Discusión de Resultados

The motivation for developing a quality management system and the benefits an organization wishes to obtain by implementing it will affect how the system itself is designed. Like the quote by Kaziliunas in section 4.2.1 indicates, an organization may choose to develop and implement a system that merely meets the requirements of a standard such as ISO 9001, so that the certification can be referred to for marketing and sales purposes. Similarly, Holye writes (2011, p. 101):

25

“In [a documented system established to meet the requirements of ISO 9001 on the demand of customers or the market] there are likely to be no processes beyond those specified in ISO 9001 and within those processes no activities that could not be traced to a requirement in ISO 9001”

Hoyle problematizes this practice of making the certification a goal in itself by quoting Seddon (2000, cited in Hoyle 2011, p. 93), who claims that:

“People cheat, they do what they need to do to avoid the feared consequence of not being registered.”

According to Hoyle (2011, p. 81), what he denotes implementing the ISO 9001 standard (meaning that an organization picks up the standard and does what it is required) is less effective than first consulting the ISO 9000 standards, establishing a management system that enables the organization to fulfill its goals and then finally assessing the system by doing what he denotes applying the standard. If the goals of an organization in developing and implementing a quality management system are of an external orientation (that is, driven by external pressures), simply creating a system that adheres to the requirements of ISO 9001 may be sufficient in order to reach those goals. If the objectives are internally driven, however, the quality management system should be designed based on the organization’s inherent processes and challenges. Hoyle (2011, pp. 111-135) uses systems theory to argue that a management system, such as a quality management system, is neither a set of rules, a set of documents, nor a set of tools. Instead, the management system is “formed from a set of interacting

processes designed to function together to fulfill a specific purpose” (Hoyle, 2011, p.

117), the key words being processes and purpose (recall that ISO 9000:2006 emphasizes ‘System approach to management’ and ‘Process approach’ as two of eight quality management principles). Designing a system based on ISO 9001 requirements, rather than strategic objectives, will lead to an emphasis on satisfying them rather than on achieving the objectives, which will lead to the flawed approach of treating the quality management system as something that is separate from the business (Hoyle, 2011, p. 98). Moreover, Hoyle argues that the quality management system must be seen as an inherent part of the organization’s business management system (BMS),

26

which is the complete system through which the organization achieves its business objectives. The difference between viewing the quality management system (and other management systems such as those for environmental objectives etc.) as separate from the business and viewing it as part of the business management system can be illustrated by the figures below.

The principle of treating the quality management system as a part of the BMS corresponds with the systems approach to management principle in ISO 9001:2008 (IOS, 2008). Furthermore, the notion that lack of integration between quality management and everyday business practices can lead to failure of quality system implementation is well established in literature (e.g. Soltani & Wilkinson, 2010, p. 368). By equating the BMI, which contains the quality management system, with the organization itself, Hoyle argues that the common mistake of treating the quality

Figure 5 Integrated business system (IMS) separated from business (Hoyle, 2011, p. 127)

Organization

IMS

Safety Objectives Health & Safety Objectives Quality Objectives Environmental Objectives Organization’s objectives (customer satisfaction) Organization (BMS) Safety Constraints Health & Safety Constraints Quality Constraints Environmental Constraints Organization’s objectives (customer satisfaction) Non-value adding

27

management system as something separate from the business is eliminated (Hoyle, 2011, pp. 103, 196).

Because truly effective quality management systems are designed based on the principles above, it is useful to examine whether or not Swecos QA-system is designed as an integrated part of the organization’s business management system or not. Based on observations made in the period of time leading up to the present case study, this yields the following propositions:

Proposition 5: Sweco’s quality management system is designed on the basis of the organization’s inherent processes and challenges. As such, it exceeds the bare minimum of the ISO 9001 requirements.

Proposition 6: However, the system is frequently seen as something “extra” to the organization’s business activities. This indicates that the system in not an accurate model of how the organization functions and that the quality management system does not equal the business management system.

Going further into the notion of the organization as a system of processes, Hoyle identifies four generic business processes, which are the processes that are determined by looking at the organization as a whole and asking the question “what outputs will our stakeholders look for as evidence that their needs are being met?”. The answers to that question will the objectives of the organization, as well as the outcomes or objectives of the four generic business processes: Mission management, Demand creation, Demand fulfillment and Resource management (Hoyle, 2011, p. 135). These processes can be characterized by having the same stakeholder at the input and output end (see table 3). Together, these processes form a generic model of

28

Business process

Input stakeholder

(inputs) Output stakeholders (outputs)

Mission management

Investors, Owners (vision) Investors, Owners (mission

accomplished)

Demand creation Customer (need) Customer (demand)

Demand fulfillment Customer (demand) Customer (demand satisfied)

Resource management

Resource user (resource need)

Resource user (resource satisfies need)

Table 3 Business process stakeholders (Hoyle, 2011, p. 151)

Ultimately, all other processes through which an organization performs work, i.e. the work or task processes, are sub-processes to the four generic business processes. In designing a quality management system, both business processes and work processes must be determined and managed to achieve the desired quality objectives. According to Hoyle (2011, p. 200), “a focus on work processes and not business processes is the

primary reasons why ISO 9001, TQM and other quality initiatives fail”. This can be Feedback Intelligence Stakeho ld ers’ n eeds Sa tisfied st ake h o ld ers Manage resources Manage mission Create demand Fulfill demand Resources Engage Products Demands Capable resources Capable resources

29

attributed to the fact that such a focus causes the quality system development and execution to lose sight of the organization’s business objectives and thus result in a sub-optimization of organizational performance.

As can be seen from table 3, the generic business processes cater to the needs of different stakeholders. According to Hoyle (2011, p. 134), ISO 9001:2008 requirements can be interpreted to primarily take the customer’s needs and expectations into account. The resulting system of managed processes, the quality management system, will therefore include those processes whose outputs deal with the customers’ needs and expectations relative to quality objectives (see the customer satisfaction cycle to the left in figure 8). The approach in ISO 9004:2009, on the other hand, takes all stakeholders into account (Hoyle, 2011, p. 134). The resulting system of managed processes, the business management system, now includes all processes whose outputs are a concern to some stakeholder relative to the organization’s vision and mission (see sustained success cycle to the right in figure 8).

Hoyle (2011, p. 101) argues that the holistic approach of ISO 9004:2009 should be the basis for establishing a management system, because such a system would enable the

30

organization to deliver outcomes that satisfied all stakeholders and thus avoid sub- optimization of performance. He writes:

“For the application of ISO 9001 to be successful, quality has to be a

strategic issue with every function of the organization embraced by the management system that is focused on satisfying the needs of all stakeholders” (Hoyle, 2011, p. 84)

This resonates well with the argument that a non-holistic approach to system design may cause poor implementation because the system is seen as separate from the business. It also resonates well with the argument that ISO 9001:2008 must be regarded an assessment standard, not a design tool (Hoyle, 2011, p. 94). Therefore, although it can be argued that not all of the business processes in Figure 7 necessarily have a direct effect on quality and customer satisfaction, a quality management system, or more correctly, a business management system, should model all of them, as well as their interrelationships. Furthermore, it can be argued that all of the generic business processes do in fact affect quality and customer satisfaction, which strengthens the argumentation for developing the quality management system as a complete business management system.

Based on the above discussion and on observations made prior to the startup of this case study, the following proposition can be stated:

Proposition 7: Sweco’s quality management system is designed to produce outputs that aid in achieving several of the company’s business objectives by satisfying the needs of several stakeholders

Proposition 8: Sweco’s quality management system (sweco@work) treats aspects from several of the four generic business processes: Mission management, Resource management, Demand creation and Demand fulfillment. Therefore, it can be argued that the system is somewhat developed through a holistic approach, such as that of ISO 9004:2009.

Proposition 9: However, above all, Sweco’s quality management system places an emphasis on the demand fulfillment process and corresponding outputs and objectives, indicating that the system falls short of being a complete business management system.

31