the American Society for Quality

10

ISO standard is very formal and intimidating. Implementing

ISO/IEC 17025:2005: A Practical Guide reviews each element
of this standard by providing a basic explanation of the activities
an organization must include in its QMS to comply with the
standard. After each element, author Mehta provides a very
basic checklist for the internal quality auditor to assess the
organizations QMS for compliance.
Laboratories are typically subject to very strict regulations as
required by the nature of their products or services, as well
as elements of industry-specific standards such as ISO 9001,
ISO 13485, and AS 9100. Organizations with these existing
certifications and an internal laboratory within their operations
could consider including any of the specific elements of ISO
17025 to provide a basis for objective evidence of improvements
to their existing ISO certification. Many elements of ISO
17025 are common to other ISO standards, and the selective
implementation of specific elements is a natural progression
for the maturation of a QMS. Even if an organization does not
seek to certify to ISO 17025, elements of this standard can be
identified as compliant and contained in the existing QMS.
Implementing ISO/IEC 17025:2005: A Practical Guide can
also be very helpful for an organization in the developmental
stages of a QMS. The explanations and audit question examples
are written in a universal and general structure that can be
commonly applied to laboratories in most any industry. The
basic requirements of a QMS are explained in a very processfocused format. The development work for each process is
subdivided by area of focus and responsibility. Implementation
teams will find the explanations very basic and highly applicable
to all laboratory environments.
ASQ Press and Bob Mehta have joined to provide another
practical guide that deconstructs the intimidating complexity
of an ISO standard into a practical and hands-on model for
successful implementation and ultimate ISO certification.
Dr. Milton Krivokuca, ASQ-QMD Chair 20122013, is the
Quality Program Coordinator at California State University
Dominguez Hills. He is a subject matter expert in Quality
Management Systems (QMS). He is a contributing author to the
CMQ/OE Handbook, 4th edition. He has presented numerous
papers related to QMS at conferences throughout the United
States, Canada, Middle East, and Asia. Dr. Krivokuca advises
masters degree students with their research work and instructs
numerous ASQ Certification refresher courses. He has earned nine
ASQ certifications and three additional professional certifications.
Milt can be reached at milt619@cox.net.

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

Book Review
By Robert Spencer
Lean Six Sigma and Minitab: The Complete Toolbox Guide
for all Lean Six Sigma Practitioners
Quentin Brook
Hampshire, UK: OPEX Resources Ltd., 2010
When we start out on a big project, its like beginning an
extensive tripwell get to our destination sooner and more
comfortably if we have a good roadmap to follow. That is just
whats offered in this pocket guide. The entire Six Sigma and
Lean process improvement strategy is laid out from start to
finish through the DMAIC phases, showing the array of tools
and techniques used along the way. A big bonus in this guide is
the extensive presentation of examples showing how to analyze
and interpret process improvement data using Minitab. This
guide fills a unique need in demonstrating the integration of Six
Sigma and Lean methodologies with the power of the Minitab
statistical analysis software package.
The book can easily be used to design a Six Sigma Lean project.
Most routine templates (e.g., project charter, FMEA table,
Pugh diagram and so on) are provided via download from the
publishers website. These templates have a common look and
feel, making for a consistent and attractive presentation of
your results. In addition, numerous Minitab example analyses
are displayed. Pointers are offered to customize graph and data
outputs to be more understandable by decision makers. The
format of the presentation of Six Sigma and Lean tools and
Minitab analysis setup and output interpretation should fit
well with team members who have some training (green belts).
The guide should also be an excellent training resource for
more experienced belts who are coaching and mentoring team
members. It could first be used as a training text and then kept
at the ready as newly acquired skills are applied in a real-world
process improvement project.
There are several outstanding free resources that come with the
pocket guide. First, the author provides a customized menu that
can be added to Minitab to ease the task of finding commonly
used Six Sigma and Lean graphing and statistical analysis
procedures. This drop-down menu is easily installed and allows
selection of procedure groups for statistical analysis, statistical
process control, graphical analysis, and hypothesis testing from a
single consolidated menu.
Second, dozens of data files and Minitab script files are provided
for readers who want to practice further with examples presented
in the guide. These resources show the data setup and procedure
instructions to obtain the analysis output, and more importantly,
how the source data must be configured in the Minitab data file.
Finally, a Six Sigma Tool Finder app (for Android and iOS)
provides a high-level summary of each tool and technique
explained in the text. These summaries are accessed through an

interactive DMAIC roadmap, making this a valuable addition

to allow selection of tools quicker and with greater certainty
about appropriateness.
I had the good fortune of meeting the pocket guide author
Quentin Brook at the ASQ World Conference on Quality
Improvement in Indianapolis last May. I obtained the print
version of the guide, which is 7 X 8 inches and about 1
inches thick. This is actually larger than pocket size, but the
guide is easy to carry around and the spiral binding makes it
a pleasure to use since pages can be laid flat for easier viewing.
An iBook version is available for iPads and includes additional
instructional videos.
At last count I have nearly two dozen references in my library
on Six Sigma and Lean practices. Although I would not want to
part with many of these resources, I could do rather nicely in
most process improvement projects with just this pocket guide
as a reference. The guides subtitle: The Complete Toolbox Guide
for all Lean Six Sigma Practitioners accurately states the utility
of this book to business process improvement leaders and the
members of their Six Sigma and Lean teams.
To obtain a copy of this pocket guide visit www.opexresources.com.
Be sure to download the customized Minitab menu for Six
Sigma and Lean and the data files and templates to go along
with the many examples shown in the guide. The guide is now
in its 3rd edition, with over 90,000 copies having been sold.
For publisher and online orders:
Web: www.opexresources.com
Email: info@opexresources.com
ISBN: 978-0-9546813-6-4
Robert Spencer is the editor of the Quality Management Forum.

11

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

Quality Management Journal Preview

As a continuing feature of the QMF, we are showcasing the
most recent articles in our sister publication, the Quality
Management Journal (QMJ). The QMF focuses on the
practical application of quality principles, and the QMJ
focuses on the research aspect of quality. We hope that
you will visit their website and begin the synthesis process
of merging theory with application to advance the field of
quality. http://www.asq.org/pub/qmj/index.html
The QMJ provides relevant knowledge about quality
management practice that is grounded in rigorous research.
They seek:
Empirical articles that provide objective evidence
concerning actual quality management practice and
its effectiveness.
Research case studies that consider either a single
application or a small number of cases.
Management theory articles that present significant new
insight and demonstrated practice.
Review articles that create links to the existing academic
literature and aid in the development of an identifiable
quality management academic literature.
Here is a summary of their most recent articles.

QMJ vol. 20, no. 2 Introduction

Thank You

This is the first issue of the Quality Management Journal

(QMJ) for which I have had the honor of serving as the
editor. I want to thank all of the members of the Editorial
Advisory and Editorial Review Boards who have generously
contributed their time to making this journal a success.
Without the generous donation of so much time by members
of these boards, there could be no journal. I also want to start
my tenure as editor of QMJ by thanking Dr. James R. Evans
for his great help in preparing this issue and in making the
transition between editors successful. Those of you who have
done this work can appreciate the amount of work involved. I
also want to thank the QMJ administrative staff, particularly
the publisher, William Tony, and the manuscript coordinator,
Valerie Ellifson, for patient guidance during the process.
Book Review Section

This issue of QMJ also has a new book review editor, Dr.
Nicole Radziwell, and a new associate book review editor,
Dr. Matthias Threr. Both are very qualified for their
positions. Dr. Radziwell is an active member of the American
Society for Quality (ASQ) quality community. She is an
12

ASQ Fellow and past chair of the ASQ Software Division.

She is also a certified Six Sigma Black Belt and a national
examiner for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award.
She was recognized in Quality Progress in 2011 as one of
the 40 New Voices of Quality and currently blogs as part of
ASQs Influential Voices (http://qualityandinnovation.com).
She is also an assistant professor in the Department of
Integrated Science & Technology at James Madison
University, where she enjoys teaching statistics. Dr. Threr
is an international scholar, having worked in Portugal and
Brazil as well as Germany. Through his work on the use of
workload control to introduce Lean operations into job shops
(http://www.workloadcontrol.com/home) he developed a
deep appreciation of the importance of quality because of its
importance to Lean operations. These editors are constantly
looking for books that could be of particular interest to QMJs
readers. If you have ideas about books to review, or if you
want to write a review of a particular book, please contact Dr.
Nicole Radziwell at nicole.radziwill@gmail.com.
Striving to Fulfill the Quality Management
Journals Mission

The QMJ actively contributes to the development of the

quality profession throughout the world by striving to be the
first choice of those who want to learn more about quality
management and for those engaged in research efforts to
further develop managers theoretical understanding of
quality management. Since QMJ s first editor, William A.
Golomski, QMJ has sought to be recognized as the home of
thought leaders in the field of quality management. QMJ has
long sought to link the efforts of academic researchers and
quality management practitioners [and] provide a forum
for communicating and discussing research findings. (QMJ
Aims and Scopes). To accomplish this, QMJ must strive to
publish original research that will continue to increase the
understanding of quality management systems in both service
and manufacturing companies.
New QMJ Section

To ensure that our research addresses the most pressing

problems in both the service and manufacturing industries,
and to increase dialogue between practitioners and researchers,
QMJ will begin to publish Perspective articles. The first of
these articles is in this issue. The QMJ Perspective section is
modeled on the Perspective section published in Science. These
are not research articles; rather, they are the perspective of
individuals who have a unique expertise or voice that needs
to be shared with the practitioner and quality community.

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

It is hoped that these articles will identify research problems

that need to be explored and fruitful areas for collaboration
between practitioners and researchers. The perspective article
should provide insight into current quality management
research or provide an overview of the quality management
field and insights about the research gaps and needs in the
field. A perspective paper is not a research paper, although
it is peer reviewed. It is a thought piece that to be valuable
needs to be grounded in both experience and the research
literature. The first Perspective article in this series provides
a nurses view of quality management in a hospital. Sue Sietz,
the author, provides insight from her more than 35 years of
experience in various nursing positions as well as her work
with various professional associations.
Focused Issues of QMJ

If you are interested in editing a special issue about an aspect

of quality management or about quality management in a
particular field, please submit your idea to me at flawren@
clemson.edu. Some suggestions for future focused issues
include: 1) the role of nurses in quality of health care delivery
services; 2) the role of the middle manager in continuous
improvement efforts; 3) how incentive reward systems affect
quality management; 4) the effectiveness of ISO 9001 in
providing a structure for continuous improvement; and 5)
the use of Hoshin planning/deployment systems or target
cascading to implement continuous improvement programs.
Lawrence Fredendall, Editor
flawren@clemson.edu

QMJ vol. 20, no. 2 Executive Briefs

Perspectives of a Clinical Nurse Specialist
About Improving the Quality of Nursing Services
Susan Seitz, University Medical Center, Greenville Hospital System
The author of this Perspective article, Susan Seitz, has more
than 35 years of nursing experience and has been a leader in
her hospital as well as her profession. While she acknowledges
the great progress made in providing high-quality health care
delivery services, she points out that as a profession, nursing
has not fully implemented quality metrics that can be used
to improve the quality of delivered services. She suggests
that quality management researchers partner with nursing
managers to investigate what process measures should be used
within the various fields of nursing and to determine how
these process measures affect system performance.

A Framework for Leading the Transformation

to Performance Excellence, Part I: CEO
Perspectives on Forces, Facilitators, and
Strategic Leadership Systems
John R. Latham, University of Northern Colorado
This article describes a framework for Leading the
Transformation to Performance Excellence (LTPE) that is
based on structured interviews with 14 CEOs who successfully
led organizational transformations and were recognized as
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award recipients. The
LTPE consists of five categories of concepts: forces and
facilitators of change, leadership approaches, leadership
behaviors, individual leader characteristics, and organizational
culture characteristics. These concepts and their relationships
are explained in detail. A valuable contribution of the article is
that it then uses the LTPE to identify nine processes used by
the CEOs to lead the change in their company and provides
a view of a strategic leadership system that leaders can use to
help transform their organization by creating a customized
strategic leadership system.

An Integrated Framework for Service Quality:

SQBOK Perspective
Rajesh Kumar Tyagi, HEC Montreal, Nikhil Varma, HEC
Montreal, and Navneet Viydarthi, Concordia University
With the service sector making up such a large portion of the
total gross domestic product in most OECD countries, its
important to understand the determinants of service quality.
One of the major challenges in managing service quality is the
lack of a common definition of services and a general lack of a
standard measurement system originating from the intangible
nature of the services.
After a thorough study of the literature in the area of service
quality and a perception of a gap for the service quality
practitioner, the Service Quality Division of ASQ undertook
a project to identify a common definition of services and a
framework that could serve as a theoretical formulation. The
stated objective of the project was to foster the knowledge and
professional development needs of the service quality community.
Researchers adopted brainstorming, affinity diagram, Delphi
techniques, and interview-based methods to identify and define
four key concepts and seven knowledge areas. The research teams
worked to come up with the current version of the Service Quality
Body of Knowledge (SQBOK). SQBOK provides a holistic view of
service quality and broadens the definition of services and service
quality. It also provides a body of knowledge representing a unique
perspective on the application of quality principles.
(Q uality Management Journal Preview, continued on page 14)

13

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

(Q uality Management Journal Preview, continued from page 13)

Front-line Employee versus Customer

Perceptions of Quality Attributes
Anne Julien, Reims Management School, and Christina Tsoni,
Champagne Business School
While managers and academics have examined customer
perceptions of quality in many studies, front-line employees
(FLEs) perceptions of quality do not appear to have been suffi
ciently studied, and FLEs have a crucial role in delivering
quality. FLE assessments of quality attributes may be quite
different than those of customers. Therefore, the authors of this
article carried out a comparative quantitative study to answer
some questions about FLEs perceptions of service quality.
This study was conducted within a regional French banking
firm. It examined the perceptions financial advisors (FAs)
employed by the firm had about their customer expectations.
They used the SERVQUAL tool to measure the customers
expectations and to identify any gaps between the measured
customer expectations and the perceived expectations of the FA.
They found that employee perceptions of the customer expec
tations differed from the actual customer expectations, but that
the size and type of gaps depended on the customer segment.
They suggested that the gaps may occur because the FA cannot
actually evaluate their customer expectations without evaluating
their own performance. So, a technique they suggested to
reduce this gap was to involve the FA in setting the bank goals
and target objectives for their own performance.

QMJ vol. 20, no. 3 Introduction

Book Reviews

The book review editor, Nicole Radziwill, and the associate

book review editor, Matthias Threr, have prepared three
insightful reviews. These three reviews span a range of
interests of QMJs readers. Threr reviewed an older book
about hoshin kanri because hoshin is an unappreciated tool
that can integrate quality management at both the strategic
and shop-floor level. The second book Threr reviewed is
about performance metrics, which he found to be a very
informative book about how to better coordinate operations
using the appropriate performance metrics. Radziwill also
reviewed a book of strategic importance. This book builds on
using Demings philosophy to explain how to build highly
capable organizations that are based on trust and respect.
If you have ideas about books to review, or if you want to
write a review of a particular book, please contact Nicole
Radziwill at nicole.radziwill@gmail.com.

14

Perspectives Articles

There are two Perspective articles in this issue. The first,

Deming-Based Lean Six Sigma Management as an Answer to
Escalating Hospital Costs, by Howard Gitlow and Abraham
Gitlow, builds on the authors decades of experience in quality
management to offer suggestions about how to improve
healthcare using insights from quality theory. The second,
Time-Relevant Metrics in an Era of Continuous Process
Improvement: The Balanced Scorecard Revisited, by Richard
Schonberger, provides insights from decades of experience
as a management consultant and author of multiple books
about world-class manufacturing techniques about the role of
performance metrics in achieving process improvement.
Research Articles

The second article in a two-part series about leadership and

organizational transformation is provided by John Latham,
who used grounded theory to establish a framework to lead
the transformation of a company to performance excellence.
Prakah Singh et al.s article, Deming Management Method:
Subjecting Theory to Moderating and Contextual Effects, is
an empirical examination of the Deming management method
in the public sector.
Lawrence Fredendall, Editor
flawren@clemson.edu

QMJ vol. 20, no. 3 Executive Briefs

Deming-Based Lean Six Sigma Management
as an Answer to Escalating Hospital Costs
Howard S. Gitlow, University of Miami, and
Abraham L. Gitlow, New York University
The cost of medical care in the United States is increasing
dramatically. One reason for this could be the traditional
management paradigm, which views process variation as
good or bad, uses management by objectives for decision
making without considering the causes of process variation,
and endorses a performance appraisal system to reward or
punish employees for achieving, or failing to achieve,
objectives. In this article, the authors explain the problems
with these components of traditional management and offer
a solution, which they call professional management.
Professional management offers an alternative view of
variation in a process. It creates the cultural transformation
needed to control escalating healthcare costs. Professional
management requires the top management of health care
organizations to be committed to the Deming-Based Lean Six
Sigma Management paradigm.

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

Time-Relevant Metrics in an Era of Continuous

Process Improvement: The Balanced
Scorecard Revisited
Richard J. Schonberger
This article addresses the importance of using performance
metrics that support continuous process improvement
(CPI) and its customer-centered benefits. A large number of
methodologies make up CPI, and these have spawned their
own large set of targeted performance measures. These are
largely targeted to the eyes of the customer, including better
quality and quicker, more flexible response. By replacing the
inward-looking, control-focused conventional system with CPI,
a more outward-directed approach, it emerges as a potential
solution for improving the competitiveness and durability of
an organization. At the middle and senior management levels,
performance management metrics remain largely unchanged,
and to some extent these indicators interfere with CPI best
practices. The balanced scorecard mixes short, medium,
and long lag-time metrics. The authors suggest intensively
managing with the strong short-term CPI metrics to keep CPI
alive and on track. The weaker medium- and long-lag metrics
are better used for managerial oversight through multiperiod
trend watching. Modifications such as these by upper
management will help avoid errors of micro-management,
while encouraging visits to CPI action zones, which will lead to
a better appreciation for the value of a strong CPI effort.

A Framework for Leading the Transformati

on to Performance Excellence Part II: CEO
Perspectives on Leadership Behaviors,
Individual Leader Characteristics, and
Organizational Culture
John R. Latham, University of Northern Colorado

linkages to theory. It also identifies and discusses several

current leadership theories including transformational and
transactional leadership, servant leadership, and spiritual
leadership. In addition, the article identifies and discussses
implications for theory and practice.

Deming Management Method: Subjecting

Theory to Moderating and Contextual Effects
Prakash J. Singh, University of Melbourne, Chua Ming Wee
Dean, University of Melbourne, Australia, and Sum CheeChuong, National University of Singapore
Many organizations seek to systematically and sustainably
improve the quality of their products or services, and
practices such as quality management have been shown
to help organizations achieve this outcome. W. Edwards
Deming, a prominent personality of the quality management
movement, wrote his 14 Points of Management, the ideas of
which became known as the Deming Management Method
(DMM). These ideas were appealing to many practitioners in
manufacturing organizations in the United States and other
Western countries, who found it difficult to compete with
companies from Japan and others. Despite the popularity
of Demings ideas, evidence of their efficacy is lacking, and
several important research questions remain relating to the
impact of factors that operate at different levelsthat is, the
theory has been tested at the organizational level but not
at the individual levelas well as the applicability of the
theory in various industry sectors and countries. This article
addresses the aforementioned research gaps and issues through
an empirical study, where DMM was tested with data from
367 individual employees from five public-sector organizations
in Singapore. The results provide a relatively positive appraisal
of the DMM theory as it applies across organizations in new
industry and country contexts. They also learned that some
individual-level metrics have a moderating influence on how
the theory is perceived and used in the workplace.

This is the second in a series of two articles that describe the

results of a qualitative, multiple case study that used grounded
theory methods based on in-depth interviews with 14 CEOs
who led successful organization transformations, resulting
in recognition as Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award
recipients. The article describes a framework for leading the
transformation to performance excellence (LTPE) from the
top. This framework includes 35 concepts organized into five
categories. This article explores three of the five categories
in depth: leader behaviors, individual leader characteristics,
and organizational culture. It describes the elements of
each individual component along with supporting data,
explains relationships to other components, and identifies
15

ASQ JOINT AUDIT DIVISION AND QUALITY MANAGEMENT DIVISION CONFERENCE

AS

16

ASQ JOINT AUDIT DIVISION AND QUALITY

MANAGEMENT DIVISION CONFERENCE

QUALITY REVOLUTIONEVOLUTION

JR McGee
Managing Partner and CEO
X-Stream Leadership Group,
LLC

Denise Robitaille
Quality Management
Systems Specialist
Robitaille Associates

John Knappenberger
President and CEO
ANSI-ASQ National
Accreditation Board

Paul Palmes
President, Business
Standards Architects, Inc. of
Fargo, ND and Prescott, WI

Tim McKay
Executive Vice President,
Growth and Regional
Development, Dallas Area
Rapid Transit

October 1011, 2013 Hilton El Conquistador Resort Tucson, AZ

Presented by ASQs Audit Division partnering with the Quality Management Division
and the Design and Construction Division
Audit
Division

The Global Voice of Quality

TM

Quality Management
Division
The Global Voice of Quality

TM

Design & Construction

Division
The Global Voice of Quality

TM

Many thanks to our Conference Sponsors:

Platinum: Design and Construction Division
Gold: Hilton El Conquistador Resort
Silver: EtQ, Minitab, Sustaining Edge Solutions, Inc.
Bronze: X-Stream
Training: Eight tutorials are being offered, including three associated with
certification exams (CQA, CMQ/OE, and CQIA). There are courses for beginners
and courses for more seasoned professionals. For a complete list of tutorials visit
http://2013auditconference.com/Refreshers_Tutorials.php.
Networking: The conference attendees have varied work histories and experience. Some
attendees are experienced professionals who might have job openings, and others are just
beginning their journey into the quality profession. There will be several opportunities to network
with others, including breakfast, lunch, and breaks at the conference; the Division Business Meeting;
Thursday evening opening reception; and the Friday afternoon closing reception.
Books and book signings: Many of the presenters at the conference are authors. Various books
will be available at the on-site bookstore, and some authors will do book signings.
Tracks and Sessions: There are four tracks with a variety of sessions. For descriptions of the
sessions, visit http://2013auditconference.com/Program.html.
Certification exams: Six certification exams will be held on the Saturday after the conference. Go
to http://2013auditconference.com/On-Site_Exams.html for the registration links. The application
deadline is August 30, 2013.
Sponsors and exhibits: One of the highlights of the conference is the opportunity to talk to the
sponsors in the exhibit area to find out more about their products or services.
To register, go to https://asq.org/conferences/audit/2013/registration.html.

QMF Book Summary

The Handbook for Quality Management: A Complete Guide to Operational
Excellence Second Edition, 2013*
By Russell T. Westcott
Thomas Pyzdek and Paul Keller make
a worthy contribution to the quality
management field and provide excellent
study material for the CMQ/OE
certification exam.
These authors present a progression
that differs from the ASQ Handbooks
tracking with the CMQ/OE body
of knowledge. This book is more
integrated for direct work application
than for exam prep and provides
more of the how to do than many
past and present texts on quality
management practices.
There is a strong emphasis on Six Sigma
and the Define-Measure-AnalyzeImprove-Control (DMAIC) model.
The concepts and usage of Quality
Function Deployment, Theory of
Constraints, process variation, analysis,
management, and control are detailed
in quite understandable language.
There is excellent coverage of change
initiation-project management, and
measurement. Anecdotes of reallife situations and applications are
strategically placed within the book.
The authors have cleverly and
skillfully woven the quality principles,
techniques, and practices into the
fabric of managing quality. The flow of
topics begins with Business-Integrated
Quality Systems, and discusses
Organizational Structures, The Quality
Function, Approaches to Quality, and
Customer-Focused Organizations.
Integrated Planning follows with
Strategic Planning, Understanding
Customer Expectations and Needs,
Benchmarking, and Organizational
Assessment. Process Control delves into
Quantifying Process Variation, Quality
Audits, and Supply Chain Management.
Continuous Improvement deals with
Effective Change Management followed
by the Define Stage, the Measure Stage,

the Analyze Stage, the Improve/Design

Stage, and ending with the Control/
Verify Stage. Management of Human
Resources defines Motivation Theories
and Principles, Management Styles, and
concludes with Resource Requirements
to Manage the Quality Function.
Four appendices are: Control Chart
Constants, Control Chart Equations,
Area under the Standard Normal
Curve, and Simulated Certification
Exam Questions. References are listed.
Quality terms and techniques are
defined and explained in situ, therefore
there is no glossary.
Wisdom and practical advice are
sprinkled within, such as:
We must also ask of each present
activity, product, process, or market, If
we werent already doing this, would
we start?
Managers often spend inordinate
time chasing higher productivity for
their own departments, without much
concern for whether the whole system
benefits or not.
Customers who are satisfied with
the way in which their complaints are
handled are more likely to patronize a
firm in the future than customers who
had no complaints.
Acceptance sampling methods have
absolutely no place in a modern quality
organization. They should be soundly
rejected by the quality professional. (A
rationale is given.).
Effective quality auditing can prevent
problems by uncovering situations that,
while still acceptable, are trending
toward an eventual problem.
Formal rules are often responses to
past problems, and they continue to
exist long after the reason for their
existence has passed.

Value is only relevant at a specific

price and point in time. One common
problem in specifying value is that
organizations tend to concentrate on
what they are able to deliver, rather
than what the customers really want.
Inventories hide problems, such
as unpredictable or low process
yields, equipment failure, or uneven
production levels.
problems with quality costs is that
they measure negatives, rather than the
lack of positives. Quality is not only the
absence of negatives (e.g., defects) it is
the presence of desirable features.
The authors have given explanations,
definitions, charts, figures, tables and
formulas to exemplify the principles
and practices of quality management.
This book will help instructors to guide
course participants in assimilating the
BoK topics as an integrated system, and
to provide additional information for
answering detailed questions.
ITS A MUST READ.
Russ Westcott is an ASQ Fellow, CQA,
and CMQ/OE. He is editor of the
ASQ Certified Manager of Quality/
Organizational Excellence Handbook,
4th ed. and a co-editor of the ASQ
Quality Improvement Handbook, 2nd
ed. Russ instructs the ASQ CMQ/
OE refresher course nationwide. He
writes for Quality Progress, Quality
Management Forum, the Auditor, and
other publications.
Reach Russ at russwest@snet.net or
263 Main Street, Suite 100, Old
Saybrook, CT 06475.
* McGraw-Hill ISBN978-0-07-179924-9

17

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

QMD CHAIR

Milt K rivokuca
QMD AUDIT CHAIR

ADVISORY COMMIT TEE (WOW COMMIT TEE)

Dick Mat thews

Ron Bane
Bill Denney
A r t Tr e p a n i e r

AUDIT SUP T

Dean Bot tor f f

Grace Duf f y
Jack Moran
Russ Westcot t

SECRETARY

TREASURER

CHAIR-ELECT

PAST-CHAIR

Peggy Milz

Sandra Low

Ken Sadler

JD Marhevko

DEPUT Y SECRETARY

DEPUT Y TREASURER

Open

Open

CONFERENCE / ICQI CHAIR

Heather McCain
David Lit tle

ARR ANGEMENTS CHAIR

Anne Moyer
VICE-CHAIR
MEMBERSHIP

VICE-CHAIR
MARKETING

VICE-CHAIR
PRINT INITIATIVES

VICE-CHAIR
FACE-TO-FACE
INITIATIVES

VICE-CHAIR
E-BL AST

VICE-CHAIR
OPER ATIONS

VICE-CHAIR
TECHNICAL
COMMIT TEES

VICE-CHAIR
GLOBAL

Jan Tucker

Ellen Quinn

Robert Spencer

Heather McCain

Ron Meier

Jerry Rice

Claud Russey

Bill Denney

Awards Chair

Marketing
Communications
Coordinator

DEPUT Y VICE-CHAIR
PRINT INITIATIVES

DEPUT Y VICE-CHAIR
FACE-TO-FACE
INITIATIVES

DEPUT Y
VICE-CHAIR E-BL AST

DEPUT Y VICE-CHAIR
OPER ATIONS

DEPUT Y VICE-CHAIR
GLOBAL

Troy Burrows

Bill Hackett

Diane Dixon

Karen Ambrosic-Tolf
Michael Hirt

DEPUT Y VICE-CHAIR
TECHNICAL
COMMIT TEES

Jack Moran

Denis Devos

Jd Marhevko
- Debbie Hausauer

TC Chair
Organizational
Excellence

Mexico
Executive
Director

CMQ/OE Exam
Chair (Cert Board
Committee)

TC Chair Risk
Management

Brazil Executive
Director

TC Chair Public
Health

China/East Asia
Executive
Director

Dan Zrymiak

Member Data
Analyst

Ellen Quinn Interim

- Open

Open

Partnership
Liaison

Volunteer Chair

Carol Beauchesne

Doug Wood

Examining Chair

VOC Chair

John Sharp
David Little

Dennis Lapp

Education/IVP
Chair

VICE-CHAIR
BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT

Vijai Venkata

Forum Editor

Robert Spencer
- Elizabeth Cudney

Editorial Review
Chair
Denis Leonard

Michael Mladjenovic

Program Chair

3rd Party Web Host

Mike Ensby
Thane Russey
- Gayle Norman

Subscribed Service

Discussion Board
Moderator

Speakers List Chair

Geoffery Withnell

Steve Bogar
- James Head

Web Reviewer
e-Blast Content
Chair

Training &
Workshops

Thane Russey

Dave Little

Conf Registration
Chair
Gayle Norman

VICE-CHAIR
E-BASED INITIATIVES

Booth Management
Chair
Bill Hackett Interim
Ellen Quinn

Welcome Chair

QMD Officers
Chair

Milt Krivokuca
Cell:
(949) 892-7994
E-Mail: milt619@cox.net

Chair Elect

Kenneth F. Sadler
Sadler Consulting
Office Phone:
(902) 835-7482
Fax:
(902) 835-7482
E-Mail: sadler@ns.sympatico.ca

Past Chair

Jd Marhevko,
JQLC, Inc.
Principal Consultant
Office/Cell:
E-Mail:

(419) 704-5603
jdmarkevko@frontier.com

Peggy Milz
L3 CommunicationsCrestview Aerospace
Office Phone:
(850) 682-2746 ext. 568
Fax:
(903) 457-9883
E-Mail: Peggy.Milz@l-3com.com

Karen Ambrosic-Tolf
- Michael Hirt

CMQ/OE Exam
Liaison
(Workshops)

Karen Ambrosic-Tolf
- Michael Hirt
- Miles Littlefield

By-Laws

David Little

Social Sites

Prashant Hoskote

Ron Meier

Grace Duffy
- Pierce Story

Open

TC Chair Finance
& Governance
TC Chair Social
Responsibility
Jack Moran

Vice-Chair, Membership

Ellen C. Quinn
Quality Programs Management
Northrop Grumman
Office Phone:
(703) 907-4060
Cell:
(240) 606-2814
E-Mail: Ellen.Quinn@ngc.com
Robert Spencer
California State University, Dominguez Hills
Office Phone:
(314) 395-3383
E-Mail: rspencer@csudh.edu

Vice-Chair, Face-to-Face Initiatives

Bill Hackett
Valley Psychiatric Service, Inc.
Cell:
(508) 561-9336
E-Mail: bhackett@valleypsychiatric.com

Open

India Executive
Director
Vineet Sharma

Egypt & Middle

East Executive
Director
Shady El-Safty
Baher

Hong Kong
Regional
Executive
Director
Sarah Mak

Janice A. Tucker
Quality ManagerMetaldyne
Phone:
(734) 604-7354
E-Mail: JanTucker@Metaldyne.com

Vice-Chair, Marketing

Open

Open

TC Chair
Innovation &
Value Creation

Dan Zrymiak

- Bill Hackett Interim

Vice-Chair, Print Initiatives

Secretary

Treasurer

Thane Russey

Operations Manual

Vice-Chair, e-Blast Initiatives

Ronald L. Meier
Illinois State University
Office Phone:
(309) 438-2905
E-mail: rlmeier@ilstu.edu

Vice-Chair, Operations

Jerry Rice
Office Phone:
(573) 248-1707
Cell:
(217) 779-7605
E-Mail: rice_jerry@sbcglobal.net

Vice-Chair, Technical Committees

Claud Russey
Fusion QHSE
Office Phone:
E-Mail:

(832) 282-0245
claud@fusionqhse.com

Sandra Low
Office Phone:
(902) 827-3676
E-Mail: sandralow@eastlink.ca

To see a QMD organization chart and complete roster of QMD officers, committee chairs, and volunteers, go to the QMD Organization pages on the QMD Web site at www.asq-qmd.org.

18

THE QUA LIT Y M A NAGEMENTFORUM

Coach's Corner
By J. R. McGee
I recently received a question from a friend
in Alaska, Randy Norville: Why are some
people so afraid of failure? Some of our
most famous inventors were immense
failures. Could overall success have
more to do with our attitude towards
failure than how often we succeed?
Randy, Ive given this topic a lot of
thought myself. Ive found that truly
successful people almost never discuss
or consider failure in the same language
as the majority of people. They dont
see things in terms of failure but in
terms of learning! Each trial that doesnt
work simply provides them with new
information about how to better achieve
success with the next experiment or the
next time they use that process. They
focus only on achieving their ultimate
goal. Another thing really successful
people have in common is that they are
never satisfied with their results!
Our approach to the outcomes of our
endeavors has an inordinate impact on how
we continue to struggle to achieve true
excellence. Most people seem to focus on
all the ways something wont work. As soon
as they run into trouble, it confirms their
beliefs, and they simply stop trying. For
example, if people see an outcome that is
less than desirable as something to avoid at
all costs, they will have a strong tendency
to play it safe and never achieve their
full potential. Even worse, the organization
will suffer one of the 8 Deadly Forms of
WasteNon-Applied Talent. However, if
people see an outcome through the eyes
of learning from the results so that they
can do something different next time, that
is a success! Your premise that attitude is
critical is precisely correct in my opinion. I
tell my clients that if you believe you can
youre right! If you believe you cant
youre right!
There is yet another aspect to truly
successful people that highly correlates
to this issue of attitude, and that is
how a person defines good enough.
Weve all faced situations where were

exhausted, out of time, or over burdened

by all of our commitments. In these
circumstances, it is so easy to proclaim
that something weve done is OK and
move on. Every one of us has been in
that situation, and each of us has made
that call. Occasionally, it is a function of
priority. But Im talking about something
much deeper for the quality profession.
Are we practicing what we preach
to our workforce? Are we settling on
OK quality for the quality inspections
themselves when we have an opportunity
to demonstrate to the organization what
truly world-class quality can be?
One of the topics that I get into at almost
every conference or convention I attend is
how the quality profession is not respected
enough; how we are not given proper
resources or adequate budgets. I believe
this topic is directly related to how we are
perceived in the workforce and the degree
of value they think we bring to the table.
How often do we allow something to slide
because it was good enough when we
could have stood up for real excellence?
People are watching everything we do, and
our actions set the tone for what quality
means for the rest of the organization!
Recently, I was working with a leadership
development program at a well-respected
university. It consists of juniors and
seniors in an experiential leadership
challenge week that is designed to push
them to their limits. We work them
20-hours a day for seven straight days
(while carefully monitoring them for
safety). We present them with a constant
series of increasingly difficult challenges
that they cannot solve alone. At every
step, we relentlessly challenge them to do
even more than they thought they could
do, achieve greater results than they ever
thought possible. This whole concept of
what constitutes good enough is taken
to the max. The students discover that
what they actually can achieve is so much
greater than they thought they could
have doneand so far beyond what they

would have normally accomplished, and

so radically different from what they
would have gladly accepted under more
normal circumstancesthat it changes
their perspective forever about what it
means to do their very best. Weve also
seen that even after going through this
experience and achieving unimaginable
personal and professional growth, they
will slip back into their previous
mindset if they are not continuously
challenged and coached for at least a year.
Do we do this at our jobs? Are we willing
to sign our names to the final product or
service that goes to our customers? How
often do we settle for OK when we
could have done so much more if we had
just changed our attitudes about success
and failure? We are often more afraid
of something not working than we are
of expending the effort to do something
exceptional. It is my personal belief that
you cannot fail until you quit trying. As
long as you learn something from the
experience, something you can change to
affect the outcome, something that you
can tweak or try, you have not failed
you have advanced the ball for your
organizations operational excellence. And
THAT is what true quality is all about!
This column is dedicated to the memory of
my friend and business partner, Ms. Sandy
Miller. She spent her life in the pursuit of
excellence and never accepted failure of
any kind as long as I knew her. She will be
deeply missed but never forgotten.
If you have a question or an issue you
would like to see addressed in this column,
contact me at askthecoach@x-slg.com.
J. R. McGee
Managing Partner and CEO
1248 Queen Street, Pottstown Pa 19464
610-212-6728
A Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned
Small Business
www.xstreamleadershipgroup.com
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/j-rmcgee/5/470/5b1/
19

The Quality Management

Quality
Management
Division

American Society for Quality, Inc.

Customer Service Center
600 N. Plankinton Ave.
Milwaukee, WI 53201-3005
Quality Management Division
Vice-Chair, Print Initiatives

Robert Spencer
Quality Management Forum Editor

Robert Spencer
Chair, Editorial Review Board

Denis Leonard, Business Excellence Consulting

Editorial Review Board

Hank Campbell, Professor Emeritus, Illinois State University

Mark R. Chandler, Federal Highway Administration
Eleanor Chilson, Chilson Quality Services
Deepak Dave, BobcatIngersoll Rand Company
William Denney, Quality Texas Foundation
Mac McGuire, McGuire & Associates Consulting
Pradip V. Mehta, Mehta Consulting LLC
Nestor (Nick) Ovalle, CEO & Principle Consultant of PI Consult
Oz Rahman, Rayovac/Varta Battery
Matthew J. Roe, Dow Chemical
Mustafa Shraim, SQPS Ltd
Gabriel Smith, John Deere
Chad Vincent, Baxter Health Corporation
Robert J Vokurka, Texas A&M UniversityCorpus Christi
Jeanette Wilde, Los Alamos National Laboratory
Consulting Editor

Dave Roberts, PhD

The Quality Management Forum is a peer-reviewed
publication of the Quality Management Division of the
American Society for Quality. Published quarterly,
it is QMDs primary channel for communicating
quality management information and Division
news to Quality Management Division members.
The Quality Management Division of ASQ does
not necessarily endorse opinions expressed in The
Quality Management Forum. Articles, letters and
advertisements are chosen for their general interest to
Division members, but conclusions are those of the
individual writers.
Address all communications regarding The Quality
Management Forum, including article submissions, to:
Robert Spencer, Adjunct Professor
Quality Assurance Program
College of Extended & International Education
California State University, Dominguez Hills
1000 East Victoria Street
Quality Assurance Office, M/S 2-120, EE-1300
Carson, CA 90747-0005
Office Phone: (314) 395-3383
E-Mail: rspencer@csudh.edu
Address all communications regarding the Quality
Management Division of ASQ to:
Milt Krivokuca
Program Coordinator to Quality Assurance Program
California State University, Dominiguze Hills
Phone: (949) 892-7994
E-Mail: Milt619@cox.net
Address all communications regarding QMD
membership including change of address to:
American Society for Quality
Customer Service Center
P.O. Box 3005
Milwaukee, WI 53201-3005
1 (800) 248-1946 or (414) 272-8575
For more information on how to submit articles
or advertise in the Quality Management Forum
see the Quality Management Division website
at www.asq-qm.org. Articles must be received
ten weeks prior to the publication date to be
considered for that issue.
Contact the ASQ Customer Service Center at
1 (800) 248-1946 or (414) 272-8575 to replace issues
lost or damaged in the mail.

20

Advertise in
The Quality Management Forum
If you provide products or
services to the quality
profession, The Quality
Management Forum
will help you reach your target
market.
Every quarter, the Forum can convey your advertising message to over 20,000
Quality Management Division members. These members include many of ASQs
quality executives, managers, supervisors, and team and project managers. Most are
decision makers or influencers for products and services such as:
Consulting Training Publications ISO Registration
Conferences Business Shows Software ... and more

For information on advertising in the Forum, contact

Robert Spencer, Editor, at rspencer@csudh.edu.