| Memo: Quality at Work
Edition: Final
As I consult internationally between Nigeria
and South Africa, the issues of cultural differences
pertaining to implementing the quality processes
are always raised. I have a tendency to negate
that culture makes a significant difference, in
both countries.
Thinking that culture makes a significant difference
in the way an organization approaches total quality
management can lead to disillusion. Believing
that ''we are different'' and that quality is
dependent on culture or where you live on the
globe is a fallacy. This belief can cause a company
to embark on its mission thinking it is operating
at a handicap.
Some will argue that the reason Japan is a quality
leader has to do with its culture. They point
out that the Japanese are homogeneous and are
not faced with the so-called problems of diversity.
The insinuation is that with Nigeria being made
up of over 250 ethnic tribes and cultures, cooperation
for quality is impaired.
Care must be taken in thinking that homogeneity
is a controlling variable. One has only to recall
that the Japanese were all alike when they had
a reputation for delivering inferior products.
What changed their reputation to producers of
superior products was their ''thinking or attitude,''
not any of the homogeneous variables that tend
to suggest better cooperation among people.
I am not saying that it is entirely wrong to
suggest that culture plays a part, but I fear
that we are missing something very important if
we think that it is significant in delivering
quality.
To attribute the success of the quality process
to the differences in culture is superficial and
misleading and may cause an attempt to ''fix what
isn't broken.''
It is perhaps possible for quality efforts to
be impeded in situations where you find that levels
of management are dominated by one cultural group.
Organizations fool themselves about being in pursuit
of quality while refusing to make sure that all
levels of the organization reflect the diversity
of its workforce and community.
In Nigeria the divisiveness is along tribal lines.
In South Africa it is a combination of race and
tribes. In both situations the stratification
has its impact on quality efforts. But, to attribute
the effects to simply cultural differences is
narrow thinking.
What seems to be more of an influencing variable
is the attitude of the leadership. Leaders who
straddle the fence and do not set the pace to
pursue aggressively a quality culture that transcends
protecting certain groups are destined to take
their company down the tubes.
The focus of leadership or top-management should
be on transforming the organization to a quality
culture that positions customers at the center.
A culture of quality permeating the organization
would be more in line with the attitude that makes
a significant difference in delivering quality.
Submitted by Afolabi
Imoukhuede, Managing Consultant, MCS
Consulting Limited Ikoyi, Lagos
aimoukhuede@mcsworldgrp.com
Customers, Not
'Cultural Differences,' Are The Key Focus On Leading
Quality
[download
article]
|
