OM in the News: Building a Reputation for Quality No Easy Task for Chrysler

As we discuss in Chapter 6, quality can take on a wide range of attributes.  For auto makers, and their customers, these  attributes  range from safety, to the choice of interior materials, to the way parts fit together—all of which affect perceptions of a brand. The Wall Street Journal (May 10, 2012) reports the bad news for Chrysler–that through bailouts and bankruptcy, there is one liability that the automaker hasn’t yet managed to shed: its reputation for lousy quality.  “You can lose your reputation in a year, but it takes five to 10 years to rebuild it,” says the  director of the Consumer Reports.

Despite surging sales, the auto maker remains dogged by a long trail of recalls, customer complaints and poor ratings on quality surveys. In 2008,  the London Times proclaimed Chrysler’s now-discontinued Sebring “almost certainly the worst car in the entire world.”  The Journal quotes Chrysler’s quality chief, Doug Betts, as saying:  “We were building cars that were functional, and other than that, they were boxes you got into that hopefully kept the rain off your head.”

But today, dealers, customers and independent reviewers say Chrysler’s efforts are starting to pay off, with better finishes and higher quality scores on new models such as the Jeep Grand Cherokee SUV and  300 sedan. Last year, the brands earned their highest ratings in years in Consumer Reports’ annual reliability survey, rising from the bottom of the pack to the middle. That year, Betts used his new authority to delay a restyled Chrysler 300 after inspection of a prototype found a right rear tail light that wasn’t flush with the body. The one-millimeter projection was hardly visible, Betts said, but it was enough to “catch a rag if someone was hand-washing” the car.

Discussion questions:

1. Why is a quality reputation easy to lose, but hard to gain?

2. What caused Chrysler’s reputation to drop?

OM in the News: Infection Rates and the Outsourcing of Hospital Cleaning

The Vancouver Sun (May 7,2012) has just reported another outbreak of  infection rates at Canadian hospitals. The article states that  health authorities have been warned for 10 years or more that the outsourcing of hospital cleaners – key personnel in any infection prevention and control program – was a misguided attempt to save money and would put patients at risk.   In  2004,  incidents at Surrey Memorial Hospital concluded that infection prevention had completely broken down. An auditor-general’s 2007 review found that the ministry of health had failed to implement systems for the prevention and control of infection.

Things heated up in 2009 when Vancouver  released reports from its Centre for Disease Control (CDC) on a persistent and lethal  infection  out-break at Nanaimo Regional General Hospital, the third in four years.   The CDC found that: “There were insufficient numbers of cleaning staff to meet the basic daily needs of the facility and they were not adequately trained in appropriate cleaning procedures for a health care facility. They were not able to meet the increased demand for environmental cleaning that is required to control an outbreak.”

Best practices in infection prevention programs highlight the vital role of hospital cleaning: adequate staffing and training, proper equipment and supplies, and real communication and cooperation among hospital personnel at all levels.   None of these factors are included in the government-ordered cleaning audits (which were confined to visual inspections only) that report hospitals passing with flying colors even while infection outbreaks were raging.

Scotland banned the outsourcing of hospital housekeeping in 2008 and brought cleaning back in house. The result? Infection cases have dropped dramatically. Reviews of Ontario’s devastating 2003 SARS outbreak named hospital cleanliness as a critical component in preventing and containing infections, and hospital cleaners’ involvement essential.

Discussion questions:

1. Why are janitorial services successfully outsourced in most organizations, but not here?

2. What OM tools are available to address this quality issue?

OM in the News: Quality and the Dreamliner

When we discuss quality in Chapter 6, we note that there are 3 views of the term. The 1st is user-based — quality “lies the eyes of the beholder.” The 2nd is manufacturing-based–conforming to standards. And the 3rd is product-based–quality is a “precise and measurable variable”. The Wall Street Journal’s article ( Feb.16,2012), “How Dreamy is the Dreamliner”, covers all three in analyzing Boeing’s new 787, which is now in its 4th month of service and flying daily from Tokyo to Frankfurt for All Nippon Airways.

To passengers (users), the plane approaches a revolution in air travel with better cabin climate, less airsickness, reduced jet lag, and fewer headaches. The humidity level is a more breathable 10-15%, vs. 4-7% for existing planes. The cabin pressurizes at 6,000 feet vs. 8,000 feet on others. Overhead bins are 2 inches larger. Big windows help reduce motion sickness, and a new stability system makes for a smoother ride in turbulence. Cabin attendants even claim the atmosphere is much better for their skin.

From a manufacturing perspective, the body of the plane, constructed from super-strong plastics — carbon fibre composite materials — instead of aluminum, makes the plane lighter and more fuel-efficient. And the number of holes drilled in the fuselage (under 10,000 vs. 1 million in a 747) means better aerodynamics.

The products-based view of quality can claim a plane that flies at Mach .85, compared to Mach .785 for a Boeing 737. Fuel efficiency and emissions are 20% better than on a similar-sized 767.

Discussion questions:

1. Did Boeing’s continuing supply chain problems on the 787 impact the plane’s quality?

2. Which aspect of quality is most important to Boeing? To the airline  buying the 787? To the passenger?

OM in the News: The Fall and Rise of Quality in American Cars

An interesting perspective on the quality (or lack thereof) of American-made autos comes from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram (Feb.10,2012). For decades we have bemoaned quality problems in the industry, but until recently the situation was simply considered normal. It goes back to around 1915, when GM’s chief production guy told a reporter that his new model “would boast massive improvements.”  When queried for details, he replied that Chevys would now have a mesh screen under the motor that “would catch all the screws and parts that came loose while driving.” Even as late as 1949, it was common knowledge that a Ford could not be taken through a car wash without its occupants being drenched.

And surprisingly, when MIT did its famous 5-year study of the auto industry, which was published as The Machine That Changed the World, it was pointed out that Mercedes put more man-hours into fixing vehicles after production than Lexus needed to build one of its flagship sedans–which had zero problems leaving the assembly line. Of course, it was the auto workers who would take most of the blame for the lack of quality in their cars. But for the most part, it was mediocre engineering –not just in vehicle design, but in factory layout as well. How else can you explain how Buicks occasionally ended up with Chevy dashboards installed–and that GM would refuse to replace them when the errors were discovered at the dealer showroom.

Perhaps the greatest untold automotive story this decade is that no company builds  a  bad car anymore. Thanks to the integration of Japanese design and production techniques, we will never see a car produced whose A/C compressor falls off or whose fenders come in different colors.  Just as Mercedes had to compare itself to Lexus, GM and Ford had to measure up to Honda and Toyota–and to accept the principles of Japanese engineering.

Discussion questions:

1. Why is poor quality accepted in any product?

2. Has US auto manufacturing reached quality levels equal to Japan and Germany?

OM in the News: How Alaska and Delta Airlines Reengineered Quality Control

If you fly a lot, you will want to read this article in The Wall Street Journal (Jan.5, 2012) and use it in class when you cover the topic of Managing  Quality (Ch.6). It begins by dealing with American Airlines, which ranked dead last (again) in customer service in the Journal’s annual analysis of major air carriers. The score card ranks airlines on on-time arrivals, delays, cancelled flights, missing bags, bumped passengers , and complaints filed with the DOT.

Alaska  Airlines, which overhauled its operations in 2007 after several dismal years of reliability came in 1st in 4 of the 7 key operational areas. What did it do to change? For one thing, Alaska has set 50 internal quality checkpoint standards on a timeline for each departure. Flight attendants have to be on board 45 min. before departure; agents must board the 1st passenger 40 min. before departure; 90% of passengers need to be boarded 10 min. before departure; the cargo door must be opened 3 min. after arrival; the 1st bag has to be on the conveyor belt within 15 min. of arrival; and so on with 45 other measures for which data are collected on every flight.

Similarly, Delta engineered a major operational turnaround last year after coming in 2nd worst in punctuality and baggage handling and worst in cancelled flights and customer complaints. It has opened maintenance operations in 9 new cities to keep more its fleet ready to fly. It has also invested in a new baggage system and new technology in its operations control center. “There are a lot of side benefits of running a good, clean operation”, says Delta’s VP-Operations.

Discussion questions:

1. Why do some airlines, like Jet Blue, have a terrible problems with delayed flights, while others, like Alaska, do not?

2. What quality measures would students select to monitor besides the ones mentioned here?

Good OM Reading: What Really Happened to Toyota?

Consumers in the US were surprised in Oct., 2009, by the 1st of a series of highly publicized recalls of Toyota vehicles. It began with 3.8 million cars brought back  for uncontrolled acceleration. Over the next 4 months, 3.4 million more  recalls followed for gas pedal and software glitches. Then from Feb.-Aug., 2010, 13 more recalls followed. Just as things seemed to be settling down, 2 more recalls were announced in Jan.-Feb., 2011. The total had now reached 20 million vehicles!

How could this happen to the company that shaped the modern approach to quality improvement, asks UC-Berkeley Prof. Robert Cole  in his excellent article in MIT Sloan Management Review (Summer, 2011). Had auto execs all over the world “been chasing after the wrong manufacturing model”? And to what extent did the problems originate with product design and assembly and to what extent to Toyota’s manufacturing systems?

One factor Cole found was a “reverse halo effect”. Toyota buyers in 2010 had heard a barrage of negative news and became far less forgiving about minor quality flaws than previous owners. A 2nd factor was that competitors’ products were improving to the point that Toyota didn’t look as outstanding by comparison as it had in the past.

Cole’s analysis found 2 root causes for Toyota’s problems: (1)management’s ambitious plans for rapid growth (which did not focus on quality issues already arising), and (2) the increasing complexity of the actual auto product.

I think this is an article that you will enjoy reading and that you will be able to use in your OM class.

Teaching Tip: What Can You Expect From Your Hotel?

When you are teaching  TQM in services (Ch.6), you might ask your students to consider how they would rate the quality of hotels they have stayed at. We write in the chapter about the intangible differences between products (hotels) and the intangible expectations customers have of these products. Certainly, we all have lower expectations of service quality when we stay at a Motel 8 versus when we are guests at a Ritz Carlton or Four Seasons. (See in our video case study “Quality at the Ritz”).

I bring this up because my family and I  just returned from our big vacation of the summer– a 3-night stay at what some claim to be the premier resort hotel in the Caribbean. The “product” was really on the  expensive side, so our expectations ran high. World class facilities, food, service, and activities were all on the list.  The people/services were extraordinary. Every single employee we came in contact with was gracious, smiling, helpful, and courteous.

But one of the reasons we came in contact with so many hotel staffers was that so many things went wrong with the tangibles. My wife counted over a dozen repair people (all warm and friendly) in our rooms during the 3 days– yet the problems kept coming. First the broken shower head was replaced. Then a deadbolt that locked my 13-year-old in and us out (which had to be drilled out). Then no sound on the TV, as well as a missing remote. To boot, the sink was dirty (brown) when we arrived. But the real issue was the unflushable toilet! After 4 visits to first replace the insides, then to repair it over and over, the toilet still ran all night long. I worked on it myself a few times, then gave up and put 4 towels and a bathrobe over it to mask the noise.

How did the manager handle service recovery? The LEARN routine was followed perfectly, and a discount was even applied. But would we return to a hotel that had such problems? Very doubtful.

Teaching Tip: Why Did the Chevy Steering Wheel Fall Off?

Imagine speeding along the roadway in your brand new 2011 Chevy Cruze, turning your car’s steering wheel, and the wheel breaks off from the steering column!  It’s an interesting story (in The Wall Street Journal, April 10,2011) that certainly ties in with our discussion of quality in Chapter 6. 

Of course, it’s every driver’s nightmare, but in particular to the person who it happened to a few weeks ago. As a result, GM is recalling 2,100 new cars and facing an unwelcome development while it rides high on the compact Cruz’s sales success.

According to the NHTSA (Nat’l Highway Transportation Safety Admin.), the wrong wheel was put in this particular car, then replaced later with the correct one. But the new wheel was not attached properly.

This raises some good issues to discuss in teaching quality in class. First, how did the wrong wheel end up on the assembly line? (JIT delivery gone awry?  What was the root cause of this defect?) 

 Second, why was it that a wrong wheel could fit on the column? (No poka-yoke system in place?)

 Third, was there no Andon call signal to alert supervisors that such a problem had popped up? (Could it have happened before and no one pointed it out?  Had it happened at a different plant? Is there a struggle to change from the old Detroit mentality that the line should never be stopped?)

Chevrolet says “it has changed the production process to make sure the machine used to attach the steering wheel can accommodate only the correct one”.  I like this story because it raises several teachable issues.

Video Tip: Darden Restaurant’s Quality “From Farm to Fork”

What I really like about this 12 min. video on Darden Restaurants (Olive Garden and Red Lobster) is that the VP-Quality comes right out and says “we use SPC charts, Pareto charts, process flow diagrams, fishbone charts, and scatter charts”. When you are teaching Ch. 6 and Supp. 6, it’s good for your students to hear that a real company is employing all the tools they see in the text (as in Figure 6.6).

Darden calls its quality program “From Farm to Fork”, since the inspection process begins at the food source (be it farm or pond), continues with inspections throughout the supply chain, and ends with a final check by the chef and server before the customer is served. Fifty scientists and health specialists work in QA throughout the world, most close to the food source outside the US. With 50 million pounds of seafood coming into the US for Darden each year, it is clear that quality cannot be considered just at the end of the supply chain.

The video presents real data in the form of x-bar and R-charts and capability histograms and shows what happens when specs are not met on products like steaks, salmon fillets, and chicken breasts.

Before showing the film, you may want to ask students where they think inspections are taking place on a fish that is caught in Thailand and served 48 hours later in say, Dubuque, Iowa.

OM in the News: Quality Tales– Dogfish Beer and Zappos

If you are looking for a few interesting examples of companies choosing quality of service over quick money, here are two firms that I discovered in the news today: Dogfish  Head Beer and Zappos.

The Delmarva Daily Times (March 15,2011) reports that Dogfish, a well-known Delaware  brewery, just decided to stop its explosive growth by pulling out of markets in four states. Sales of  “off-centered beers for off-centered people” had grown into 30 states in the past 9 years. Founder Sam Calagione, a Discovery Channel minor celebrity, decided that Dogfish ramped up production too far, too fast, to guarantee quality. The expansion even resulted in shortages in the firm’s home state. Fans may be frustrated in Tennessee, Rhode Island, Indiana, and Wisconsin, but the company’s reputation for quality will be preserved.

Meanwhile, Next Montreal (March 16,2011) is reporting,  very unhappily, that Zappos is shutting down completely in Canada. Here is the message that the shoe e-tailer has just posted on its website:

We have made the difficult decision to shut down the canada.zappos.com site and stop shipping to Canada. One of our core values is to “deliver WOW through service”. That means the best selection of brands and products that can meet just about every individual’s needs as well as fast, free shipping and free returns, all at competitive pricing. Our Canadian customers know that we have not lived up to these service levels.
  
Zappos has struggled with uncertainty and unpredictability of delivering orders to Canada, given customs and other constraints. Considered by many to be  one of the best on-line retailers, it was not willing to risk its reputation for quality in a market where it could not meet its own standards.
 
In today’s economy, it is indeed unusual to see firms cede market share in order to maintain such high quality.
 
Discussion questions:
 
1. Refer to Table 6.5, Determinants of Service Quality, and relate Zappos’ decision to the 10 items.
 
2. What did Dogfish view as the danger of rapid expansion?

OM in the News: Tylenol, J&J, and a Quality Disaster

A timely topic to bring to your students when discussing quality (Ch.6) is an embarrassing and expensive problem currently facing Johnson & Johnson. It’s a tale that has been making news for months now,  but just ended with the US government taking over 3 Tylenol plants a few days ago (New York Times,March 10,2011). This follows a blizzard of drug recalls and an FDA criminal investigation into safety issues at the factories. The government also indicted two execs, the VP-Quality and the VP-Operations, for failing to comply with manufacturing standards.

The scathing report on 20 manufacturing violations and criminal investigation follows eight recalls of Tylenol, Benadryl, and Motrin that have been ongoing since  2009. J & J was warned over a year ago about the unsanitary and unsafe practices in the plants (one in Puerto Rico and two in Penn.), but the company was slow to fix them. Now, all drugs recalled must be destroyed, a “consent decree” allows independent experts to control the plants until safer manufacturing processes are in place, and one of the Penn. plants will remain closed until the FDA stamps its approval. Fines will also be levied at $15,000 per day up to $10 million annually until the FDA clears the company.

Production is expected to be hurt while the corrective actions take place. But as Philip Crosby wrote in his 1979 classic, Quality is Free, “What costs money are all the actions that involve not doing it right the first time”.

Discussion questions:

1. What happened in Tylenol’s 1982  famous recall?

2. What did Crosby mean when he wrote “quality is free”?

3. What is the role of OM in this dilemma?

Good OM Reading: The Checklist Manifesto

Here is a popular book that deals with quality issues (Ch.6) in medicine by extolling the use of checklists. Dr. Atul Gawande’s The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right (Metropolitan Books,2009) will add to your TQM lecture with some interesting examples. Gawande points out that just as airline pilots use checklists before takeoff,  surgeons need checklists, which are proven to reduce mortality from operations.

The medical culture, unfortunately, often includes doctors who are just plain rubbed the wrong way by such a tool. Surgeons, in particular, view themselves as individuals whose skill and reputation are all that is needed in the OR. Gawande uses a WHO study to show that surgical complications dropped by more that one-third when checklists were used.

The checklists includes such items as: making sure everyone in the OR knows everyone else’s name; that blood for a transfusion is on-hand; and that the pre-op was performed correctly. Medicine, he says, has become so incredibly complex that mistakes are virtually inevitable.

The Huffington Post (Jan. 6,2011) has a quick review of the book, followed by a 6 minute video clip of Gawande being interviewed recently on the Steven Colbert show. (Note that you have to scroll down about 6″ to get to the video link). I am not a huge fan of the show, but somehow I think your students will find it hilarious. They seem to understand his humor, and at the same time, Gawande does make  his point about checklists.

Guest Post: Teaching Quality Control with Olive Garden Breadsticks

Here is a great Chapter 6 teaching tip that is sure to make you popular with students – especially if you offer some extra credit.  Send them on a “breadstick quality control” mission.  A number of years ago, I helped the Olive Garden Restaurant chain solve an important problem.  Their breadsticks were inconsistent.  They were varying colors, sizes and shapes.  The breadsticks are a signature item for Olive Garden, so management needed to define the extent of the problem, and to change the quality control.

I will not go into the whole process of solving the problem, but I will tell you that I began by visiting Olive Gardens and observing the breadsticks, even measuring them and recording variations in color and shape.  There was no doubt about it, there was a striking inconsistency, indicating a quality control issue.  After working with their bakeries, and finding a problem in the production chain, the restaurants once again had a delicious, high quality, consistant product.

Are the breadsticks at the Olive Gardens still consistent?  Why not send teams of students to dinner and ask them to record their observations.  With today’s technology, they can even take pictures of “problem breadsticks” and share them with the class. You can also discuss these 3 questions with the class:

  1. Why are breadsticks such an important item in the Olive Gardens?
  2. What are other examples of signature items in restaurants or other businesses?
  3. Before you visit the restaurants to do a quality control survey, what equipment do you need, and what exactly will you be looking for?
  4. 

Prof. Bill Quain currently teaches at Stockton College in NJ. He previously held endowed professorships at the U. of Central Florida and at Florida International U.

OM in the News: Detroit Moves Up in Auto Reliability, But Asia Still Rules

People buy cars for all sorts of reasons: styling, prestige, safety, and even color. But a reputation for quality and reliability is the one constant to almost every consumer, according to The Wall Street Journal (Oct.27,2010). With this week’s  release of Consumer Reports’  rankings of new auto reliability, there is some good news for Detroit.

Ford and GM have greatly improved the reliability of their vehicles, and in some sectors are ranked better than their Asian counterparts. The Ford Fusion, for example, is now tops in the “family car” segment–bettering  the Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, and Nissan Altima. Ford is the top American company overall.

Chrysler, sadly, has still not taken off and is dead last in the rankings. Toyota’s once sterling reputation was also dinged;  its Prius hybrid fell to “average” from its once high-rating because of recalls and brake problems. BMW ranked only 24 out of 27 brands, underlining how luxury car makers face quality challenges as they insert advanced technologies (that don’t always work perfectly) into their vehicles.

Good quality, as we in OM all know, creates an upward circle: the more reliable the car, the more people are willing to pay, and then the  less discounts are needed. “It doesn’t take very long to lose a good  reputation, but it takes 5 or 10 years to gain one”, says a Consumer Reports director.

Discussion questions:

1. Give some examples of products (cars included) where it took years to rebuild a damaged quality reputation.

2. Why is the Honda family of vehicles ranked consistently high?

3. Ford is now ranked 10th out of the 27 auto makers. What will it take to move to the top of the pack?

OM in the News: Toyota’s Quality Problems

Toyota’s sterling reputation for quality took a major hit in 2009-2010 with the recall of 5 million vehicles for unintended acceleration and braking issues. The auto maker was also slow to tell federal regulators about sticky accelerator pedals and was fined a record $16.4 million…not exactly the quality image the firm had built up over the past 4 decades! These quality problems led to a temporary shutdown of all US plants and a halt in the sales of 8 popular models.

The Wall Street Journal (Oct.5,2010) has just reported that all 2011 Toyota, Lexus, and Scion models are equipped with “black boxes” to help identify the cause of accidents.

Toyota’s situation would likely cause my mentor Phil Crosby to turn over in his grave. “There is absolutely no reason for having errors or defects in any product or service”, he wrote in his 1979 book Quality is Free.

Quality, it turns out, is not to be taken for granted, even when one is the leader in the field. Mercedes faced this same recall issue in 2004-2005, when its suppliers cut corners on quality in response to Mercedes’ desire to pump up corporate profits. Its recall was 1.3 million cars, costing $600 million. You may recall seeing a photo in Ch.6 of our book’s 9th ed. of an E -Class Mercedes setting itself on fire in Tokyo.

Companies that take their eye off the quality ball find that “quality is not free”, and that it may take several years to rebuild a  reputation.

Discussion questions:

1.What was Toyota’s initial response to the “floor mat problem” (which it claimed caused the accelerator to stick)?

2.What is Toyota doing today to deal with customer complaints?

3. Name some other recent major recalls of cunsumer items. How were they handled?