Examining TQM's Legacies for R&D

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, executives in one American company after another began to recognize that they had to dramatically improve the quality of their products and services while at the same time reducing manufacturing costs-if they wished to survive the onslaught of high-quality yet affordable Japanese offerings. They also discovered that the techniques and tools used by the Japanese to achieve high-quality manufacturing had been developed decades ago by American engineers and managers and championed for many years by American advocates such as Armand Feigenbaum, W. Edwards Deming, and Joseph Juran. These American executives embraced the quality improvement challenge with remarkable zeal-and to their credit, extended the challenge beyond manufacturing to the total organization. Thus began the great campaign for Total Quality Management (TQM). It took several years until R&D managers in Industrial Research Institute member companies started paying serious attention to TQM principles and their applicability to R&D activities. The first set of presentations and publications highlighting the experiences from initial experimentation with TQM by Xerox, 3M, Eastman Kodak, and other IRI member companies appeared during 1986-1987 (1-4). Interest in the subject gained significant momentum by 1991-1992. By then, most companies (but by no means all) had come to conclude that the application of quality management principles to R&D was "a virgin, pioneering field, and as such, self-- innovation coupled with a learn-as-you-go approach" was critical to success (5). TQM was a major theme at an IRI semiannual conference in 1992, and IRI established a Quality Directors Network (QDN) that year to promote exchange of experience and advancement of knowledge in the area. A 1993-94 survey of IRI member companies performed by the QDN concluded that the vast majority of companies surveyed had at least initiated a TQM program, and that approximately one-third of these companies considered most elements of their TQM programs to be in the "succeeding" or "role model" category (6). Quality in R&D became a focal point for numerous other publications and conferences as well, including the well-attended annual Juran Conference on Quality in R&D (7). Between the mid-1980s and 1990s, several Research Technology Management articles specifically addressed the role of TQM in R&D. Did Management Lose Interest? After 1996, the number of Research Technology Management articles on TQM slowed to a trickle. There was only a handful of presentations on the subject at the IRI semiannual conferences during 1997-1999. The Quality Directors Network modified its mission and renamed itself as the Process Effectiveness Network (PEN) in 1999. Were these the telltale signs of R&D management becoming disillusioned with and losing interest in TQM? Did all the interest and activities in TQM come to nothing for the R&D management community? Based on our informal interactions with IRI peers and active participation in QDN/PEN activities, we believe that the answer is a clear "no" to both these questions. We say this with the full knowledge that much has been written about the excesses and the shortcomings, and the successes and the failures, of the great American campaign for Total Quality Management (8,9). We also know that many managers believe TQM was a fad that had little impact on most American companies. It is fair to say, in hindsight, that many TQM programs did indeed suffer from being overreaching, poorly focused, or implemented without true commitment to the underlying principles. Nonetheless, we maintain that R&D's efforts to adapt and apply quality management principles have left some subtle but powerful legacies-- and as a community, we are all richer for these legacies. Furthermore, we believe that while the TQM "movement" may be viewed in the past tense, in many organizations these legacies are pursued today with the same vigor and impact as the original TQM programs. …