Full Issue

Quality Progress | DECember 2013

P

Putting Best Practices to Work

www.qualityprogress.com | December 2013

QUALITY PROGRESS

salary survey Volume 46/Number 12

Do Y o Qua u

lify?

Expe rienc e Cert ificat ions Educ ation Indu stry know ledge Hiring to ge manager s tell t the how job in Salar this y y Sur ear’s vey r esult s p. 18

The Global Voice of Quality

TM

New Books From Quality Press The Certified Manager of Quality/ Organizational Excellence Handbook Fourth Edition This handbook is designed to help address organizational issues, from the application of the basic principles of management to the development of strategies needed to deal with the technological and societal concerns of the new millennium. Item: H1447

The Executive Guide to Innovation: Turning Good Ideas into Great Results Use this book to get the information, tools, techniques, and methodologies to help align a growth-based strategy with all functions of the organization, create a culture for ideas and growth, acquire and retain the right mix of resources, and sustain what you’ve built over time.

Principles of Quality Costs: Financial Measures for Strategic Implementation of Quality Management, Fourth Edition This book provides a basic understanding of the principles of quality costs. Using this book, organizations can develop and implement a quality cost system to fit its needs. Used as an adjunct to overall financial management, these principles will help maintain vital quality improvement programs over extended timeframes. Item: H1438

Item: H1453

Quality Press books are peer reviewed and continually being updated to ensure you have the latest in quality knowledge and tools with special member prices.

Learn more about these books by visiting the Quality Press bookstore at asq.org/quality-press. TRAINING

CERTIFICATION

CONFERENCES

MEMBERSHIP

PUBLICATIONS

^ĞůĞĐƚƚŚĞnterprise Quality &

PDM

NCMR

QMS Software ISO/TS FMEA

ISO

Nonconforming

Quality

ISO 9000 PDM Quality Software ISO 13485 NCM

QMS

Nonconforming Materials

TL 9001

CAPA

ISO

Quality Compliance Software Manufacturing

Quality Assurance

Product Data Management

Manufacturing

Supplier & Materials

Quality Compliance

Process

Nonconformance

Discrete

Corrective Actions

Quality

Discrete ERP

Manufacturing Quality Compliance

QMS Software Discrete

Risk Assessment

Nonconforming Materials ISO 9000

FMEA

ERP

ISO/TS MRB QMS Software

NCM

ISO 9000

Discrete

Calibration

ISO/TS 16949

ISO/TS

ISO 13485

FMEA

Supplier & Materials

AS9100

Compliance

Corrective Actions

AS9100

TL 9001

Nonconforming

FMEA

Actions Inspections Corrective Manufacturing

Quality ISO

ISO 9000 Quality Assurance Risk Assessment

Calibration

Process ISO/TS

ISO

Product Data Management ISO/TS 16949

ERP

ISO 13485 Receiving Inspections

CAPA

Calibration

Quality

Quality Software

Process

Supplier

Quality Assurance

MRB

CAPA

PDM

ISO/TS Supplier

TL 9001

Product Data Management

Materials

Inspections

Nonconformance FMEA Quality Systems Software Receiving

Quality Management Software Supplier Rating

MES

CAPA QMS Software

Manufacturing

Product Data Management

Calibration

Quality

QMS

Process

Supplier & Materials QMS QMS Software

Calibration

ISO/TS

QMS Software

Quality FMEA Manufacturing ISO 13485 Rating

CAPA ISO/TS

QMS

Calibration

ISO 13485 PDM

AS9100

Quality

Calibration

Quality Compliance QMS PDM Manufacturing Receiving Nonconformance Quality Assurance Materials Compliance ERP CAPA ISO

Process

ISO 13485

ISO/TS MRB

TL 9001

Process

...ǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŵŽst VALUE : Integrated modules for Quality and FDA Compliance Management: CAPAͻŚange ManagementͻRisk Assessment ...and more! Risk Management in tŚĞQuality System

events

Flexible: Leading edgĞŇexible workŇow adapts to all business processes, witŚŽƵt programming : Integrates witŚ3rd party business systems Scalable: Readily adapts to enterprise environments, and deployments Supplier Management: Collaborates witŚ^ƵƉƉůŝĞrs tŚrougŚ^ƵƉƉůŝer Business Intelligence in decision-making witŚŚƵŶĚreds of conĮgurable cŚarts and reports

800-354-4476 ͻ [email protected]

www.etq.com/quality

2014 LEAN AND SIX SIGMA CONFERENCE SUSTAINING RESULTS THROUGH A CULTURE OF QUALITY February 24 – 25, 2014 | Phoenix, AZ | sixsigma.asq.org

Product quality, service superiority, and increased contribution to the bottom line are all marks of business excellence. The true measure of excellence, however, lies not only in results, but in sustaining those results. The 2014 Lean and Six Sigma Conference will show you how to apply lean and Six Sigma tools and methodologies, and the steps taken to sustain those results to make a difference in your organization by offering more than 50 sessions, hands-on workshops, keynote speakers, and networking opportunities focusing on: • New/Unique Applications With Lean and Six Sigma • Globalization • Lean and Six Sigma in Service • Change Management • The Human Side of Lean and Six Sigma

Early-bird pricing is available through January 13, 2014.

To register for the 2014 ASQ Lean and Six Sigma Conference, visit sixsigma.asq.org.

The Global Voice of Quality

TM

Contents Putting Best Practices to Work | December 2013 | www.qualityprogress.com

FEATURES 18

18

SALARY SURVEY

Read Their Minds

In today’s competitive job market, everyone looks for an advantage over others seeking the same job and promotion. Something new in this year’s QP Salary Survey report might give you an edge: an analysis of the qualifications, assets and traits hiring managers expect to see in candidates for specific job titles in the quality community. From there, pore over all 24 sections (19 online) of the most comprehensive examination of salaries in the quality community to gain more insight into how you compare to others. You’ll find breakdowns of quality professionals’ salaries by job title, education, training, years of experience, certification and more.

by Max Christian Hansen

25



Behind the Results



The methodology behind taking loads of data and making sense of it all.



29

Salary by job title.

33

Salary by U.S. regions and Canadian provinces.



Regional Variations

37

Earnings Rise With Experience

45

Certifiably Valuable

Salary by number of years in the quality field.



Salary by ASQ and Exemplar Global certification.

52

Rewards for Master Black Belts



LIFY?

Expe rienc e Cert ificat ions Educ at Indu ion stry know ledge Hiring m a n to ge a g e rs tell t the Salar job in this how y Sur yea vey r esult r’s s

Overview of the Money





DO Y QUA OU

Salary by Six Sigma training.

Only @

www.qualityprogress.com

• Breaking More Down

Access 19 more sections of the QP Salary Survey, including four dedicated to self-employed consultants.

• All in One



56

SERVICE QUALITY

The Service Quality Platform

A five-step framework can be the building blocks for service organizations to develop effective quality programs and process improvement activities, which ultimately leads to better customer service.

by Arthur J. Swersey

The five salary survey sections printed in this issue of QP are also available in the complete salary survey online report—200-plus pages containing 24 sections and more than 110 graphics—in PDF format.

• Calculated Moves

Access results and make quick comparisons with QP’s updated salary calculator.

• Hear It Out

Listen to a webcast with analysis of this year’s survey findings and career advice.

• Back to Basics

Translated in Spanish.

QP

DEPARTMENTS 6

LogOn

8

Expert Answers

14

• Complex coordination in safety, compliance and documentation.

8

QUALITY PROGRESS

• Measuring customer experience. • SPC for low-volume assembly.

Mail

Quality Progress/ASQ 600 N. Plankinton Ave. Milwaukee, WI 53203 Telephone Fax 800-248-1946 414-272-1734 414-272-8575

Keeping Current

• Curing what ails the Obamacare website. • Three 2013 Baldrige recipients named.

Email

17

Mr. Pareto Head

Follow protocol of first initial and full last name followed by @asq.org (for example, [email protected]).

74

QP Toolbox

Article Submissions

76

QP Reviews

Quality Progress is a peer-reviewed publication with 85% of its feature articles written by quality professionals. For information about submitting an article, call Valerie Ellifson at 800-248-1946 x7373, or email [email protected].

Author Guidelines

COLUMNS 5 12

Up Front

62

3.4 per Million

Perspectives

66

Quality in the First Person

68

Career Corner

80

Back to Basics

Being selective.

Be a trendsetter.

12

Taking the best of two methods.

Carrying social responsibility over into your personal life.

Is now the time to reinvent yourself and your career?

A strategy to strengthen SOPs.

To learn more about the manuscript review process, helpful hints before submitting a manuscript and QP’s 2014 editorial planner, click on “Author Guidelines” at www. qualityprogress.com under “Tools and Resources."

Photocopying Authorization

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use or the internal or personal use of specific clients is granted by Quality Progress provided the fee of $1 per copy is paid to ASQ or the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400. Copying for other purposes requires the express permission of Quality Progress. For permission, write Quality Progress, PO Box 3005, Milwaukee, WI 53201-3005, call 414-272-8575 x7406, fax 414-272-1734 or email [email protected].

Photocopies, Reprints And Microform

Special section: ASQ enterprise and site members p. 70

Article photocopies are available from ASQ at 800-248-1946. To purchase bulk reprints (more than 100), contact Barbara Mitrovic at ASQ, 800-248-1946. For microform, contact ProQuest Information and Learning, 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106, 800-5210600 x2888, international 734-761-4700, www.il.proquest.com.

Membership and Subscriptions

NEXT MONTH - big data

Defining, managing and executing big data projects.

- big quality

Surviving and succeeding in the big data world.

ASQ’s Vision: By making quality a global priority, an organizational imperative and a personal ethic, the American Society for Quality becomes the community for everyone who seeks quality technology, concepts or tools to improve themselves and their world. Quality Progress (ISSN 0033-524X) is published monthly by the American Society for Quality, 600 N. Plankinton Ave., Milwaukee, WI 53203. Editorial and advertising offices: 414-272-8575. Periodicals postage paid at Milwaukee, WI, and at additional mailing offices. Institutional subscriptions are held in the name of a company, corporation, government agency or library. Requests for back issues must be prepaid and are based on availability: ASQ members $17 per copy; nonmembers $25 per copy. Canadian GST #128717618, Canadian Publications Mail Agreement #40030175. Canada Post: Return undeliverables to 2835 Kew Drive, Windsor, ON N8T 3B7. Prices are subject to change without prior notification. © 2013 by ASQ. No claim for missing issues will be accepted after three months following the month of publication of the issue for domestic addresses and six months for Canadian and international addresses. Postmaster: Please send address changes to the American Society for Quality, PO Box 3005, Milwaukee, WI 53201-3005. Printed in USA.

4

QP • www.qualityprogress.com

For more than 60 years, ASQ has been the worldwide provider of information and learning opportunities related to quality. In addition, ASQ membership offers information, networking, certification and educational opportunities to help quality professionals obtain practical solutions to the many problems they face each day. Subscriptions to Quality Progress are one of the many benefits of ASQ membership. To join, call 800-248-1946 or see information and an application on p. 55.

List Rentals

Orders for ASQ’s member and nonmember buyer lists can be purchased by contacting Michael Costantino at the Infogroup/Edith Roman List Management Co., 402-836-6626 or fax 845-620-1885.

upfront

QP

QUALITY PROGRESS

Being Selective The attributes of high-caliber candidates

Executive Editor and Associate Publisher Seiche Sanders

Associate Editor Mark Edmund

Assistant Editor Amanda Hankel

It’s been said—repeatedly—that money makes the world go ‘round. And yes, what you take home is certainly a contributor to your satisfaction with your job. Someone has to pay the bills, right? But there are so many more facets to a fulfilling career. Employee engagement is one of the biggest buzzwords right now, probably because of the linkage research has shown between engaged employees and organizations that are more productive, more efficient and more profitable. According to a recent Gallup report, “2013 State of the American Workplace”: “Engaged workers are the lifeblood of their organizations. Work units in the top 25% of Gallup’s Q12 Client Database have significantly higher productivity, profitability, and

manuscript Coordinator Valerie Ellifson

contributing EDITOR Megan Schmidt

COPY EDITOR Susan E. Daniels

Art Director Mary Uttech

Graphic Designer Sandy Wyss

Production

customer ratings, less turnover and absenteeism, and fewer safety incidents than those

Cathy Milquet

in the bottom 25%.” (The report can be found at www.gallup.com.)

Advertising production

And this is one reason hiring and retaining the best and brightest talent is getting so much attention these days: Engagement is tied to the right employees being in the right jobs. This year’s QP Salary Survey specifically targeted hiring managers with a set of questions related to what they look for when reviewing candidates for employment.

Barbara Mitrovic

Digital Production specialisT Julie Schweitzer

Media sales

Max Christian Hansen also provides some in-depth analysis as to the key attributes

Naylor LLC Lou Brandow Krys D’Antonio Norbert Musial Rob Shafer

hiring managers zero in on.

Media sales Administrator

Respondents to these questions got very specific about what it takes to pique their interest in the QP Salary Survey analysis presented in “Read Their Minds,” p. 18. Author

When you’re looking to hire someone to join your team, finding the right fit is essential to maximizing performance and the engagement that employee feels. There’s another lesson here for those of you who are coasting, ambivalent or downright miserable in your jobs. If you acquire the right skills, experience, and training

Kathy Thomas

Marketing Administrator Matt Meinholz

Editorial offices

and education, you will have a much easier time rising to the top of the candidate pool

Phone: 414-272-8575 Fax: 414-272-1734

when that dream job opens up. QP

Advertising offices Phone: 866-277-5666

ASQ administration CEO

Paul E. Borawski

Seiche Sanders Editor

Don’t forget to watch the new episode

Managing Directors Ajoy Bose Julie Gabelmann Brian J. LeHouillier Michelle Mason Laurel Nelson-Rowe

To promote discussion of issues in the field of quality and ensure coverage of all responsible points of view, Quality Progress publishes articles representing conflicting and minority views. Opinions expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily of ASQ or Quality Progress. Use of the ASQ logo in advertisements does not necessarily constitute endorsement of that particular product or service by ASQ.

December 2013 • QP

5

logon Seen&Heard Account for complexity

them.” We also should remember that

While reading the conclusion of Mustafa

ASQ's manager of quality certification

Ghaleiw’s article, “Quality vs. Safety”

also includes organizational excellence.

(September 2013, pp. 22-27), which states

Prashant Hoskote highlights this in an

that quality should be first in everything

article: “Too many quality leaders are

the industry does or processes won’t

practitioners—tactical thinkers who are

be safe, I became quite uncomfortable

more absorbed with methods than with

because it does not adequately reflect the

business needs and organizational out-

complexity of offshore development proj-

comes … quality must prove its value.”1

ects. It is unrealistic to think that a single

As quality professionals, we should

discipline would have sufficient expertise

always establish that requirements are

to envelop all systems and processes. For

documented and understood, adequate

instance, the bow tie and safety-critical

resources and competencies are in

elements examples that are presented are

place to execute, and records will be

generally owned by the risk management

generated that requirements were met.

and process safety engineering teams,

In my opinion, this is the overall highest

respectively.

quality risk to the business.

Similarly, document control is owned

Quality professionals do not need to

by project services, record control by

replace subject matter experts in every-

information management and assurance

thing to achieve these fundamental pillars

reviews are conducted by an independent

of safety, compliance and documentation.

safety and operation group function.

For example, equipment performance

The quality discipline in oil and gas

teams should set the functional design

projects is confined to quality control

input requirements, and reliability teams

activities, such as planning for product

should be in place for projects. But this

realization and validation of manufac-

quality improvement concept is not well

turing processes via the deployment

established in the industry.

of inspectors. This set of activities is

Max Lyoen

comprehensive and complex in itself, with multiple interrelated processes and process verification requirements, leading to regulatory acceptance of the asset by the regional authority to operate. Quality professionals in the oil and gas

1. Prashant Hoskote, “Quality—It Isn’t What You Throw at a Problem,” Quality Management Forum, Summer 2013, pp. 1-4.

Quoted on quality Just read the new issue of Quality Progress (“Words to Work By,” Novem-

maintain the focus on the requirements of

ber 2013, pp. 18-25). Fantastic work!

customers—the users of the asset. I refer

Very well compiled, as always, and fun

to Oscar Combs’ article, “Standard Wise,”

to read! Thank you for publishing my

(September 2013, pp. 16-21): “The ability to

quote—it feels great.

with having an initial understanding of

QP • www.qualityprogress.com

The latest episode of ASQ TV covers standards and auditing. In the episode, learn why ISO 9001 is being revised, hear how to prepare for a standards audit and get a refresher on the finding sheet. Watch for the next episode, available Dec. 17, which focuses on careers in quality. Visit http:// videos.asq.org to access the full video library.

StayConnected Find the latest news, quips and targeted content from QP staff.

Executive Editor & Associate Publisher Seiche Sanders: @ASQ_Seiche

Associate Editor Mark Edmund: @ASQ_Mark Assistant Editor Amanda Hankel: @ASQ_Amanda Contributing Editor Megan Schmidt: @ASQ_Megan

industries should act as integrators to help

meet requirements is directly correlated

6

Houston Reference

Tune In

Prateek Dhariwal Dubai

[email protected] www.facebook.com/ groups/43461176682

www.linkedin.com/groups/qualityprogress-magazine-asq-1878386

QP

Online Extras@

QP

QUALITY PROGRESS

www.qualityprogress.com

• Complete package View 19 more sections of the QP Salary Survey, including four dedicated to self-employed consultants. The five salary survey sections printed in this issue of QP are also included in the complete salary survey online report, with more than 200 pages containing 24 sections and more than 110 graphics, in PDF format.

• Number crunching Access results and make quick comparisons with QP’s updated salary calculator.

• More to hear Listen to a webcast analyzing this year’s survey findings and providing career advice.

• Back to Basics Read this month’s Back to Basics column, “Pyramid Scheme,” p. 80, in Spanish.

Quick Poll RESULTS Each month at www.qualityprogress.com, visitors can take an informal survey. Here are the numbers from last month’s Quick Poll: How did the U.S. government shutdown affect you? • I wasn’t affected. 51.6% • I lost access to some of the services I need. 19.3% • I was furloughed. 16.1% Visit www.qualityprogress.com for the latest question: What do you like best about your job? • The amount of money I make. • Lots of career growth opportunities. • It’s challenging. • I don’t like my job.

PAST CHAIR

James J. Rooney, ABS Consulting, Global Government Division

CHAIR

John C. Timmerman, Gallup Inc.

CHAIR-ELECT

Stephen K. Hacker, Transformation Systems International

TREASURER

Chava Scher, RAFAEL—Advanced Defense Systems (retired)

PARLIAMENTARIAN Karla Riesinger, ASQ

DIRECTORS

Heather L. Crawford, Apollo Endosurgery Raymond R. Crawford, Parsons Brinckerhoff Ha Dao, Emerson Climate Technologies Inc. Gary N. Gehring, Saskatchewan Ministry of Governmental Relations Kathleen Jennison Goonan, M.D., Goonan Performance Strategies Eric A. Hayler, BMW Manufacturing Co. James M. Loseke, Sargento Foods Inc. Joanne D. Mayo Elías Monre´al, Industrial Tool Die and Engineering Richard A. Perlman, Bayer HealthCare Steven J. Schuelka, Calumet College Daniel E. Sniezek, Lockheed Martin (retired) G. Geoffrey Vining, Virginia Tech Department of Statistics Alejandra Vicenttin, Vicenttin Performance Excellence and Kaizen Bharat Wakhlu, Tata Services Ltd., a division of Tata Sons J. Eric Whichard, JE Whichard and Associates

QP EDITORIAL REVIEW BOARD Randy Brull, chair

QualityNewsToday

Administrative Committee

(All URLs case sensitive)

Technical reviewers

Recent headlines from ASQ’s global news service Automakers Mine Data to Track, Trace Defects Tiny recalls are growing across the industry, experts say, as automakers, like drug companies and food manufacturers, build sophisticated data-mining operations to guard against costly and reputation-crippling recalls. (http://bit.ly/automakersmine) Put Down That Doughnut: FDA to Ban Trans Fats The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has taken a first step toward potentially eliminating most trans fat from the food supply, saying it has made a preliminary determination that a major source of trans fats—partially hydrogenated oils—is no longer “generally recognized as safe.” (http://bit.ly/transfatban)

Brady Boggs, Randy Brull, Jane Campanizzi, Larry Haugh, Jim Jaquess, Gary MacLean, R. Dan Reid, Richard Stump Andy Barnett, David Bonyuet, David Burger, Bernie Carpenter, L.N. Prabhu Chandrasekaran, Ken Cogan, Linda Cubalchini-Travis, Ahmad Elshennawy, Mark Gavoor, Kunita Gear, Daniel Gold, T. Gourishankar, Roberto Guzman, Ellen Hardy, Lynne Hare, Ray Klotz, Tom Kubiak, William LaFollette, Pradip Mehta, Larry Picciano, Gene Placzkowski, Tony Polito, Peter Pylipow, John Richards, James Rooney, Brian Scullin, Amitava Sengupta, A.V. Srinivas, Joe Tunner, Manu Vora, Keith Wagoner, Jack Westfall, Doron Zilbershtein

Want the latest quality-related news and analysis? The QNT Weekly e-newsletter delivers it every Friday. Subscribe now at http://email.asq.org/subscribe/qntwk.

December 2013 • QP

7

expertanswe Measuring customer experience

to know how to uncover and establish your

to make sure they get this part, as it is crucial

Q: I am trying to develop appropriate cus-

own metrics.

to the success of the initiative. You are now

tomer experience metrics for service delivery

There are two important tasks that must

ready to start testing for alignment between

touch points at a financial institution, such

be completed: a current-state assessment

the identified metrics and the associated

as automated teller machines, internet bank-

and a future-state design. There are at least

levers. This is where you learn whether you

ing, point of sale, mobile banking and bank

two schools of thought here. One position is

have the correct data so that you know the

branches. These metrics should be linkable to

not to bother with the current state. It will

needle will go in the correct direction when

appropriate business financial performance

only serve to put you in a box consisting of

you turn a dial. Here is an example of apply-

outcomes, such as profitability, deposit liabil-

existing paradigms. The other way to think

ing this thought process:

ity growth and value of new accounts. Can

about this is in terms of a gap assessment.

someone who has worked on this help?

It is easy to debate that without the current

happy with the number of times they are

state and future state, it is impossible to

handed off during one of their calls to your

know what gaps need closing.

organization. Your data also show there is a

Fajimi Oladapo London

You find out that your customers are not

So where do you start? Consider estab-

correlation between the number of handoffs

A: In today’s environment—where every

lishing your current-state baseline. As part of

and the number of times a cross-selling op-

dollar not only counts, but is absolutely vital

this exercise, it is critical to know the current

portunity is successful. You decide to invest

to long-term viability—you want to make

performance levels for all dimensions, not

in training to reduce the number of handoffs

sure that expenditures are moving the ap-

just customer experience. In the past, I have

by increasing the breadth of knowledge your

propriate dials. In this case, it sounds like

taken a substantial matrix of data, correlated

call center personnel have. After a period of

you want to make sure that the expense

the data against itself and evaluated it for

time, the cross-selling rate improves.

designated to improve customer experience

cause and effect. This narrows down the

not only improves the customer experience,

data from the trivial many to the vital few.

but also improves some associated financial measurements.

Next, or perhaps even concurrently, consider asking your customers what is impor-

In this example, you were able to turn the dials (take action to reduce handoffs) and see a positive resulting outcome. This response to your question does not

tant to them in terms of customer experience.

give a listing of metrics. Rather, it gives an

ber: There are no silver bullets when it comes

Conduct surveys, interviews, focus groups

approach to get the metrics you need. Too

to metrics. More important than a catalog of

or workshops to obtain the voice of the

many times, individuals look for silver bullets

potential metrics is a process to generate the

customer (VOC). You may want to consider a

that just do not exist. A good process is bet-

metrics that you need, not a list of metrics

benchmarking exercise and research to find

ter than a silver bullet any day.

that has worked for someone else. You need

out what others are doing in this space.

Here is something important to remem-

Keith Wagoner

At this point, you have

AVP Partner Solutions

your current state, potentially

Lincoln Financial Group

know what the future state

Greensboro, NC

looks like, and you have the VOC. You have a nice data set

SPC for low-volume assembly

that you can leverage for con-

Q: How can assembly manufacturing orga-

versation. Bring in functional

nizations meaningfully implement statistical

leaders and start asking what

process control (SPC) if they are purchasing

they really need to run their

all parts and assembling only a few units per

area. Sometimes, leaders

month?

struggle with understanding

8

QP • www.qualityprogress.com

the outputs (the “Y” vari-

A: Let’s first interpret “a few units” as 30 or

ables). Spend time with them

less per month. For the purchased parts,

rs Too many times, individuals look for silver bullets that just do not exist. A good process is better than a silver bullet any day. assume there is a mixture of commodity

ing results and final testing results can be

assembly. Resources may then be directed

items and custom parts built to supplied

charted over time. What is the nonconform-

accordingly.

drawings. As for the finished item, assume

ing rate of subassemblies or finished units

This example is best understood when

it is complex, such as a large medical

when initially tested? P-charts can be used.

thinking about putting together an initial

instrument or an aircraft.

This can be done based simply on number of

subassembly from parts. But as subas-

subassemblies or finished units, or it can be

semblies are put together into higher-level

on the parts and working with the suppliers.

done with consideration for part complexity.

assemblies, the method still can be applied.

While the onus is technically on the suppliers

For example, a subassembly may have

At the initial subassembly or higher as-

to demonstrate capability of their processes

20 parts. Count the critical dimensions on

sembly level, in addition to critical dimen-

to make your parts, you must work with

each of the 20 part drawings and total them.

sions, the opportunity count can include per-

them in partnership. It is more about supplier

This can be termed “opportunities for error.”

formance requirements such as mechanical

relationships than it is about SPC.

(There are other ways to count opportuni-

actions or electrical requirements.

In this scenario, the primary focus must be

At the macro level, when choosing a supplier, verify it has a certified quality system or one that meets your organization’s

ties, but we’ll use critical dimensions for the purpose of this discussion.) Say there are 100 critical dimensions

But don’t get too caught up in the math. In almost all assembly or manufacturing operations, if you really want to know what

requirements. At the detail level, you must

(opportunities) in the parts of a certain

the problems are, just ask the people doing

identify critical dimensions or performance

subassembly. The nonconforming rate can

the work. They will tell you.

requirements of the parts or part drawings,

be expressed as the number of failures

measurement methods must be agreed

divided by the number of opportunities. For

upon and suppliers must provide inspection

example, if there were two failures in 10

data via certificates of conformance.

subassemblies, the nonconforming or defect

Incoming part inspection must be conducted for verification until there is confidence in the suppliers and the parts. This is often termed “item certification.” Your organization will have to define just how much data are required before incoming inspection

Peter E. Pylipow Principal engineer Vistakon—Johnson and Johnson Vision Care Inc.

rate for that subassembly for that week or

Jacksonville, FL

month could be expressed as: 2 / (10 subassemblies x 100 opportunities) or 2 / 1,000 or 0.2% or 2,000 defects per million opportunities (DPMO). The same could be done for other subas-

can be reduced or eliminated for a specific

semblies with results presented in Pareto

part. This may be a function of part criticality.

fashion. If desired, an adjusted Pareto can be

Some high-priced custom parts may always

developed factoring in dollar value per sub-

For More Information 1. Peter E. Pylipow, “My Supplier’s Capability is What?” Quality Progress, May 2003, pp. 60-64, http://asq.org/pub/qualityprogress/past/0503/qp0503pylipow.pdf. 2. S.K. Vermani, “Capability Analysis of Complex Parts,” Quality Progress, July 2003, pp. 65-71, http://asq.org/data/ subscriptions/qp/2003/0703/qp0703vermani.pdf. 3. T.M. Kubiak, “Perusing Process Performance Metrics,” Quality Progress, August 2009, pp. 52-55, http://asq.org/ quality-progress/2009/08/34-per-million/perusing-process performance-metrics.pdf.

require incoming inspection while, for others, inspection may be reduced or eliminated after a period of time. Commodity items may require minimal or no inspection. Within your operation, subassembly test-

Turn to the experts

Have a quality-related question? Let us help. Submit your question at www. qualityprogress.com, or send it to [email protected], and our subject matter experts will help you find a solution.

December 2013 • QP

9

QUALITY COUNCIL OF INDIANA CQIA PRIMER

C

CSSBB PRIMER

CQE PRIMER

C

C

CQT PRIMER

C

PRIMERS New CBA

CSQE PRIMER

C

CBA PRIMER

CRE PRIMER

C

C

CMQ PRIMER

C

CQI PRIMER

CCT PRIMER

C

C

CQA PRIMER

CSSGB PRIMER

C

CQPA PRIMER

C

C

Our Primers contain study material for the current ASQ bodies of knowledge plus sample questions and answers. The Primers may be taken into the exam. The completeness of our materials makes them the most widely used texts for Certification Training.

SOLUTION TEXTS

Quality Council of Indiana offers detailed solutions to all questions presented in the corresponding Primer.

CD-ROMS

CQE

QCI offers user-friendly interactive software to assist students preparing for ASQ examinations. Each CD contains 1000 total questions. Examinations are timed and summarized graphically. A help file provides explanations and references. The CDs run on Windows XP and newer.

Mail Orders Quality Council of Indiana Order Department 602 W. Paris Ave. W. Terre Haute, IN 47885-1124

Information 812-533-4215

CSSGB

CQA

Fax Orders 812-533-4216

Telephone Orders 800-660-4215

Internet Orders www.qualitycouncil.com

Juran’s Quality Handbook by Juran & De Feo The essential quality reference for most ASQ exams En Español

CSSGB PRIMER

Implementing Six Sigma by Forrest W. Breyfogle, III A great CSSBB reference

The Quality Technician’s Handbook by Gary K. Griffith Great for CQT and CQI exams.

Spanish Green Belt

Quality Dictionary

The Spanish version of the CSSGB Primer.

by Tracy Omdahl

More than 2500 definitions. Great for any ASQ certification.

RAM Dictionary

LSS Primer The Lean Six Sigma Primer is written to a QCI BoK. There are more case studies and lean content than in any other QCI products. 400 questions are included. A solution text is also available.

by Tracy Omdahl

Contains 2800 definitions. Helpful for Reliability and Quality Engineers.

ISO 9001 Internal Auditing Primer

ISO Primer by Bensley & Wortman

by Greg Wies & Bert Scali

A convenient book for training internal auditors to the ISO 9001 expectations. An instructor CD is available.

Reliability & Maintenance Analyst CD by Bryan Dodson

Solve your Weibull, reliability, warranty, Bayesian & Maintenance, prediction & estimation problems.

Measurement Analyst CD

ISO

Presents a thorough treatment of the ISO implementation and documentation process. There are generic manuals on the CD.

Quality System Handbook by Edenborough

Performs all measurements required in the AIAG manual. Contains ANOVA methods and excellent graphs. Site and global license available!!!

Used by Chrysler, ITT, FedEx, Ford, TRW, GM, HP, U.S. Postal Service

QSH

Details the selection, organization, and writing of quality documents. The disk contains procedures and work instructions.

PERSPECTIVES

BY Debra Kraft

Be a Trendsetter Lead by example with your quality mindset in everything you do QUALITY PROFESSIONALS should

think about what you would do in these

taking another action to separate the

consider expanding their networking

situations:

right way from the wrong one?

efforts into the business realm. Why?

1. You’re at an organized gathering, help-

2. While you’re in line at a lunch buffet,

Our organizations expect us not only to

ing yourself to a cup of coffee. A small

the person directly ahead of you tries

eliminate the costs of poor quality, but

trash container has been placed at the

to replace a small set of tongs into a

also help optimize profitability. The only

end of the beverage table, but it’s not in

bowl of shredded cheese, but misses.

way to do that is by shedding plant-centric

view when you’re looking for a place to

The tongs clatter to the floor. Do you

mindsets and infusing quality concepts into

dispose of your empty coffee creamer

apply the five-second rule by picking up

our organizational cultures. The only way

pod. Before you arrived at the table,

the tongs and putting them back into

to do that is by becoming the trendsetters.

someone else apparently solved this

service? Or do you flag down a waitstaff

We must lead by example.

dilemma by dumping his or her empty

member to take away the tongs and

pod into a nearly empty metal bowl that

replace them?

What would you do?

had obviously been put into service to

My assumption for the first scenario is

Leading by example means sticking with

dispense full creamer pods rather than

that most of you would follow suit, using

your quality mindset wherever you are and

to collect empty ones. Other attendees

the metal bowl to discard your beverage

in everything you do. It means infusing

followed suit, dumping used coffee stir-

table trash. The majority of people, after

quality concepts such as 5S and failure

rers, empty creamer pods and tea bag

all, are followers rather than leaders.

mode and effects analysis into how you ap-

envelopes amongst a handful of still-full

That’s just a fact of human nature. Besides,

proach situations, even if you don’t create

pods. Do you follow suit, assuming this

you’re a guest at this gathering; you’re not

tape marks or use special forms to assign

has become an accepted process? Or do

working.

numerical values to each potential risk.

you step up to initiate change by inform-

To see whether you lead by example,

ing the waitstaff, removing the bowl or

But think about it for just a minute. Trash on top of a table isn’t acceptable at home. Why should you accept it anywhere else, under any circumstance? If just one person does the right thing, others will follow suit. As a quality professional, try to get in the habit of showing your colleagues the value of doing the right thing, whether you’re auditing a manufacturing plant or attending a business luncheon. My fervent hope for the second scenario is that most of you would have the tongs removed. But that’s my hope, not my assumption. Sadly, I have witnessed situations in which people who are employed in the field of quality applied the five-second rule instead. If you’re not sure why that would pose a problem, force yourself to look at a much larger picture. Many manufacturing plants have distinct rules about dropped parts.

12 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Until and unless those parts are proved to

quality hits can lead to recalls. Guess

remain uncontaminated and undamaged,

what? Recalls can cost far more than

they must be segregated from good parts

whatever was saved in the first place by

and considered nonconforming.

cutting heads. True lean efforts involve

Now think about that set of tongs

developing efficient processes free of

again. You don’t know what’s on the floor

waste and always getting it right the first

where they landed. Microscopic contami-

time. Today, process quality matters more

nants are still contaminants. Animal feces

than product quality because the latter is

and other germ-bearing things I’d rather

the direct result of the former.

not think about could have been deposited

Quality toolboxes should be restocked

on that floor by any number of people’s

to include business concepts, especially

shoes.

those that are intricately linked to the

If a quality professional is willing to

costs of doing business. In turn, quality

Your Quality Advisor Are you in a bind at work? Are you looking to clarify a term or methodology? Have you run into a problem where nobody seems to have the answer? Do you wish you had a quality

put his or her colleagues’ food at risk

concepts also must take root in organiza-

mentor? Someone you could

through potential contamination, it seems

tional cultures. Those folks in finance who

turn to when you run into a

reasonable to assume that same person

are always cutting budgets and com-

also could be willing to turn a blind eye

plaining about overspending should take

roadblock?

to a dropped part—or worse, put it back

another look at the costs that might be

amongst usable stock. If a quality profes-

hidden in their own inefficient processes.

sional is doing that, count on everyone

If the HR department is more heavily

else in the organization doing it, too.

staffed or budgeted on the recruiting and

QP’s experts will provide

hiring side than elsewhere, the processes

answers and insight to your

be the clarion ringers and set the tone for

targeting employee retention are probably

toughest quality queries.

a quality mindset in our organizations. We

inefficient—it’s costly to fuel a revolving

need to live and breathe quality, and set

door.

Simply email your situation,

As quality professionals, it is up to us to

You do.

question or problem to

the example for everyone else in our organizations. If we don’t, no one will. If no

Setting the example

[email protected], and QP’s

one takes the lead in setting the example,

How can we get business colleagues to see

subject matter experts will

our organizations are doomed to repeat

the critical links between efficiency and

failures, or at the very least to never

quality? By setting an example. As quality

offer their sage advice in our

discover what it means to truly optimize

professionals, we have a responsibility to

profitability.

put quality first. Don’t be so shy, lazy or

Expert Answers department.

impatient that you accept problems. Don’t

True quality = efficiency

play “follow the leader” and use a creamer

But what does it mean, in the quality

bowl for a trash container because that’s

realm, to optimize profitability? The an-

what everyone else is doing. Be the leader.

swer is simpler than you might think. It’s

Raise your hand, raise your voice or just

about efficiency—and that means being

take the reins and start driving teams in

lean.

the right direction. QP

It’s a tough market out there. Organizations that don’t go lean don’t get ahead. Regrettably, some organizations still seem to think going lean is all about cutting heads; but efficiency is the real driver. Without efficiency, process quality—and, by default, product quality—can take a significant hit. In the automotive industry, the worst

DEBRA KRAFT is a senior process engineer and business unit audit program manager at a tier-one automotive supplier in Michigan. She holds a bachelor of fine arts degree from Wayne State University in Detroit and is a senior member of ASQ.

December 2013 • QP 13

keepingcurre government

Critical Condition

T

Sick Obamacare website affects millions as White House scrambles for a cure The botched rollout of the website built to allow Americans to enroll in a health

by the consulting firm Kantar US Insights.3 “Nobody is madder than me,” President

insurance plan under the Patient Protection

Barak Obama said as he spoke about the

and Affordable Care Act—also known as

problem-ridden website—technology that’s

Obamacare—will go down in history as one

at the very heart of his plan to bring health

of the biggest technology debacles ever.

coverage to millions of Americans.

Since its launch Oct. 1, millions of

The online marketplace is central to the

people who used www.heathcare.gov to

2010 law to reform the U.S. healthcare sys-

find a health plan have encountered error

tem. Every American will be legally required

messages, delays, crashes and stalled ac-

to have health insurance after Jan. 1 or face

counts.1

a penalty.4 The federal exchange and similar

The snarls didn’t end there. The reports

state websites are meant to be one-stop

features and, finally, enroll the person in a plan.

System snafus Initially, Obama blamed the website meltdowns on an overwhelming number of visitors.7 Software engineering experts identified fundamental issues with the website’s design and function, however. Some software engineers have suggested the website’s consumer end, designed by one contractor, is not “talking to” the website’s back end, which was created by a

generated from the federal exchange

shops for health insurance for Americans

on new enrollees and sent to insurance

who can’t afford coverage and don’t get it

different contractor.8 “Anyone in software engineering will tell

providers were riddled with errors—such as

through employers.

you that cross-group coordination is one of

syntax mistakes and transposed and dupli-

Complex project

the hardest things to get right, and also one

cate data. Insurers also reported receiving

The federal exchange is a huge system

of the most crucial, because while program-

multiple enrollments and cancellations

that’s composed of multiple systems with

mers are great at testing their own code,

without time stamps from the same people.

hundreds of integration points, making it

testing that their code works with every-

Insurers resorted to contacting enrollees

innately difficult to manage, said Robert

body else’s code is much more difficult,”

directly to follow up.2

Charette, president of ITABHI Corp., a busi-

wrote software engineer David Auerbach in

Just six people successfully enrolled on the first day it opened. Of the 9.47 million

ness and technology risk management

Many of the problems also stem from a

consultancy.5 The website must fuse with

people who visited the site the first week,

disparate platforms of other large govern-

only 36,000 were able to complete the en-

ment agencies in addition to the systems of

rollment process, according to an analysis

state exchanges and insurance providers.

6

The federal

14 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

a recent Slate column.9 design element that requires users to create accounts before shopping for insurance. Making all users go through the registration process created logjams that blocked most

exchange website

other users from the marketplace.10

also must do many

Project management missteps

things: verify a

Building a system takes more than good

person’s identity,

programming. It also requires sound project

legal residence and

management. The Centers for Medicare and

income; record his

Medicaid Services (CMS) oversaw the entire

or her personal

project while also monitoring the develop-

information; match

ment of the state exchanges.11

the enrollee with

The flop isn’t that surprising, consider-

health insurance

ing the CMS and most of the government

plans; calculate

has no experience running a project this

subsidy eligibility;

large, wrote Steve Bellian, a professor of

provide compari-

computer science at Columbia University, in

son shopping

a CNN column.12

nt “There are standard approaches, standard tools and standard software for building largescale websites. Using them correctly takes good planning and management. That was in short supply here,” Bellian wrote.

NAME: Rob Herhold.

Shoddy testing

RESIDENCE: Dardenne Prairie, MO.

Representatives from private contractors charged with building www.healthcare.gov told members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee at a hearing in late October that full testing of the website didn’t begin until two weeks before it went live instead of months earlier.13 “You must create and emulate the customer experience as closely as possible,” said Tim Moynihan, VP of marketing at Empirix, a network performance company that provides testing and monitoring services for web systems. “You must understand how it works and appears from the customer side of the equation, not the inside, IT side of the equation.”14

EDUCATION: Bachelor’s degree in business management from Washington University in St. Louis.

Delayed start While CGI Federal, a primary contractor, was awarded its $94 million contract to design the website’s back end in December 2011, the government was so slow to issue specifications that the firm did not start writing software code until spring 2013. As late as the last week of September, features were in flux because officials kept making changes.15 “That becomes a real problem if you’re using a waterfall method where you begin with the requirement process, then move to coding, then move to testing, then release an entire system,” said Kev Coleman, head of research and data at HealthPocket, a site that compares and ranks health insurance plans.16

According to expectations Major IT projects fail in the private sector, too, but without the entire nation watching. “Anyone who has written a line of code or built a system from the ground up cannot be surprised or even mildly concerned that www. healthcare.gov did not work out of the gate,” said Jim Johnson, chair of the Standish Group

Q

Who’s Who in CURRENT JOB: Former president of the Institute for Strategic Management Practices. Herhold is currently disabled with Lou Gehrig’s disease, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), but he continues to volunteer his expertise in quality to companies and nonprofit organizations.

INTRODUCTION TO QUALITY: During the late 1970s, Herhold worked for TRW Inc., considered one of the first Fortune 500 companies to use the Toyota Production System. He met Shigeo Shingo and has been hooked on quality ever since. PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE: During his days with McDonnell Douglas (Boeing), Herhold and others formed its first quality processes division. The division was on the cutting edge with total quality management and helped establish the Baldrige Foundation. Herhold is also a former executive with the Excellence in Missouri Foundation, which administers the Missouri Quality Award, one of the most successful state quality award programs in the country. ASQ ACTIVITIES: Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award alumni examiner; past chair and board member emeritus of Epworth Children & Family Services; member of the state advisory board of the Missouri Small Business and Technology Development Centers; and member of the steering committee of the Center for Supply Chain Management Studies at St. Louis University. RECENT AWARDS: Herhold received the Ambassador Award from Epworth Children & Family Services. He has also received the ASQ Volunteer Excellence Award and the Waldo Vezeau Technical Achievement Award, as well as other plaques and citations from ASQ and other organizations, including the Human Resource Management Association of St. Louis, March of Dimes, Muscular Dystrophy Association, American Red Cross, University of Missouri, Defense Contract Management Command and the Finnish Government. PERSONAL: Married 17 years to Jan. Three grown children and two grandchildren. FAVORITE WAYS TO RELAX: Reading and staying in touch with the happenings in the quality profession. QUALITY QUOTE: There are two phrases that most people define as Herhold’s signature quotes: “Trust the process,” and “You can’t make this stuff up.”

(continues on p. 16)

December 2013 • QP 15

keepingcurrent Website woes (continued from p. 15) International, an IT company. “The real news would have been if [www. healthcare.gov] actually did work.”17 Still, government IT has a notorious reputation for poor project management and an overreliance on contractors. A 2008 report showed 48% of federal IT projects were restructured because of cost overages or goal changes. Another 2008 report said 43% of the Department of Health and Human Services’ major projects were being monitored by the Office of Management and Budget because of poor performance and other concerns. After improvements trickled in and outages occurred in the first few weeks following the rocky launch, the White House enlisted some of the best and brightest from Google, Oracle and RedHat to fix the problems that were still rampant and crippling the website in early November.18,19 But the clock is ticking, and some officials worry the troubled website may start to directly affect the success of the healthcare law.20 The White House hopes to enroll 7 million people in Obamacare by the end of 2014. “Obama says the product is good. You can have the best product in the world, but if no one can buy it, it really doesn’t matter,” said David Lloyd, CEO of IntelliResponse, a customer service technology provider.21 —Megan Schmidt, contributing editor EDITOR’S NOTE To see the references and links to the sources, read the online version of this article at http://asq.org/ quality-progress/2013/12/keeping-current.html.

BALDRIGE AWARD

Three Honored as 2013 Award Recipients Three organizations from two different categories have been name recipients of the 2013 Malcolm Baldrige National Award. The recipients, announced Nov. 13, include: • Pewaukee School District, WI (education category). • Baylor Regional Medical Center at Plano, TX (healthcare category). • Sutter Davis Hospital, Davis, CA (healthcare category). “The Baldrige program has had a tangible impact on the success of thousands of organizations worldwide and our nation’s economy, and the winners will undoubtedly continue that legacy and serve as role models for their peers in the health care and education sectors,” U.S. Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker said during the announcement of this year’s award recipients. The Baldrige judges also recognized two organizations that excelled in one or more of the Baldrige criteria categories. They are: • Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC. • Hill Country Memorial, Fredericksburg, TX. A ceremony honoring the organizations will take place during the 26th Quest for Excellence Conference April 7-9, 2014, in Baltimore. To read more about the recipients, visit www.nist.gov/baldrige/ baldrige_recipients2013.cfm.

16 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

HEALTHCARE

HOSPITAL ERRORS THE third-LEADING CAUSE OF DEATHS IN the U.S. New research estimates that up to 440,000 Americans are dying each year from preventable hospital errors, which would make medical errors the third-leading cause of death in the United States. The research, prepared by the Leapfrog Group, a patient safety advocacy group, underscores the need for patients to protect themselves and their families from harm, and for hospitals to make patient safety a priority, group representatives said. “During this time of rapid healthcare transformation, it’s vital that we work together to arm patients with the information they need and tell doctors and hospitals that the time for change is now,” said Leah Binder, president and CEO of Leapfrog. The research also grades general hospitals in the United States. Leapfrog reports that many of these hospitals are making headway in addressing errors, accidents, injuries and infections that kill or hurt patients, but overall progress is slow. For more information about the research and how the hospital safety scores were calculated, visit www. hospitalsafetyscore.org. EXEMPLAR GLOBAL

CERTIFICATION ORGANIZATIONs CHANGE NAME The ASQ entity RABQSA International and iNARTE last month changed their names to Exemplar Global. The organization, which develops personnel and training certification products for professionals and training providers, wanted “to recalibrate itself so that we can demonstrate that we now serve a broader community of professionals and organizations in their pursuit of recognition of their abilities,” Peter Holtmann, CEO and president of Exemplar Global, said in a statement. The rebranded RABQSA International Inc. and iNARTE brands are represented in 190 countries and offer certifications to 15,000 industry professionals and more than 100 training organizations. For more information about the name change, visit Exemplar Global at www.exemplarglobal.org.

Mr. Pareto Head

By Mike Crossen

global state of quality research

REPORT PUTS THE SPOTLIGHT SQUARELY ON THE ‘QUSTOMER’

A balance between quality and customer engagement is needed to increase the value of products and services organizations provide to both internal and external customers, according to the first of four reports that complement ASQ’s Global State of Quality Research. The five-page “spotlight” report highlights an ASQcoined term—Qustomer—and says 67.4% of respondents share some quality performance information with customers, but a delicate balance is critical to success: Too much interaction with customers can be costly, but too little won’t yield adequate information to improve quality. In addition to striking a balance, the report concludes there are other challenges to incorporating the customer into the quality process, including cultural differences, intellectual property issues and regulatory standards. The report also describes how organizations such as Airbus, ABF Freight and Booz Allen Hamilton share information within their organizations about the role of customers. “These spotlight reports take a close look at the data presented in the Global State of Quality Research, providing real-world examples of the impact of quality,” said ASQ Chair John Timmerman. “The Qustomer spotlight offers examples of how organizations are engaging customers to improve product performance and services, and offers approaches that all companies can use and benefit from.” To download the Qustomer spotlight report, visit http://asq.org/global-state-of-quality/index.aspx. The report is free to ASQ members and $29 for nonmembers.

ASQNEWs

second keynote annOUNCED Tony Kern, the founding partner and CEO of Convergent Performance LLC, a think tank based in Colorado Springs, CO. has been announced as the second keynote speaker for ASQ’s 14th annual Lean and Six Sigma Conference—to be held Feb. 24-25 in Phoenix. Kern has authored seven books on human performance, including the Plane of Excellence trilogy (Redefining Airmanship, Flight Discipline and Darker Shades of Blue). He is also a featured columnist for Canadian Skies, Vertical and Vertical 911 magazines. Kern joins Shane A. Yount, the previously announced keynote speaker for the lean and Six Sigma event. Yount is a nationally recognized author, speaker and principal of Competitive Solutions Inc., an international business transformation consulting firm. Watch for more updates on the conference at http://asq.org/conferences/six-sigma. Early-bird registration pricing runs through Jan. 13. PITTSBURGH SECTION HONORED ASQ’s Pittsburgh Section has received the Keystone Alliance for Performance Excellence (KAPE) Award. KAPE helps Pennsylvania organizations achieve performance excellence using the Baldrige criteria as a framework for improvement. Five other award recipients were recognized along with the ASQ section at a banquet and conference in November in Harrisburg, PA. STUDENT MEMBERSHIP UPGRADE Student members of ASQ can now select to participate in one of ASQ’s 25 forums and divisions as a way to further network with those in the quality community and learn best practices. The upgrade is one way to enhance this level of membership and improve the experience of student members. For more information about membership levels, visit http://asq.org/membership/members/ your-benefits.html.

December 2013 • QP 17

extra * extra * extra * extra * extr “All the numbers you need to know”

QP Salary

Read Their Minds What hiring managers look for in job candidates by Max Christian Hansen

THE QUALITY PROFESSION is helping the world economy pull out of its long slump. Those who responded to this year’s QP Salary Survey seem to be experiencing their own recovery—be it ever-so-slight. After a year in which the average salary for full-time employees in the United States stagnated, the needle moved upward again for quality professionals in 2013. The average salary for full-timers in the United States was $88,458 in 2013, up a bit from 2012’s average of $86,743. That latter figure was $343 lower than the average salary in the previous year, the first time the U.S. average had decreased in the 27-year history of the survey. This year’s increase, amounting to only 1.58% over two years, is nothing to crow about, however. Clearly, the world economy—and the quality pro-

Sponsored by

fession itself—still face some struggles. If you’re a quality professional aiming to clear career hurdles and build a successful career, what can you do? Answer: Understand the needs of the marketplace, and prepare yourself accordingly. Hiring managers weigh in Each year, QP accompanies its salary survey results with a discussion of some aspect of the em-

tra * extra * extra * extra * extra 2013

QP SALARY

Survey

SURVEY

Founded 1987

ployment and salary picture: • In 2010, sophisticated statistical techniques showed how several of the variables measured by the survey correlate with salary. • In 2011, the value of ASQ certifications was highlighted, including an assertion that when certifications matched well to the job its holder performs, that certification seemed

to provide a hefty boost to the paycheck. • In 2012, formal education and its effect on salary were examined. While every year’s survey looks at salary by highest degree held by a respondent, extra statistical rigor was applied to the question last year, confirming the high value of education beyond a fouryear degree.

In This Issue Part 1. Regular Employee Results

Section 14 Salary by Organizational Quality Infrastructure Online

Section 1 Salary by Job Title

p. 29

Section 2 Salary by U.S. Regions and Canadian Provinces

Section 15 Salary by Extent of Quality Responsibilities Online

p. 33

Section 3 Salary by Number of Years of Experience in the Quality Field

Section 16 Salary by Highest Level of Education Online

p. 37

Section 4 Salary by ASQ and Exemplar Global Certification p. 45 Section 5 Salary by Six Sigma Training

p. 52

Section 6 Salary by Number of Work Hours Online Section 7 Salary by Nonexempt vs. Exempt Status Online Section 8 Salary by Number of Years in Current Position Online Section 9 Salary by Number of Years in Current Position and in the Quality Field Online

Section 17 Salary by Highest Level of Education and Number of Years in Quality Online Section 18 Salary by Exemplar Global Certification Online Section 19 Salary by Gender and Age Online Section 20 Size of Raise and Additional Annual Payments Online

Part 2. Self-Employed Consultant Results Section 21 Consultant Overview



Online

Section 22 Base Earnings by Years of Experience Online

Section 10 Salary by Number of Employees Overseen Online

Section 23 Base Earnings by Education and Training Online

Section 11 Salary by Division Size, Organization Size and Location of Headquarters Online

Section 24 Base Earnings and Rates by Age, Gender and Geographic Location Online

Section 12 Salary by Industry Online

Note: All sections printed in this issue of QP are also available in the online report in PDF format at www.qualityprogress.com/salarysurvey.

Section 13 Salary by Geographic Location Online

December 2013 • QP 19

New to the salary survey this year was a set of ques-

to count the number of first-choice votes received by

tions asking hiring managers to describe what they

each option, and average the rankings. The second

look for in new hires. First, hiring managers were

method is not quite as easy as it sounds. For a simple

asked what hiring plans they had in the foreseeable

average of ranking to work, the questionnaire must

future. In total, 2,613 respondents said they believed

meet two criteria:

they knew when they would hire their next employee.

1. It must require each respondent rank every option.

Results are shown in Table 1.

2. It must not permit ties.

Remember, the numbers in the second column of

Because the question allowed options to go un-

this table are the number of respondents answering

ranked and allowed ties, a simple average of rankings

the question—not the number of expected hires. Of

wouldn’t work, so the closely related method called

the hiring managers surveyed, many didn’t answer this

the Borda count was used. To implement the Borda

question, presumably because they didn’t know when

count, the rankings were normalized so every first-

they would make their next hire.

choice ranking had a value of x – 1, each second choice

Next, hiring managers were asked which positions they expected to fill with new hires. The results are

was given x – 2 and so on, and x was the number of choices offered. In this case, x = 7.

shown in Table 2. Respondents then were asked to

Thus, a first choice had a value of 6, and values de-

consider what they look for in a prospective hire. They

scended by rank until a seventh choice had a value of

also were asked to rank certain qualifications and as-

zero, as did any unranked choice. Then the aggregate

sets, and other less-quantifiable traits they expect in a

ranking was obtained by simply adding up the Borda

candidate, including:

counts of each option for each respondent. Table 3 (p. 22) shows the ranking results for all

• ASQ certifications. • Domain or industry experience.

respondents, also broken out by the position each re-

• Highest academic degree.

spondent was considering when ranking the choices.

• Personality or character.

Many respondents indicated their rankings would have

• Exemplar Global (formerly RABQSA International)

been different if they were interviewing or screening for different positions.

certifications.

For each grouping, the first line shows the attribute

• Six Sigma training.

which received the most first-choice votes, and, in pa-

• Years of quality experience. There are many ways of gaining an aggregate pic-

rentheses, the number of first-choice votes it received

ture of a group’s preferences. No method is ideal;

out of the total number of respondents who ranked

economist Kenneth Arrow received a Nobel Prize for

attributes for that job title. The next two lines show

demonstrating how it’s impossible to design a univer-

the top two choices as determined by the Borda count,

sally perfect method of gathering and assessing votes.

with the total Borda count for each option. A complete

In the case of this year’s questionnaire, however,

version of the table with additional rankings listed can

two simple methods seemed reasonable: the first is

be found in the online version of this article at www. qualityprogress.com/salarysurvey.

Expected timing of next hire  When do you expect to hire your next employee?

/  Table 1

Number of responses

Percentage of total

Within 3 months

784

30%

At least 3 months but less than 6 months

275

10.52%

At least 6 months but less than 9 months

271

10.37%

At least 9 months but less than 12 months

211

8.08%

1,072

41.03%

One year or more

Table 1 includes results from managers with hiring authority who answered questions related to their hiring plans.

20 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

The two methods do not always give the same top choice. However, there’s no case in which the firstchoice method ends up a winner that is not among the first three options as determined by the Borda count.

Free-form responses Finally, respondents were asked to name any other attributes they look for in a prospective hire. This question received many responses: 2,321 respondents provided answers, and many named more than one attribute as being important. Of course, there was some redundancy, and many answers provided

2013

QP Salary

no information that hadn’t already been conveyed

were many responses that clearly clustered around

by the earlier rankings. Enough new detail was pro-

the notion that the hiring manager is looking for can-

vided to shed light on what hiring managers look for

didates with the ability to apply theoretical knowledge

in job candidates, however.

in real-life situations, and use it wisely and correctly to

Answers that included more than one attribute

Survey

solve the variety of problems that arise in workplaces.

were divided into individual statements and coded us-

Many responses used the word flexible or some syn-

ing the schema shown in Table 4 (p. 24), which also

onym, but those were not placed in this code. The adapt-

shows how many respondents named the attributes.

ability this code tries to capture is the sort of practical

Also for Table 4:

intelligence by which a worker can understand how a

Rows one, three and seven: Experience was

new situation is similar to those he or she has already

named far more often than any other desired attribute

encountered, and can adapt the knowledge gained from

in a candidate. The overwhelming importance of expe-

school or prior experience to fit a new environment.

rience appears only when you see that rows one, three

Row 10: When coding, degrees and certifications

and seven are all codes related to experience. Row one

were lumped together because this question was not

contains the code for experience of a type not specifically described. Nearly all other forms of experience fell into one of the other two groups: domain (industry or product type) or quality related. Some responses were even

Positions managers foresee hiring  /  Table 2

more specific, stating the experience the respondent was looking for was quality experience within a spe-

Worldwide

United States

Canada

Quality engineer

642

597

31

Technician

607

560

42

Inspector

537

495

34

Analyst

273

247

21

Specialist

270

256

11

be more highly valued than experience in quality. This

Associate

232

214

14

is especially interesting considering that experience in

Manager

222

207

10

the quality field perennially appears as a strong con-

Auditor

207

186

15

tributor to salary in QP’s surveys.

Coordinator

139

122

12

Other

134

124

8

Supervisor

129

118

10

Supplier quality engineer/ professional

126

117

6

Process/manufacturing/ project engineer

100

92

7

draw any strong distinction between personality and character. While integrity is often named as a character

Black Belt

88

86

1

trait, flexibility might be regarded as a feature of either

Consultant

76

73

1

character or personality. Specific traits that may have

Software quality engineer

60

57

3

been given as examples of personality or character, but

Reliability/safety engineer

55

53

1

Green Belt

44

40

3

Calibration technician

39

35

3

Educator/instructor

37

36

1

Director

24

24

164

Master Black Belt

23

23

164

18).

Champion

10

7

3

Row six: This was a tricky code to apply, but there

Vice president/executive

3

3

0

cific product or service realm. These statements often were accompanied by information that the respondent’s organization operates in a specialized compliance environment. It’s worth noting that domain experience seems to

Rows two and four: Personality, character and their many facets appeared frequently. Several responses suggested that when personality or character was named, another attribute was given as an example to further explain. This reveals many people don’t

which were coded separately, were: • Fit with existing team or ability to be a team player (row five). • Detail orientation (row 16). • Autonomy, ability to be self-directed (row 17). • Understanding of quality and quality mindset (row

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 21

Attributes sought by hiring managers Personality or character (48/139) Analyst

Personality or character (639)

/ table 3

Master Black Belt

Domain or industry experience (627) Personality or character (38/92) Associate

Personality or character (423) Years of experience (396)

Process/ manufacturing/ project engineer Quality engineer

Years of experience (462) Personality or character (18/54) Personality or character (241)

Reliability/ safety engineer

Domain or industry experience (215) Calibration technician

Personality or character (6/16) Years of experience (74)

Software quality engineer

Personality or character (72)

Consultant

Coordinator

Specialist

Personality or character (24)

Personality or character (218)

Domain or industry experience (183) Personality or character (178) Domain or industry experience (19/41) Domain or industry experience (206) Years of experience (198) Years of experience (733)

Supervisor

Personality or character (448)

Domain or industry experience (218)

Domain or industry experience (429)

Personality or character (27/59)

Years of experience (20/66)

Personality or character (279)

Domain or industry experience (306) Personality or character (9/23) Personality or character (116)

Supplier quality engineer/ professional

Personality or character (285) Years of experience (282) Personality or character (112/314)

Technician

Personality or character (1,424) Years of experience (1,344)

Vice president/ executive

Personality or character (14/46) Domain or industry experience (200)

Domain or industry experience (102)

Personality or character (194)

Personality or character (4/7)

Personality or character (821/2,527) All positions

Personality or character (39) Years of experience (81/226) Years of experience (1,052) Personality or character (1,018) Years of experience (100/275)

Manager

Domain or industry experience (17/38)

Domain or industry experience (35/98)

Six Sigma training received (28) Inspector

Years of experience (2142)

Years of experience (16/50)

Personality or character (298)

Green Belt

Domain or industry experience (351)

Personality or character (726)

Domain or industry experience (21/69)

Educator/ Instructor

Personality or character (372)

Domain or industry experience (22)

Years of experience (246) Director

Domain or industry experience (28/77)

Years of experience (54/165)

Domain or industry experience (2/6) Champion

Personality or character (105)

Personality or character (2,142)

Personality or character (435) Black Belt

Years of experience (110)

Personality or character (150/478)

Years of experience (39/102) Auditor

Years of experience (8/25)

Years of experience (1,246) Personality or character (1,215)

22 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

Personality or character (11,672) Years of experience (11,267)

What Table 3 shows: Out of all positions for which the respondent plans to hire in the foreseeable future, we asked respondents to consider the highest-paid position and rank the importance they place on each attribute in a candidate for that position. For each position, the first line shows the attribute with the most first-choice votes, with the number of first-place votes in parentheses. The next lines show the ranking as computed by Borda count. For each attribute, the Borda count is given in parentheses. More information about the Borda count method can be found in the article.

2013

QP Salary

regarded as the best means of assessing the impor-

plied by respondents to this year’s special questions

tance of either form of standard credential. The rea-

were enlightening. The most important responses

soning was this: As a few respondents explicitly stated,

probably weren’t the most common.

degrees are often named as minimum requirements in

Yes, everybody wants their hires to have experience,

a job description, and thus aren’t regarded as being

fit into the team and possess problem-solving skills.

within the discretion of the hiring manager when he or

From my own experience, however, respondents who

she reviews résumés or interviews candidates. For cer-

emphasize communication and leadership are the ones

tain job titles, the same may hold true for certifications.

who are doing the sort of hiring that will best move

In other words, respondents were mostly thinking of

their organizations forward. Why? Because quality is a

what they’ll have in mind when they’re screening or in-

quest, and if there’s perfection to be found at the end

terviewing a candidate. They’ll mostly think of degrees

of it, very few, if any, organizations have gotten there.

and certifications as something likely to have been al-

The methods that truly achieve quality will always be at

ready screened by HR before a candidate would be

odds with the old paradigm of produce-then-test, and

shortlisted and sent for the respondent’s consideration.

that paradigm is a natural and seductive one. Further-

Rows eight and 13: Respondents were often very

more, there’s a growing awareness that if quality isn’t

helpful in naming the type of communications skills they sought and the importance of leadership skills in

Survey

everywhere, it isn’t really anywhere. Here’s an extreme example:

the positions they were thinking of filling. When the at-

In the 1980s, I worked with a company in the auto

tribute was communication, responses often included:

parts industry. The firm was at an early stage in the

• “Technical competency and ability to professionally

process of implementing statistical process controls, and the vice president overseeing the campaign had a

communicate with a diverse audience.” • “Ability to communicate technical concepts for the

pretty dour view of how long it might take for quality to be consistent across the enterprise.

layperson.” When it came to leadership, these were typical an-

The reason: It might take years to train suppliers

swers:

on how to work in the company’s new quality-oriented

• “Ability to be a change agent.”

processes, and in many cases, it might be impossible.

• “Ability to effectively lead from a position of influ-

New suppliers would have to be found. At a meeting of workers directly involved with the change project, he

ence vs. a position of authority.” • “Ability to influence and drive improvement without

talked about supplier quality:

direct authority.” • “Experience and willingness to invoke process change.”

“Our contracts won’t allow us to send back a roll of metal stock for out-of-spec width unless more than

• “Ability to foster an environment of improvement

30% of the roll is noncompliant. Well, we can’t know

through prevention, not detection.”

that until we measure, and we don’t want to clog

Many of these assets overlap, meaning one may de-

up our new, smooth processes with material that’s

pend on another. For example, even in an intelligent

full of surprises. So we have to take every roll into

person, the ability to see how a particular problem fits

a special room and feed it through a special gauge

into the big picture and how various possible actions

designed to get it through quickly and alert us

will affect an organization’s overall well-being (in fi-

when the width is wrong. Here we are trying to be

nancial or quality terms) depend on experience of both

a state-of-the-art company, and we have to invent

kinds: domain and quality. In addition, common sense

new machines just to scrap incoming material.”

and the ability to apply book knowledge to hands-on situations is often a function of life experience and simple maturity.

This is an extreme example and from an earlier decade. In the early 1980s, the United States was just reawakening to the quality teachings that had helped it win

Extend the scope of quality

World War II but had then been largely forgotten. There’s

While QP’s annual survey always measures variables

been a lot of progress since then, but I suspect there are

that are easy to quantify, the free-form answers sup-

many supply chains that lack end-to-end best practices.

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 23

ASQ recently published a report titled “The ASQ

So, if quality is a quest—and it is—then the work-

Global State of Quality: Discoveries 2013,” which re-

ers who are going to provide the greatest value to their

veals that only 46% of manufacturing firms participat-

organizations (and be rewarded in turn) are those who

ing in the study train their suppliers on their quality

can do more than measure, report and take corrective

system. Of course, this doesn’t mean those suppliers

action. They’re the ones who do their part to carry a

are sending junk. Most probably have their own quality

proactive and quality-conscious mindset to every part

systems in place. The point is that there can be many

of the business environment they touch.

potential weak links in a supply chain. Even in a product’s go-to-market process (from con-

Practical implications

ception and design through process design to manu-

What does this mean for the quality professional build-

facture and distribution), there may be gaps. Quality

ing a career?

is often implemented first at the downstream end of

It means, first of all, that you’ll do well to keep your

this process, the end nearest the customer. The farther

eye on the big picture. Membership in ASQ is a start

you go upstream, the more likely it is that quality isn’t

because it will help you understand the whole realm

everything it could be. Manufacturing processes aren’t

of quality, even in areas where you may not have an

always designed to be as controllable as they might be,

opportunity to gain hands-on experience. Training,

and products aren’t always designed for manufactur-

schooling, and certifications can help you expand your

ability.

understanding. But as survey respondents this year overwhelmingly reported, experience is king.

Attributes named by code and number of responses  /  Table 4 Number of responses

Attribute

Every day of work is a day of experience, but there are ways to maximize the value of that experience. Seek out new ways to apply what you know, and areas in which you can gain new hands-on knowledge. Several of our respondents mentioned they weren’t simply looking for experience in their job applicants, but were

1

Experience—type not specified.

656

2

Attitude/character—not otherwise specified.

560

3

Domain experience (industry or specific product or process).

367

4

Personality—not otherwise specified.

306

5

Fit with existing team or general ability to be a team player.

246

6

Adaptability, problem-solving skills and ability to apply theoretical knowledge.

218

themselves by being promoted to higher-skilled and

7

Experience in the quality profession.

217

a change of employers.

8

Communications skills.

177

Sometimes, however, a new employer is what’s called for. If you have what some of our respondents

9

Ability—general.

170

10

Standard credentials, such as degrees or certifications.

159

11

Track record of achievement.

80

12

General intelligence—ability to learn.

69

13

Leadership skills and ability.

52

14

Analytical skill.

47

15

Response unreadable or difficult to classify.

41

16

Detail orientation.

35

17

Autonomy—ability to be self-directed.

35

18

Understanding of quality and quality mindset. Total attributes named

24 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

15 3,450

Sponsored by

seeking broad, diverse or varied experience. This doesn’t mean job hopping. There’s a wealth of experience available in nearly every organization. Although QP Salary Surveys consistently show there’s little reward for staying in the same job for a long time, this means only that quality professionals advance better-paying positions. Most often, this doesn’t involve

call the quality mindset and you’re an eager evangelist for quality, you’ll quickly enough develop radar for whether your organization is on the same path. If not, it may be time for a move. If an organization really cares about quality, it will gladly reward the employees who help it in the quest. QP MAX CHRISTIAN HANSEN is president of Bright Hat Communications Inc. in Sacramento, CA. The firm does communications consulting for science-based public policy, quantitative research and marketing organizations. Hansen has an MBA from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management in Cambridge. He is a member of ASQ.

T

The 2013 QP Salary Survey was sent to 44,945 ASQ

com under the tab “Tools and Resources.” The website

members. There were 7,504 individual responses, for

also includes the entire survey report in PDF format.

2013

Behind the Results

QP Salary Survey

a response rate of 16.7%. Some responses were deleted from the data set because they were incomplete, in-

A note on currencies

cluded implausible earnings amounts that could not

For Canadian employees and consultants, salaries and

be validated or were duplicate responses. After these

earnings are provided in Canadian dollars. For all em-

responses were removed, there were 6,445 usable re-

ployees and consultants outside the United States and

sponses. Each response fell into one of the employ-

Canada, salaries and earnings are given in U.S. dollars.

ment categories listed in Table 1.

Exchange rates were supplied by the respondent and

The data from the 6,039 full-time and part-time regular employees and the 44 regular employees who also

were retrieved on the day the respondent took the survey during the month of July.

work as self-employed consultants were used to create

In the few cases in which respondents from differ-

the 20 sections in “Part 1. Regular Employee Results.”

ent countries are evaluated together, all salaries are in

The data from the 167 self-employed consultants and

U.S. dollars. In cases in which QP editors needed to

the 44 regular employees who also work as self-em-

convert currencies, the exchange rate effective July 1

ployed consultants were used to produce the four sec-

was used. In a single case (Table 4 in section 4), Ca-

tions in “Part 2. Self-Employed Consultant Results.”

nadian and U.S. respondents were viewed together to

It’s worth noting that the number of respondents

determine the salary premium afforded by holding cer-

who work both as regular employees and as self-em-

tain ASQ certifications. In that case, Canadian salaries

ployed consultants dropped considerably from 2011

were converted to their U.S. dollar equivalents using

(163) to 2012 (55). That total has dropped even further

the exchange rate effective July 1.

to this year’s 44. Except for the information provided in Table 1, the

Statistical terms

salary survey report doesn’t discuss data from the peo-

In case you’re not familiar with the statistical terms

ple who are unemployed, retired or laid off.

and job titles in these sections, here are brief descrip-

The vast majority of those who participated in the survey work in the United States and Canada. Because there were few respondents from other countries, only a few sections in the salary survey report include results from this group, which is labeled as international. Sections 13 and 24 discuss the countries represented in this group.

tions: • Minimum salary: The minimum salary is the lowest salary reported in that particular group. • Maximum salary: The maximum salary is the highest salary reported in that particular group. • Standard deviation: Standard deviation is a measure of dispersion around the mean. In a normal dis-

You can learn whether tables or figures include

tribution, 68% of cases fall within one standard de-

international results by glancing at the information

viation of the mean, and 95% of cases fall within two

boxes below the graphics. In addition to specifying

standard deviations. For example, if the mean sal-

whether tables or figures include results from inter-

ary is $70,000 with a standard deviation of $15,000,

national, U.S. and Canadian respondents, these boxes

95% of the cases are between $40,000 and $100,000

specify whether graphics include results from full-time

in a normal distribution.

and part-time respondents. Some boxes provide additional notes.

• Count: The count is the number of respondents in that particular group.

Of the 24 sections in the salary survey results, 19 are online only and can be found at www.qualityprogress.

• Mean salary: The mean salary is the average salary for that particular group.

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 25

• Median salary: The median salary is the 50th percentile—that is, the salary at which half the cases fall above and half fall below. If there is an even number of cases, the median is the average of the

quality management, assurance or control activities. • Auditor: Performs and reports on internal or external quality system audits. • Black Belt (BB): Six Sigma or quality expert. Of-

two middle cases.

ten a full-time team leader responsible for imple-

Job titles

menting process improvement projects in the or-

In each year’s salary survey, QP asks respondents

ganization to improve customer satisfaction levels

to choose from a list of job titles that most closely

and business productivity.

matches their own. In all years, there are some re-

• Calibration technician: Tests, calibrates, main-

spondents whose titles do not closely match any on

tains and repairs electrical, mechanical, electro-

the list. Those who choose “other” are asked to fill in

mechanical, analytical and electronic measuring,

a title. This is the first year we are reporting on “oth-

recording and indicating instruments and equip-

er” as a group because the number of respondents in

ment for conformance to established standards.

that category has risen to 259, larger than in any other

• Champion: Business leader or senior manager who ensures resources are available for quality

year. Here are the suggested definitions for the job titles

training and projects and is involved in project toll-

used in the 2013 survey. Some of the definitions were

gate reviews. Often an executive who supports and

compiled by an HR expert and have been revised

addresses Six Sigma organizational issues.

throughout the years. Based on respondent feedback,

• Consultant: Provides advice, facilitation and

they will continue to be analyzed and revised periodi-

training on the development, administration and

cally. All definitions are intended only as a guide:

technical aspects of an organization’s quality im-

• Analyst: Initiates and coordinates quality-related

provement efforts at any or all levels. Has exper-

data from production, service or process improve-

tise in some or all aspects of the quality field. This

ment activities and reports these data using statis-

person can be from outside the organization or can

tical techniques.

be an employee of the organization.

• Associate: Involved in quality improvement proj-

• Coordinator: Collects, organizes, monitors and

ects but not necessarily full-time. Does not neces-

distributes information related to quality and

sarily have primary responsibility for traditional

process improvement functions, possibly including compliance to and documentation of quality management standards, such as ISO 9001. Typically generates reports using computer skills and

Employment status of respondents  /  Table 1

distributes those reports to various users in the organization or among customers and suppliers. • Director: Oversees all aspects of the organiza-

Count

Percentage

Regular, full-time employee

6,044

93.8%

such as developing and administrating the pro-

Regular, part-time employee

39

0.6

gram, training and coaching employees, and fa-

Regular employee who is also a self-employed consultant

44

0.7

Self-employed consultant

167

2.6

and procedures at all levels so quality improve-

Unemployed, retired or laid off for more than six months

66

1

ment efforts will meet or exceed internal and ex-

Unemployed, retired or laid off within the last six months

85

1.3

cilitating change throughout the organization. Responsible for establishing strategic plans, policies

ternal customers’ needs and expectations. • Educator/instructor: Instructs or trains others on quality-related topics, tools and techniques.

Table 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees, x Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees, x Canadian employees, x International employees Percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding.

26 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

tion’s quality or business improvement efforts,

Sponsored by

This person may be an employee of an organization or teach in a university or college setting. • Green Belt: Operates in support of or under the supervision of a BB, analyzes quality problems and

2013

QP Salary

This year’s response rate was 16.7%. After data validation, there were 6,445 usable responses. is involved in quality improvement projects. Has at

products and systems. Plans reliability tests and

least three years of work experience.

conducts analyses of field failures. Develops and

• Inspector: Inspects, audits and reports on materials, processes and products using variable or at-

administers reliability information systems for failure analysis and performance improvement.

tribute measuring instruments and techniques to

• Software quality engineer: Applies quality prin-

ensure conformance with an organization’s quality

ciples to the development and use of software and

standards.

software-based systems. Designs and implements

• Manager: Ensures the administration of the or-

software development and maintenance process-

ganization’s quality, process or business improve-

es. Designs or specifies test methods for software

ment efforts within a defined segment of the or-

inspection, verification and validation.

ganization. Might be responsible for dealing with

• Specialist: As the primary assignment, performs

customers and suppliers on quality or performance

a specific quality-related function in the organiza-

issues. Typically has direct reports.

tion’s quality program. Examples include: manage-

• Master Black Belt: Six Sigma or quality expert responsible for strategic implementations within

ment representative, statistician and testing expert.

an organization. Qualified to teach other Six Sigma

• Supervisor: Administers the organization’s qual-

facilitators the methods, tools and applications in

ity improvement efforts within a defined depart-

all functions and levels of the organization. A re-

ment. Has direct reports who implement some as-

source for using statistical methods to improve

pect of the policies and procedures of the quality functions.

processes. • Process/manufacturing/project engineer: Per-

• Supplier quality engineer/professional: Re-

forms engineering work to evaluate manufacturing

sponsible for all quality improvement issues relat-

processes or performance improvement projects

ed to vendors and suppliers of materials, products

for optimization. May develop processes to ensure

or services used in development or manufacture.

quality, cost and efficiency requirements are met.

Assesses potential new suppliers. Works with sup-

• Quality engineer: Designs, installs and evaluates quality assurance process sampling systems,

pliers to develop and improve the entire supply chain. May be involved in purchasing.

procedures and statistical techniques. Designs or

• Technician: Performs basic quality techniques—

specifies inspection and testing mechanisms and

possibly including calibration—to track, analyze

equipment. Analyzes production and service limi-

and report on materials, processes and products

tations and standards. Recommends revision of

to ensure they meet the organization’s quality stan-

specifications. Formulates or helps formulate qual-

dards.

ity assurance policies and procedures. May con-

• Vice president/executive: Establishes the direc-

duct training on quality assurance concepts and

tion for the development and administration of the

tools. Interfaces with all other engineering compo-

organization’s quality improvement efforts. Con-

nents within the organization and with customers

sults with peers on the attitudes and practices of

and suppliers on quality-related issues.

quality throughout the organization to develop an

engineer: Uses principles

environment of continual improvement in every

of performance evaluation and prediction to im-

aspect of the organization’s products and services.

prove the safety, reliability and maintainability of

Acts as a champion for quality.

• Reliability/safety

Survey

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 27

Because MEIRxRS does it! u On-shore work u Keep jobs in the U.S.

Contribute to the Economy By u Training and employing Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math professionals u Making jobs available

100 N. Brand Boulevard, Glendale CA 91203 (P) 800.507.5277 or 818-552-2036 (E) [email protected]

www.meirxrs.com

2013

QP Salary Survey

Part 1. Regular Employee Results Section 1. Salary by Job Title

Overview of Earnings

O

For more information about these and other consultants, see

Of those who responded to this year’s salary survey, the vast majority are employees of a single organization, and of these, most

the online report, which includes four sections in part two cover-

work full time. Part one of this report, consisting of sections 1-19,

ing self-employed consultants, their demographics and earnings.

addresses these respondents.

For the rest of part one, these workers are treated simply with re-

In the United States and Canada, a small percentage of these

gard to their regular employment, and their side income is ignored. In the United States and Canada, employees who also have

respondents also work as self-employed consultants. Table 1 shows they make considerably more money overall through their

consulting clients earn much higher salaries than those who

side work. They also earn more than the average employee in

have no such extra income. Perhaps these employees include

their regular employment.

many with the highest-level skills, making it worth their while to deploy those skills in serving consulting clients in addition to

In the United States, full-time employees who also consult

their employers.

earn, on average, $121,560 in their regular employment plus

Figures 1 and 2 (p. 30) show salaries by title for full-time

$98,991 from consulting. In Canada, the corresponding numbers

employees in the United States and Canada. The top earners

are $113,000 and $91,667.

in the United States were vice president/execu-

Salary by employment status 

tives, directors and Master Black Belts. In Canada,

/  Table 1

employees with the title educator/instructor were paid quite well and appear in second place behind

Percentage

Average salary earned as an employee

Average base revenue earned as a self-employed consultant

United States

those titled vice president/executive. Table 2 (p. 31) provides detailed information for full-time and part-time quality professionals in the United States. Table 3 (p. 32) shows the same information for Canada.

Full-time employee

96.5%

$88,458

—

Part-time employee

0.6

51,092

—

Full-time employee and self-employed consultant

0.4

121,560

$98,991

Part-time employee and self-employed consultant

0.1

58,600

32,800

Self-employed consultant only

2.4

—

156,608

Full-time employee

92.7%

$84,226

—

Part-time employee

1.3

60,800

—

Full-time employee and self-employed consultant

0.8

113,000

$91,667

Part-time employee and self-employed consultant

0.3

70,000

70,000

Self-employed consultant only

5

Canada

—

122,253

Table 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees, x Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees

Money Talks



Are you satisfied with your job and salary? Why or why not?

“

I’m very happy with how much money I make, but I’m always working to

”

improve myself. Michelle Gutshall, health, safety and quality technician, Flexsteel Pipe Technologies

Canadian salaries are noted in Canadian dollars.

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 29

Salary by job title for U.S. respondents / Figure 1 Job title (percentage of respondents) Vice president/executive (2.3%) Director (10.4%) Master Black Belt (1.3%) Consultant (2.2%) Reliability/safety engineer (1.5%) Champion (0.2%) Software quality engineer (1.3%) Black Belt (2.3%) Manager (27%) Educator/instructor (0.7%) Process/manufacturing/project engineer (3.1%) Supplier quality engineer/professional (3.6%) Quality engineer (17.1%) Auditor (4.1%) Supervisor (3.2%) Specialist (5.1%) Green Belt (0.7%) Other (1.2%) Analyst (3.3%) Coordinator (2.5%) Associate (0.9%) Calibration technician (0.9%) Inspector (1.7%) Technician (3.6%)

154,720 123,460 119,274 112,435 103,604 100,630 97,832 93,123 92,740 90,293 86,566 86,456 79,621 76,776 74,212 73,513

Figure 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees

73,045 71,801 70,657 60,595 57,614 51,183 50,771 49,557

0

$30,000

$60,000 $90,000 Average salary

$120,000

$150,000

Salary by job title for Canadian respondents / Figure 2 Job title (percentage of respondents) Vice president/executive (1.3%) Educator/instructor (0.3%) Director (8.6%) Black Belt (0.8%) Software quality engineer (0.5%) Consultant (1.3%) Champion (0.8%) Manager (31.6%) Auditor (3.5%) Reliability/safety engineer (1.3%) Process/manufacturing/project engineer (2.1%) Analyst (4.6%) Quality engineer (12.3%) Specialist (8.3%) Supplier quality engineer/professional (1.3%) Supervisor (5.6%) Green Belt (0.3%) Calibration technician (0.5%) Coordinator (5.4%) Associate (2.1%) Technician (5.6%) Other (0.5%) Inspector (1.1%)

127,320 125,000 115,153 115,000 103,500 98,400 96,791 95,388 90,754 86,700 84,000 77,772 76,261 74,334 72,600 70,412 68,000 61,000 59,259 56,875 52,310

Salaries are noted in Canadian dollars.

48,500 44,750

$10,000

30 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Figure 2 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees,    U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees

Sponsored by

$50,000 $90,000 Average salary

$130,000

2013

QP Salary Survey

Salary by job title for U.S. respondents 

/  Table 2

Minimum

Maximum

Standard deviation

Count

Mean

Median

$84,530

Full-time employees $13,200

$400,000

$35,712

5,621

$88,606

Analyst

All full-time employees

27,000

150,000

23,730

184

70,657

66,410

Associate

19,000

147,000

26,085

49

57,614

56,000

Auditor

32,000

250,000

29,170

229

76,776

72,000

Black Belt

50,000

195,000

21,186

128

93,123

91,500

Calibration technician

26,000

100,000

13,823

49

51,183

50,000

Champion

55,000

169,050

35,142

12

100,630

89,128 105,500

Consultant

36,000

400,000

48,307

123

112,435

Coordinator

21,496

160,000

24,348

139

60,595

55,000

Director

31,000

400,000

38,324

582

123,460

121,000

Educator/instructor

36,000

175,000

33,452

40

90,293

88,000

Green Belt

45,000

140,000

21,272

39

73,045

67,500

Inspector

19,760

130,000

20,985

96

50,771

45,000

Manager

27,000

306,000

28,700

1,517

92,740

90,000 116,750

Master Black Belt

58,000

200,000

32,328

75

119,274

Other

20,000

150,000

31,124

66

71,801

65,500

Process/manufacturing/project engineer

45,000

200,000

24,405

171

86,566

85,000

Quality engineer

29,000

180,000

21,793

964

79,621

77,000

Reliability/safety engineer

57,595

173,160

22,469

84

103,604

104,000

Software quality engineer

56,000

152,000

20,358

71

97,832

97,500

Specialist

24,000

180,000

25,790

289

73,513

70,000

Supervisor

32,000

170,000

24,814

182

74,212

70,000

Supplier quality engineer/professional

47,000

157,000

20,723

201

86,456

85,500

Technician

13,200

320,000

29,354

203

49,557

45,000

Vice president/executive

30,000

309,100

57,346

128

154,720

145,000

All part-time employees

$9,116

$117,000

$24,778

38

$52,080

$51,000

Analyst

65,000

65,000

—

2

65,000

65,000

9,116

55,000

22,964

3

32,639

33,800

Part-time employees

Associate Auditor

20,000

90,000

32,851

5

54,200

52,000

Black Belt

36,000

78,288

21,542

3

54,763

50,000

Consultant

30,000

65,000

13,829

6

45,407

40,000

Coordinator

23,000

23,000

—

1

23,000

23,000 117,000

117,000

117,000

—

1

117,000

Educator/instructor

Director

10,000

85,000

27,780

6

44,167

46,000

Inspector

43,000

43,000

—

1

43,000

43,000

Manager

63,000

86,089

12,365

4

74,672

74,800

Other

50,000

83,000

23,335

2

66,500

66,500

Quality engineer

45,000

54,000

6,363

2

49,500

49,500

Specialist

30,000

34,700

3,323

2

32,350

32,350

Table 2 includes results for: x Full-time employees, x Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 31

Salary by job title for Canadian respondents 

/  Table 3

Minimum

Maximum

Standard deviation

Count

Mean

Median

$30,000

$250,000

$30,362

373

$84,458

$80,000

Analyst

40,000

150,000

24,253

17

77,772

72,520

Associate

42,000

90,000

15,394

8

56,875

50,500

Full-time employees All full-time employees

Auditor Black Belt

42,000

145,600

25,022

13

90,754

90,000

100,000

130,000

15,000

3

115,000

115,000

Calibration technician

50,000

72,000

15,556

2

61,000

61,000

Champion

67,774

135,000

34,543

3

96,791

87,600

Consultant

69,000

149,000

33,857

5

98,400

86,000

Coordinator

37,500

82,000

15,087

20

59,259

60,000

60,000

250,000

32,458

32

115,153

105,000

125,000

125,000

—

1

125,000

125,000

Director Educator/instructor Green Belt

68,000

68,000

—

1

68,000

68,000

Inspector

30,000

65,000

14,637

4

44,750

42,000

Manager

31,200

250,000

27,459

118

95,388

90,000

Other

42,000

55,000

9,192

2

48,500

48,500

Process/manufacturing/project engineer

48,000

120,000

25,596

8

84,000

83,500

Quality engineer

45,000

150,000

23,441

46

76,261

70,000

Reliability/safety engineer

60,000

95,000

15,189

5

86,700

95,000

Software quality engineer

102,000

105,000

2,121

2

103,500

103,500

43,000

185,000

27,566

31

74,334

68,000

Supervisor

50,000

100,000

16,858

21

70,412

70,000

Supplier quality engineer/professional

56,000

85,000

12,661

5

72,600

76,000

Specialist

Technician Vice president/executive

35,000

75,000

10,980

21

52,310

52,000

100,000

186,000

37,975

5

127,320

105,000

$12,000

$125,000

$38,578

6

$62,333

$59,500

70,000

70,000

—

1

70,000

70,000

125,000

125,000

—

1

125,000

125,000

Part-time employees All part-time employees Consultant Director Educator/instructor

40,000

40,000

—

1

40,000

40,000

Manager

78,000

78,000

—

1

78,000

78,000

Other

12,000

12,000

—

1

12,000

12,000

Specialist

49,000

49,000

—

1

49,000

49,000

Table 3 includes results for: x Full-time employees, x Part‑time employees,    U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Salaries are noted in Canadian dollars.



Money Talks What will define the future of quality, in your eyes?

“

Any industry’s ability to balance cost with quality. Teams have to

work in tandem to balance a supplier’s ability to provide a quality

product at a price which allows both organizations to profit.

”

Tina Henselmeier, supplier quality improvement engineer, Cummins Inc.

32 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

QP Salary 2013

Part 1. Regular Employee Results Section 2. Salary by U.S. Regions and Canadian Provinces

Regional Variations

A

Survey

Average salaries of quality professionals vary widely by

mation for both countries, as well as the rest of the world,

region, state or province. In the United States, the highest-

is available in section 13 of the full survey report, available

paying region provides salaries 9.2% higher than the national

online at www.qualityprogress.com/salarysurvey. That sec-

average, while the lowest-paying region comes in at 9.3%

tion further breaks down salaries by job title for:

below that average (see Figure 1).

• U.S. states. • U.S. metropolitan areas.

In Canada, the variations in percentage are even larger.

The lowest-paying province provides salaries 25.7% below

• Canadian metropolitan areas.

the national average, and the highest-paying province comes

• Other countries.

in at 35.3% above the average (see Figure 2). In the United States, the highest-paying region is the Pacific, where the average salary for all job titles is $96,769. The lowest salaries are an average of $80,339 in the West North Central region. The East South Central is nearly as low, with an average

Comparison of salaries in U.S. regions / Figure 1 Pacific

9.2 ($96,769)

New England

5.9 ($93,838)

West South Central

3.9 ($92,093)

South Atlantic

3.1 ($91,370)

Middle Atlantic

2.6 ($90,949)

of $81,738. In both these areas, the relatively low salaries are in line with the cost of living. For example, Tennessee has a cost of living index (COLI) of 90.6 (see Figure 3, p. 34), meaning its liv-

Mountain

−2.2 ($86,650)

East North Central

−5.9 ($83,410)

East South Central

−7.8 ($81,738)

West North Central

−9.3 ($80,339)

ing expenses are 9.4% lower than the national average. Each state’s COLI is its cost of living stated as a percentage of the national average. Thus, Delaware’s COLI of 108.3 means it is 8.3% more expensive to

National average salary of $88,606

−9

live there than the national average.

−6

−3

0

3

6

9

Percentage difference from the national average salary (region's average salary)

Salaries and living costs don’t line up so well in the high-paying Pacific region. There, while the average pay of this year’s survey respondents is 9.2% higher than the national average, this doesn’t come close to matching California’s COLI, which is 25.8% higher than average. Figure 3’s second-quarter 2013 COLIs were compiled by the Council for Community and Economic Research (C2ER). This council calculates COLIs for cities and metropolitan areas that voluntarily collect information on the cost of groceries, housing, utilities, healthcare and other items. Figure 3 doesn’t include a cost of living figure for Puerto Rico because C2ER doesn’t provide COLIs for U.S. territories. For more information about COLIs, see C2ER’s website at http://coli.org.

Figure 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees

Comparison of salaries in Canadian provinces / Figure 2 Alberta Newfoundland and Labrador Saskatchewan Quebec British Columbia Prince Edward Island Ontario New Brunswick Nova Scotia Manitoba

In Canada, the highest salaries are paid in Alber-

21.1 ($102,250) 7.2 ($90,528)

National average salary of $84,458

4.1 ($87,907) −1.1 ($83,521) −2.9 ($82,000) −8.1 ($82,158) −13.6 ($73,000) −17.2 ($69,903) −25.7 ($62,786)

−30

ta, where they average $114,271. The lowest salaries,

−20

−10

0

10

20

30

40

Percentage difference from the national average salary (province’s average salary)

averaging $62,786, are in Manitoba. Tables 1 (United States) and 2 (Canada), pp. 35-

35.3 ($114,271)

36, break down regional and provincial salaries by

Figure 2 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees,    U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees

job title. More detailed geographically based infor-

Salaries are noted in Canadian dollars.

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 33

Percentage of respondents and cost of living by state and territory / Figure 3 Regions Alaska 0.1% 134

Pacific

East South Central

Mountain

South Atlantic

West North Central

Middle Atlantic

East North Central

New England

West South Central

Washington 2% 103.2 Oregon 1.2% 107

Montana 0.1% 99.7

Idaho 0.2% 91.2

Nevada 0.2% 95 California 10.2% 125.8

New Hampshire 0.5% 119.8 Vermont 0.2% 120.5

Wyoming 0% 98

Utah 1.6% 92.7 Arizona 1.7% 102.3

Colorado 1.9% 100 New Mexico 0.5% 97.1

Hawaii 0.1% 154.1

Figure 3 includes results for: x Full-time employees, x Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees Note: Percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding. Cost-of-living index was not available for U.S. territories, including Puerto Rico. D.C. = Washington, D.C. MA = Massachusetts MS = Mississippi RI = Rhode Island WV = West Virginia

34 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

North Dakota Minnesota 0.1% 4.8% 99.7 101.7 New South Dakota Wisconsin York Michigan 0.1% 3.9% 3.7% 130.5 4.4% 97.9 98.4 Iowa 95.2 Nebraska Pennsylvania 0.9% Indiana Ohio 0.4% 4.4% 101.5 Illinois 94.2 5.2% 3.6% 91.4 5.8% 91.5 93.7 WV Kansas 96.4 Missouri 0.1% Virginia 0.8% 2.5% 96.8 2.4% 96.3 Kentucky 91.6 92.7 1.1% 91.2 North Carolina Tennessee Oklahoma 3.9% 96.3 Arkansas 2.8% 90.6 0.7% South Carolina 0.5% Alabama 90.4 0.9% 91.6 MS 0.8% Georgia 96 0.2% 2.7% 93 Texas 92.4 93.7 Louisiana 7.1% 0.6% 92 Florida 96.3 3.6% 99

Maine 0.3% 110.5 MA 3.5% 122.9 RI 0.4% 124.1 Connecticut 1.4% 132.7 New Jersey 2.4% 130.4 Delaware 0.3% 108.3 D.C. 0.5% 144 Maryland 1.7% 122.5

Puerto Rico 0.8% —

Money Talks What trends are you witnessing in the quality function at your organization?

“

More movement toward automated

and real-time measuring, monitoring and reporting of key performance indicators

vs. having to manually create reports monthly.

”

Levi Fisk, senior manager of information quality, IHS

Sponsored by

2013

QP Salary Survey

Salary by U.S. region and job title 

All respondents

/  Table 1

Pacific

Mountain

West North Central

West South Central

East North Central

East South Central

South Atlantic

Middle Atlantic

New England

$96,769754

$86,650341

$80,339556

$92,093546

$83,4101,300

$81,738275

$91,370893

$90,949582

$93,838353

Analyst

71,580

70,465

62,615

62,782

67,700

Associate

74,5405

—

66,3754

32,0002

55,61313

56,8502

57,94013

45,3336

78,0003

Auditor

83,76337

74,78312

65,80219

79,72524

65,98154

76,97010

80,64939

86,64224

83,8668

113,186

85,910

86,900

92,033

84,734

93,148

9

Black Belt

102,072

85,818

96,28510

Calibration technician

49,0007

51,3333

42,5717

56,9806

53,0849

63,9273

50,8336

50,8755

47,4003

Champion

—

—

107,5002

107,4615

96,6673

—

105,2501

60,0001

—

92,475

28

16

63,273

13

7

16

14

21

9

33

32

10

22

69,8818

133,479

100,512

126,050

119,278

Coordinator

60,35519

65,62010

53,74814

70,52313

Director

133,016

115,335

116,952

126,650

Educator/ instructor

74,5002

87,3346

95,7505

70,0001

98,3758

101,0003

81,2448

115,0004

63,3333

Green Belt

73,0005

65,0002

75,0004

71,3333

72,9005

66,3333

60,0009

99,5654

84,5004

Inspector

54,120

52,278

43,271

55,256

55,264

72,708

46,020

47,171

45,5002

104,145180

88,80085

83,791150

101,046171

Master Black Belt

113,809

4

94,000

116,167

126,000

Other

72,28010

59,2504

56,3805

71,5717

74,85218

99,0003

70,4009

88,5336

47,0133

Process/ manufacturing/ project engineer

97,69216

94,0638

82,17825

92,96721

82,79346

74,8779

86,95426

87,3659

91,3729

Quality engineer

87,121136

83,50466

78,15895

77,99080

75,255249

72,98742

81,928124

79,41596

81,19672

Reliability/safety engineer

110,19221

96,4577

98,3648

107,1888

98,57316

114,9433

104,56411

116,5003

92,4867

Software quality engineer

112,73523

82,16411

—

92,8754

95,68115

102,3001

96,4147

87,2759

80,0001

Specialist

81,96338

73,96415

66,66938

68,64535

70,68955

75,25010

75,13346

79,89825

69,65926

Supervisor

81,05329

83,74613

64,02217

80,70316

72,18546

66,75012

69,02318

73,26018

77,64612

Supplier quality engineer/ professional

94,55323

83,54011

79,42923

85,47713

83,07056

84,0685

85,54928

86,79625

100,49017

Technician

57,09324

51,8758

47,03422

40,45016

53,37159

45,41213

43,55627

45,11321

56,17013

Vice president/ executive

170,76715

173,8005

124,4647

155,53813

137,13336

134,7147

160,73722

176,33312

185,34010

Manager

82

18

3

10

32

9

10

48

17

6

9

61

5

3

21

51,34527 115,836

120

21

8

56,18211 115,415

23

2

108,895

77,059

14

Consultant

17

94,440

8

81,586

41

25

60,95625 128,447

113

15

118,617

12

58,85312 123,038

61

7

125,60010 89,5008 126,83238

88,427338

84,25884

93,475241

92,314186

95,48380

104,034

101,333

119,852

138,154

155,8336

20

3

17

13

Table 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees Superscript numbers denote the number of respondents.

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 35

Alberta

Saskatchewan

Manitoba

Ontario

Quebec

Newfoundland and Labrador

New Brunswick

Prince Edward Island

Nova Scotia

/  Table 2

British Columbia

Salary by Canadian province and job title 

$83,52149

$114,27153

$90,5289

$62,78610

$77,635199

$87,90735

$102,2504

$73,0001

$82,0001

$69,90310

67,5073

108,6673

68,0001

—

76,9508

55,0002

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

59,4005

46,0002

—

—

—

66,0001

79,5002

115,2003

—

—

79,5006

103,2001

95,0001

—

—

—

Black Belt

—

115,0002

115,0001

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Calibration technician

—

—

—

—

61,0002

—

—

—

—

—

Champion

87,6001

135,0001

—

—

67,7741

—

—

—

—

—

Consultant

86,0001

—

—

—

112,3333

69,0001

—

—

—

—

Coordinator

66,000

76,500

—

—

59,299

40,000

—

—

—

48,0002

Director

107,8577

148,9176

—

60,0001

113,10010

90,0001

—

—

99,2002

Educator/ instructor

—

125,0001

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Green Belt

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Inspector

65,000

—

—

42,000

36,000

—

—

—

—

—

Manager

86,11619

122,05523

105,5833

95,9292

89,43256

86,8789

112,0002

73,0001

82,0001

67,3172

Other

42,0001

—

—

—

55,0001

—

—

—

—

—

Process/ manufacturing/ project engineer

77,0001

—

115,0001

—

91,0002

97,0002

—

—

—

52,0002

Quality engineer

92,3064

85,2504

—

60,6673

74,19330

89,3333

—

—

—

—

Reliability/safety engineer

—

—

95,0001

60,0001

92,8333

—

—

—

—

—

Software quality engineer

—

—

—

—

103,5002

—

—

—

—

—

Specialist

67,5002

127,6673

50,0001

46,0002

72,24322

55,0001

—

—

—

—

Supervisor

78,325

2

—

—

—

—

All respondents Analyst Associate Auditor

1

1

2

14

111,4005

68,0001 1

2

1

—

63,000

—

—

71,333

Supplier quality engineer/ professional

74,0002

—

—

—

69,5002

76,0001

—

—

—

—

Technician

53,0003

65,0001

55,0001

—

51,21916

—

—

—

—

—

Vice president/ executive

105,0001

—

—

—

143,8673

—

—

—

—

100,0001

4

15

Table 2 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees,    U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Salaries are noted in Canadian dollars. Superscript numbers denote the number of respondents.

36 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

2013

QP Salary

Part 1. Regular Employee Results Section 3. Salary by Number of Years of Experience in the Quality Field

Survey

Earnings Rise With Experience

O

Over the 27 years QP has been conducting its salary survey, results have consistently shown that quality professionals are rewarded for their years in the profession. In fact, experience by itself accounts for some of the salary premium paid to the highest earners, as Figure 1 shows for the three highest-earning job titles in the

Experience in quality for highest-paid job titles in United States / Figure 1 Vice president/ executive ($154,720) Director ($123,460)

United States.

the small numbers of respondents in the

36.62

31.44

31.94

0%

ingful for Canadian professionals, due to

26.67

41.33

32

All respondents

The same analysis would be less mean-

19

35.92

45.08

Master Black Belt ($119,274)

15.63

30.47

53.91

20%

More than 20 years

40%

60%

10.1 to 20 years

80%

100%

10 years or fewer

highest-paid positions there. In Canada, however, the overall pattern holds true that earnings show significant increases

Figure 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees

with experience, as Figure 3 (p. 34) shows. Figure 4 (p. 39) shows the experience that, in general, the higher-paid positions are held by the most experienced people. For example, in Canada, respondents with more than 20 years in quality earned on average $29,115 more than those with less than a year’s experience ($95,240 vs. $66,125). In the United States, the difference is even greater, with the most experienced respondents earning $36,315 more than those in their first year ($101,189 vs. $64,874), as shown in Figure 2. For information on earnings by job title for respondents with various levels of experience in quality, see Table 1 (pp.

Salary by years in quality for U.S. respondents / Figure 2 Years of quality experience (percentage of respondents)

bands for every job title and demonstrates

More than 20 years (31.9%)

101,189

10.1-20 years (31.4%)

92,400

6.1-10 years (15.1%)

78,671

3.1-6 years (10.8%)

76,402

1-3 years (8.2%)

65,306

Less than 1 year (1.9%)

64,874

None (0.6%)

81,103

0

$20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 Average salary

Figure 2 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees

39-42) for respondents in the United States and Table 2 (pp. 43-45) for respondents in Canada. The statistical measures used in these tables are described in the introductory section of this report.

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 37

Years of quality experience (percentage of respondents)

Salary by years in quality for Canadian respondents / Figure 3

Money Talks



More than 20 years (26%)

What do you like best about working in quality?

95,240

10.1-20 years (38.6%)

84,403

6.1-10 years (17.9%)

83,711

3.1-6 years (9.9%)

“

71,735

1-3 years (5.9%)

65,327

Less than 1 year (1.1%)

66,125

None (0.5%)

always changing, always evolving, always improving.

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

Ana Luttmann, manager, quality systems and compliance, TÜV SÜD America

Average salary

Figure 3 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees,    U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Salaries are noted in Canadian dollars.

Years of experience in quality by job title— U.S. and Canada / Figure 4 Job title (average salary) Vice president/executive ($153,509) Director ($121,787) Educator/instructor ($91,048) Manager ($92,722) Master Black Belt ($119,274) Supplier quality engineer/professional ($86,067) Reliability/safety engineer ($102,508) Champion ($99,281) Software quality engineer ($97,902) Quality engineer ($79,342) Auditor ($77,380) Consultant ($111,772) Supervisor ($73,611) Specialist ($73,376) Calibration technician ($51,497) Black Belt ($93,545) Inspector ($50,476) Technician ($49,668) Other ($71,073) Coordinator ($60,203) Process/manufacturing/project engineer ($86,339) Analyst ($70,837) Associate ($57,271) Green Belt ($72,868) 0%

18

29.3

19.3

52.6 36.7

22

44

19.5

58.5

26.6

35.1

26.7

38.3

41.3

28.6

32

39.8

31.5

31.6

38.2

33.3

30.3 46.7

38.4

20

38.4

38.7

23.3

29.5

40.5

31.8

34.3

41.7

25.2

27.6

45.3

30.7 33

21.7

47.2

27.8

49

25.5

25

49.6

25.5 35.1

50

15.3

24

52.2

26 26.8

52.9

21

22.1

25

56

28.3

56.4

26.3

61.7

15.7 17.3

21.9

70.2

16.4 19.3

80

20% 10 or fewer years

10.5 15

40%

60%

10.1 to 20 years

80%

5

100%

More than 20 years

Figure 4 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Salaries are shown in U.S. dollar equivalents. Canadian salaries were converted using the exchange rate in effect on July 1.

38 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

”

Keeps me on my toes.

73,000

0

It’s never the same. It’s

2013

QP Salary

Salary by years in quality and job title (Continues through p. 42) for U.S. respondents  /  Table 1 (continued) Minimum

Maximum

Standard deviation

$35,000

$80,000

$14,891

1-3 years

32,000

136,000

3.1-6 years

33,000

106,000

6.1-10 years

27,000

10.1-20 years

40,000

More than 20 years

Mean

Median

9

$54,333

$50,000

21,146

45

64,915

65,000

15,790

31

60,385

60,000

133,264

25,603

31

70,557

66,000

131,822

20,819

37

72,136

72,000

45,000

150,000

23,836

31

92,338

91,000

Less than 1 year

19,000

36,000

9,539

3

30,000

35,000

1-3 years

25,000

72,000

16,121

13

47,100

46,000

3.1-6 years

24,000

147,000

40,606

8

55,425

49,700

6.1-10 years

40,000

107,000

24,855

9

65,490

53,700

10.1-20 years

45,000

116,480

21,274

10

72,248

70,500

More than 20 years

27,000

87,000

21,322

6

60,917

64,250

Less than 1 year

58,000

95,000

19,655

3

72,667

65,000

1-3 years

35,000

130,000

23,672

19

59,889

54,440

3.1-6 years

34,000

120,000

24,377

24

69,703

66,150

6.1-10 years

33,800

120,000

21,178

49

70,180

69,000

10.1-20 years

32,000

154,000

27,120

76

75,659

72,000

42,000

250,000

34,938

58

92,482

90,000

100,000

102,000

1,414

2

101,000

101,000

Less than 1 year

Analyst

Associate

Auditor

More than 20 years No experience

Black Belt

Calibration technician

Champion

Survey

Count

Less than 1 year

70,000

70,000

—

1

70,000

70,000

1-3 years

50,000

112,000

20,447

11

78,060

77,000

3.1-6 years

56,000

125,000

18,225

25

85,748

86,000

6.1-10 years

56,000

195,000

27,798

25

95,019

90,000

10.1-20 years

65,000

137,640

17,857

44

99,120

99,750

More than 20 years

68,000

128,000

18,209

20

95,431

95,150

Less than 1 year

45,000

45,000

—

2

45,000

45,000

1-3 years

37,000

62,500

10,264

5

45,951

42,000

3.1-6 years

26,000

50,000

8,066

6

39,667

39,500

6.1-10 years

31,000

61,000

8,991

11

43,314

40,000

10.1-20 years

36,000

75,000

13,242

13

56,115

60,000

More than 20 years

50,000

100,000

13,802

12

62,023

60,000

1-3 years

77,000

77,000

—

1

77,000

77,000

3.1-6 years

105,250

105,250

—

1

105,250

105,250

6.1-10 years

55,000

85,000

16,073

3

73,333

80,000

10.1-20 years

60,000

169,050

48,125

4

115,077

115,628

More than 20 years

80,000

135,000

30,414

3

115,000

130,000

Table 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 39

Salary by years in quality and job title for U.S. respondents  /  Table 1 (continued) No experience

Consultant

Coordinator

Director

Educator/instructor

Green Belt

Inspector

Minimum

Maximum

Standard deviation

Count

Mean

Median

$103,000

$122,000

$13,435

2

$112,500

$112,500

Less than 1 year

55,000

55,000

—

1

55,000

55,000

1-3 years

55,000

142,400

35,351

8

89,363

72,000

3.1-6 years

36,000

160,000

33,761

20

90,995

85,000

6.1-10 years

52,000

140,000

29,681

20

94,408

94,000

10.1-20 years

55,500

275,000

48,524

33

117,953

110,000

More than 20 years

85,000

400,000

56,654

38

134,801

120,500

No experience

41,300

41,300

—

1

41,300

41,300

Less than 1 year

48,000

84,000

15,534

5

66,400

65,000

1-3 years

23,000

69,000

11,117

23

46,295

45,000

3.1-6 years

25,000

160,000

27,013

25

59,259

55,000

6.1-10 years

34,656

154,000

33,091

23

67,882

55,000

10.1-20 years

33,696

119,000

19,404

39

61,286

58,680

More than 20 years

21,496

135,000

25,760

23

67,464

67,500

Less than 1 year

45,000

271,000

76,092

7

121,000

100,000

1-3 years

37,000

200,000

44,918

21

101,037

93,000

3.1-6 years

45,000

175,000

32,609

42

109,470

111,500

6.1-10 years

51,000

230,000

39,877

40

109,107

96,000

10.1-20 years

31,000

280,000

35,779

208

126,329

125,000

More than 20 years

45,000

400,000

37,546

261

127,447

125,000

No experience

60,000

60,000

—

1

60,000

60,000

1-3 years

36,000

73,000

16,021

4

50,000

45,500

3.1-6 years

60,000

61,750

1,237

2

60,875

60,875

6.1-10 years

55,000

80,000

17,678

2

67,500

67,500

10.1-20 years

45,000

142,000

30,368

8

88,250

82,000

More than 20 years

45,000

175,000

31,370

23

103,867

106,000

Less than 1 year

65,000

86,000

14,849

2

75,500

75,500

1-3 years

45,000

140,000

24,149

14

66,750

60,000

3.1-6 years

45,000

105,000

20,551

6

71,460

67,250

6.1-10 years

50,000

116,000

21,019

9

79,444

79,000

10.1-20 years

56,000

99,500

20,121

6

72,417

61,000

More than 20 years

90,000

95,000

3,536

2

92,500

92,500

Less than 1 year

42,000

62,000

14,142

2

52,000

52,000

1-3 years

19,760

67,000

13,322

12

32,963

31,128

3.1-6 years

20,640

51,000

8,490

15

40,608

39,200

6.1-10 years

31,000

70,000

11,874

19

46,737

44,000

10.1-20 years

36,000

130,000

25,021

24

62,089

60,000

More than 20 years

22,000

125,656

22,662

24

57,799

52,000

Table 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees

40 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

2013

QP Salary

Salary by years in quality and job title for U.S. respondents  /  Table 1 (continued) No experience

Manager

Master Black Belt

Other

Process/ manufacturing/ project engineer

Quality engineer

Reliability/safety engineer

Minimum

Maximum

Standard deviation

Survey

Count

Mean

Median

$27,360

$130,000

$38,359

5

$89,304

$100,160

Less than 1 year

27,000

140,000

27,324

17

64,141

60,000

1-3 years

36,100

138,000

21,558

72

69,280

66,944

3.1-6 years

32,000

178,000

24,927

133

82,704

81,000

6.1-10 years

39,000

155,000

23,305

176

88,463

85,500

10.1-20 years

32,000

262,000

28,691

529

94,438

92,000

More than 20 years

30,000

306,000

29,147

583

98,534

95,000

3.1-6 years

60,000

125,000

26,057

7

96,179

85,000

6.1-10 years

58,000

200,000

36,697

13

109,973

100,000

10.1-20 years

76,000

197,000

27,672

31

123,688

116,750

More than 20 years

84,000

200,000

34,756

24

125,348

122,000

No experience

20,000

70,000

16,544

7

45,200

39,500

Less than 1 year

50,000

82,500

22,981

2

66,250

66,250

1-3 years

35,000

88,000

14,133

11

57,655

60,000

3.1-6 years

55,000

80,000

10,840

5

64,000

60,000

6.1-10 years

27,040

98,000

23,085

10

54,656

46,000

10.1-20 years

20,000

142,000

38,843

14

82,659

90,700

More than 20 years

40,000

150,000

27,214

17

96,000

97,000

No experience

82,000

125,000

19,945

4

96,268

89,037

Less than 1 year

47,000

93,000

15,966

15

64,823

61,650

1-3 years

45,000

98,000

16,419

21

69,830

70,000

3.1-6 years

52,000

118,000

16,379

22

77,315

75,000

6.1-10 years

48,000

130,200

18,160

36

84,787

83,000

10.1-20 years

51,000

200,000

24,414

45

97,773

93,000

More than 20 years

61,000

160,000

27,842

28

100,925

97,000

Less than 1 year

45,000

63,900

7,665

7

55,829

56,300

1-3 years

29,000

130,000

16,897

86

65,694

62,625

3.1-6 years

37,190

130,000

19,624

123

72,939

71,000

6.1-10 years

30,000

128,000

17,995

159

75,482

72,000

10.1-20 years

40,000

180,000

21,592

279

81,785

80,000

More than 20 years

35,000

180,000

22,662

306

87,049

84,000

No experience

70,000

146,000

28,497

5

118,200

126,500

1-3 years

63,000

90,500

12,311

4

72,375

68,000

3.1-6 years

58,000

110,203

18,848

5

81,681

82,200

6.1-10 years

68,000

125,000

18,352

12

96,743

103,750

10.1-20 years

76,000

154,200

18,319

31

107,994

107,000

More than 20 years

57,595

173,160

23,243

27

107,597

104,000

Table 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 41

Salary by years in quality and job title for U.S. respondents  /  Table 1 (continued) Minimum

Maximum

Standard deviation

$56,000

$128,000

$30,286

6

1-3 years

85,000

110,000

10,485

4

98,700

99,900

3.1-6 years

93,000

105,000

6,928

3

101,000

105,000

6.1-10 years

67,000

152,000

26,003

15

92,417

85,000

10.1-20 years

68,000

140,000

17,479

26

98,665

96,500

More than 20 years

76,211

135,000

15,771

17

105,838

105,000

No experience

52,000

123,000

35,595

3

86,000

83,000

Less than 1 year

30,000

76,000

19,382

6

49,940

45,500

1-3 years

33,600

85,000

14,272

30

58,565

54,000

3.1-6 years

34,200

107,000

18,409

40

61,483

60,750

6.1-10 years

24,000

120,000

19,188

58

67,685

69,130

10.1-20 years

35,000

180,000

23,338

80

75,233

73,500

More than 20 years

35,000

160,000

30,108

72

90,651

91,500

No experience

75,000

75,000

—

1

75,000

75,000

Less than 1 year

33,990

170,000

76,582

3

81,663

41,000

1-3 years

37,000

86,710

14,552

17

59,495

60,000

3.1-6 years

37,272

119,000

19,331

16

64,867

60,000

6.1-10 years

32,000

112,000

18,704

49

65,927

65,000

10.1-20 years

38,000

159,000

22,477

58

78,089

75,419

More than 20 years

42,000

150,000

27,249

38

88,886

86,500

No experience

74,000

74,000

—

1

74,000

74,000

Less than 1 year

52,000

140,000

31,406

7

75,000

60,000

1-3 years

49,500

130,000

22,140

15

76,047

66,000

3.1-6 years

62,000

110,000

15,460

8

82,462

79,500

6.1-10 years

55,000

150,000

18,761

25

86,318

83,000

10.1-20 years

47,000

157,000

21,716

80

86,039

85,000

More than 20 years

51,000

138,000

18,261

65

91,341

92,500

No experience

13,200

70,000

40,164

2

41,600

41,600

Less than 1 year

20,000

45,000

8,672

8

34,688

36,250

1-3 years

23,000

85,000

15,229

22

44,040

43,250

3.1-6 years

25,000

320,000

68,938

30

61,142

40,676

6.1-10 years

24,000

73,000

9,873

46

44,717

42,000

10.1-20 years

30,000

110,000

14,488

50

50,169

48,000

More than 20 years

17,000

100,000

12,282

45

51,794

52,000

Less than 1 year

Software quality engineer

Specialist

Supervisor

Supplier quality engineer/ professional

Technician

1-3 years Vice president/ executive

Count

Mean

Median

$82,917

$76,250

100,000

300,000

106,410

3

179,000

137,000

3.1-6 years

89,000

225,000

52,332

7

177,887

210,000

6.1-10 years

95,000

228,000

47,396

10

151,350

148,250

10.1-20 years

33,000

235,000

40,771

39

130,577

127,000

More than 20 years

30,000

309,100

61,700

69

165,448

150,000

Table 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees

42 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

2013

QP Salary

Salary by years in quality and job title (Continues through p. 45) for Canadian respondents  /  Table 2 (CONTINUED) Minimum

Maximum

Standard deviation

Count

Mean

Median

$68,000

$150,000

$57,983

2

$109,000

$109,000

3.1-6 years

54,659

81,000

14,722

3

64,032

56,437

6.1-10 years

40,000

70,000

16,073

3

58,333

65,000

10.1-20 years

65,000

96,500

12,429

7

79,574

82,000

1-3 years Analyst

Associate

Auditor

More than 20 years

80,000

100,000

14,142

2

90,000

90,000

1-3 years

42,000

50,000

5,657

2

46,000

46,000

3.1-6 years

46,000

51,000

3,536

2

48,500

48,500

6.1-10 years

50,000

66,000

8,083

3

58,667

60,000

10.1-20 years

90,000

90,000

—

1

90,000

90,000

1-3 years

95,000

95,000

—

1

95,000

95,000

3.1-6 years

70,000

70,000

—

1

70,000

70,000

6.1-10 years

100,000

100,000

—

1

100,000

100,000

10.1-20 years

42,000

145,600

33,403

7

89,514

90,000

More than 20 years Black Belt

Survey

85,000

103,200

9,717

3

96,067

100,000

6.1-10 years

130,000

130,000

—

1

130,000

130,000

10.1-20 years

100,000

115,000

10,607

2

107,500

107,500

Calibration technician

3.1-6 years

50,000

50,000

—

1

50,000

50,000

More than 20 years

72,000

72,000

—

1

72,000

72,000

Champion

10.1-20 years

67,774

135,000

34,543

3

96,791

87,600

6.1-10 years

69,000

72,000

2,121

2

70,500

70,500

Consultant

10.1-20 years

86,000

149,000

44,548

2

117,500

117,500

116,000

116,000

—

1

116,000

116,000

Less than 1 year

37,500

75,000

26,517

2

56,250

56,250

1-3 years

37,500

77,000

15,635

6

56,583

59,500

3.1-6 years

39,500

51,000

8,132

2

45,250

45,250

6.1-10 years

53,684

60,000

4,466

2

56,842

56,842

10.1-20 years

45,000

80,000

15,268

6

64,500

68,500

More than 20 years

60,000

82,000

15,556

2

71,000

71,000

3.1-6 years

130,000

130,000

—

1

130,000

130,000

6.1-10 years

90,000

132,000

17,082

7

107,857

105,000

10.1-20 years

60,000

160,000

26,496

16

110,244

105,000

More than 20 years

Coordinator

Director

More than 20 years

98,000

250,000

50,359

8

129,500

110,500

Educator/instructor

More than 20 years

125,000

125,000

—

1

125,000

125,000

Green Belt

3.1-6 years

68,000

68,000

—

1

68,000

68,000

3.1-6 years

42,000

65,000

16,263

2

53,500

53,500

More than 20 years

30,000

42,000

8,485

2

36,000

36,000

Inspector

Table 2 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees,    U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Salaries are noted in Canadian dollars.

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 43

Salary by years in quality and job title for Canadian respondents  /  Table 2 (CONTINUED) Minimum

Maximum

Standard deviation

Count

Mean

Median

$31,200

$133,500

$41,953

4

$78,925

$75,500

3.1-6 years

52,500

132,000

23,380

9

86,234

81,000

6.1-10 years

50,000

135,000

25,250

18

96,700

101,500

10.1-20 years

60,000

150,000

17,940

44

91,423

90,000

More than 20 years

55,000

250,000

34,242

43

102,345

90,000

1-3 years

55,000

55,000

—

1

55,000

55,000

10.1-20 years

42,000

42,000

—

1

42,000

42,000

None

56,000

56,000

—

1

56,000

56,000

6.1-10 years

74,000

77,000

2,121

2

75,500

75,500

10.1-20 years

48,000

115,000

47,376

2

81,500

81,500

1-3 years Manager

Other

Process/ manufacturing/ project engineer

Quality engineer

Reliability/safety engineer Software quality engineer

Specialist

Supervisor

Supplier quality engineer/ professional

More than 20 years

90,000

120,000

16,773

3

100,667

92,000

None

90,000

90,000

—

1

90,000

90,000

Less than 1 year

62,000

62,000

—

1

62,000

62,000

1-3 years

65,000

65,000

—

1

65,000

65,000

3.1-6 years

58,000

60,000

1,414

2

59,000

59,000

6.1-10 years

45,984

94,000

16,293

9

66,920

64,800

10.1-20 years

45,000

110,000

17,826

18

71,639

70,000

More than 20 years

47,000

150,000

29,945

14

91,516

88,113

3.1-6 years

60,000

60,000

—

1

60,000

60,000

6.1-10 years

95,000

95,000

—

1

95,000

95,000

10.1-20 years

88,500

95,000

3,753

3

92,833

95,000

10.1-20 years

102,000

105,000

2,121

2

103,500

103,500

1-3 years

55,000

60,000

3,536

2

57,500

57,500

3.1-6 years

47,000

88,000

17,676

5

68,300

68,000

6.1-10 years

45,000

185,000

46,318

7

82,357

68,000

10.1-20 years

43,000

110,000

21,280

9

75,262

70,000

More than 20 years

50,000

125,000

23,396

8

74,250

71,500

Less than 1 year

90,000

90,000

—

1

90,000

90,000

6.1-10 years

55,000

78,000

10,616

5

62,800

56,000

10.1-20 years

53,000

94,150

14,925

9

69,294

70,000

More than 20 years

50,000

100,000

22,938

6

75,167

78,000

3.1-6 years

56,000

83,000

19,092

2

69,500

69,500

6.1-10 years

63,000

63,000

—

1

63,000

63,000

10.1-20 years

76,000

85,000

6,364

2

80,500

80,500

Table 2 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees,    U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Salaries are noted in Canadian dollars.

44 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

2013

QP Salary

Salary by years in quality and job title for Canadian respondents  /  Table 2 (CONTINUED) 1-3 years Technician

Minimum

Maximum

Standard deviation

Count

Mean

Median

$35,000

$65,000

$15,695

3

$47,333

$42,000

3.1-6 years

52,000

67,000

6,652

4

57,250

55,000

6.1-10 years

50,000

75,000

17,678

2

62,500

62,500

10.1-20 years

38,000

65,000

9,051

10

52,450

52,000

More than 20 years Vice president/ executive

Survey

38,000

40,000

1,414

2

39,000

39,000

3.1-6 years

186,000

186,000

—

1

186,000

186,000

6.1-10 years

100,000

145,600

25,009

3

116,867

105,000

More than 20 years

100,000

100,000

—

1

100,000

100,000

Table 2 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees,    U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Salaries are noted in Canadian dollars.

Part 1. Regular Employee Results Section 4. Salary by ASQ and Exemplar Global Certification

Certifiably Valuable

I

In North America, 58.2% of respondents to QP’s salary survey held at least one ASQ certification. Table 1 (p. 46) shows the two certifications held by most respondents are certified quality auditor (23.9%) and certified quality engineer (22%).

Salary by number of ASQ certifications held by U.S. respondents / Figure 1

Table 2 (p. 46) highlights the value of the quality engi-

a job title of quality engineer report that holding the certification brings them a 10.2% higher paycheck. For those with a title of process/manufacturing/project engineer, the premium is even greater, at 12.4%. Each year, these premiums appear for different combinations of certification and job title, and they appear to vary from year to year. In 2011, the annual survey was accompanied by a more rigorous analysis of these premiums, including a careful look at sample sizes and their concomitant levels of statistical significance. Refer to “Land the Big One” in the 2011 report for more details, particularly on how to use certifications strategically in your career.

Sponsored by

$150,000 Average salary

neer certification to some of those who hold it. Those with

$100,000

108,264

85,454

87,948

92,866

96,956

96,046

98,094

None (41.8%)

One (33.9%)

Two (13.9%)

Three (6.1%)

Four (2.8%)

Five Six or more (0.7%) (0.8%)

$50,000 0

Number of ASQ certifications (percentage of respondents) Figure 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees

December 2013 • QP 45

Table 3 shows the number of holders of Exemplar Global (formerly RABQSA International) certifications. Note that there are 72 RABQSA cer-

Percentage of respondents holding ASQ certifications  /  Table 1

tifications, and in any given year, many of them will

2013

2011

2009

2007

Certified quality auditor

23.9%

24.1%

24.9%

23.3%

Certified quality engineer

22.0

22.8

22.6

23.9

they hold. In most years, a similar chart shows

Certified manager of quality/ organizational excellence

12.7

13.7

12.8

12.3

a steady upward trend in salaries with a higher

Certified Six Sigma Black Belt

8.3

7.9

7.1

6.9

Certified quality technician

7.6

7.4

7.2

7.7

Certified Six Sigma Green Belt

7.2

5.7

4.0

2.8

Certified quality improvement associate

4.1

4.2

4.3

3.5

Certified quality inspector

3.5

3.8

3.7

3.9

points and may be skewed downward by a few low

Certified reliability engineer

2.7

2.9

2.3

2.7

salaries.

Certified software quality engineer

2.1

2.0

2.3

2.8

not appear among the QP salary survey’s responses. Figure 1 (p. 45) shows average salaries for U.S. respondents by the number of ASQ certifications

number of certifications. This year there’s a blip: Holders of four certifications show slightly lower average salaries than holders of three certifications, but only 2.8% of respondents hold four certifications. This is a relatively small number of data

Certified quality process analyst

1.6

1.2

0.9

0.6

95% of the total, are represented by the first four

Certified biomedical auditor

1.2

1.1

0.9

0.6

columns, which are the most statistically significant

Certified calibration technician

1.6

1.1

1.0

1.0

columns in this chart.

Certified haccp auditor

1.2

1.1

0.8

0.7

Certified Six Sigma Master Black Belt

0.6

0.6

—

—

The bulk of respondents, making up more than

Table 4 (pp. 48-49) shows average salaries for U.S. respondents by job title and ASQ certification held. Table 5 (pp. 50-51) shows the same information for Canadian respondents.

Certified pharmaceutical gmp professional None

0.5

0.3

0.1

—

41.7

42.4

42.2

44.4

Table 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees, x Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees GMP = good manufacturing practice HACCP = hazard analysis and critical control point

Differences in salary for ASQ certification  Job title Calibration technician

Certification Certified calibration technician

/  Table 2

Average with certification

Average without certification

Salary premium

Percentage premium

$57,055

$47,280

$9,776

20.7%

Inspector

Certified quality technician

54,785

49,655

5,130

10.3

Auditor

Certified quality engineer

92,181

75,751

16,430

21.7

Quality engineer

Certified quality engineer

83,615

75,852

7,764

10.2

Auditor

Certified Six Sigma Black Belt

97,000

77,299

19,701

25.5

Quality engineer

Certified reliability engineer

97,374

78,965

18,410

23.3

Process/manufacturing/project engineer

Certified quality engineer

93,625

83,274

10,351

12.4

Supplier quality engineer/professional

Certified Six Sigma Black Belt

106,874

84,665

22,209

26.2

Supplier quality engineer/professional

Certified quality process analyst

93,917

85,951

7,966

9.3

Software quality engineer

Certified software quality engineer

100,739

93,837

6,902

7.4

Auditor

Certified quality process analyst

116,560

106,837

9,723

9.1

Table 2 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Because U.S. and Canadian employees are being viewed together, Canadian salaries have been converted to U.S. dollars using the exchange rate in effect July 1.

46 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

Money Talks How has attaining certifications helped you succeed?

“

My ASQ certifications have opened doors for me and shown a commitment to quality that goes beyond just

”

QP Salary 2013



Survey

showing up for work.

Tim McLaughlin, senior quality systems specialist, Medtronic Advanced Energy

Percentage of respondents holding Exemplar Global certifications  /  Table 3 Certification

Percentage

Certification

Percentage

Quality management system (QMS) lead auditor

5.60%

HACCP practitioner lead auditor

0.05

Internal auditor

4.16

QMS auditor

2.09

Information security management systems auditor

0.05

AS9100 auditor

1.69

Laboratory lead assessor

0.05

Environmental system lead auditor

0.96

OHS associate auditor

0.05

HACCP practitioner associate auditor

0.03

Management system certification body principal auditor

0.03

QMS business improvement auditor

0.03

Responsible care management systems auditor

0.03

Aged care professional

0.02

CALA laboratory lead assessor

0.02

Environmental system associate auditor

0.02

RABQSA integrated process control (IPC) quality management systems lead auditor

0.70

QMS provisional auditor

0.53

Environmental system auditor

0.43

AS9100 aerospace experience auditor

0.40

AS9100 aerospace industry experienced auditor

0.38

Management system certification body lead auditor

0.33

Occupational health and safety (OHS) lead auditor

0.30

Environmental system principal auditor

0.02

AS9110 auditor

0.25

Food safety principal auditor

0.02

QMS associate auditor

0.25

Food safety provisional auditor

0.02

RABQSA IPC quality management systems auditor

0.23

Food safety auditor

0.18

HACCP practitioner business improvement auditor

0.02

QMS principal auditor

0.18

0.02

AS9110 aerospace experience auditor

0.15

Management system certification business improvement

HACCP practitioner auditor

0.15

OHS provisional auditor

0.02

OHS auditor

0.15

Professional trainers

0.02

Food safety lead auditor

0.13

Responsible care management systems lead auditor

0.02

Skill examiner

0.13

None

APIQ auditor

0.10

Management system certification body auditor

0.10

AS91100 aerospace industry experienced auditor

0.08

Laboratory assessor

0.08

ISO 50001 auditor

0.08

Management consultant

0.07

Management system certification body provisional auditor

0.07

Sponsored by

86.15

Table 3 includes results for: x Full-time employees, x Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees, x Canadian employees, x International employees APIQ = Australian Pork Industry Quality Assurance Program CALA = C  anadian Association of Environmental Analytical Laboratories HACCP = hazard analysis and critical control point

December 2013 • QP 47

Salary by ASQ certification and job title for U.S. respondents  /  Table 4 (Continued on P. 49) Certified Certified biomedical calibration auditor technician

Certified HACCP auditor

Certified Certified pharmaceu­ manager of tical GMP quality ­professional

Certified quality auditor

Certified quality engineer

Certified quality improvement associate

United States $110,65775

$67,62590

$97,99364

$106,456711

69,000

45,000

1

—

95,702

—

75,0001

—

94,004

—

71,275

Black Belt

—

118,5002

—

94,89111

—

Calibration technician

—

56,84420

—

—

—

All respondents Analyst

2

Associate Auditor

6

8

9

$111,66925 —

$91,1701,352 $95,8561,225 79,376

26

81,351

25

$73,550238 57,11916

78,0001

56,0001

64,2449

78,0001

47,4297

77,347

93,075

79,073

92,080

20

83,7339

89,77411

92,71315

82,0001

35,5002

—

41,5002

4

Champion

—

—

—

245,0003

—

112,0001

110,86221

132,5002

116,19929

115,20721

94,6495

Coordinator

—

50,0003

—

68,1878

—

62,46632

58,72810

55,78514

137,88513

65,8151

125,48015

127,450142

163,5002

117,539132

124,59195

108,48823

Educator/instructor

—

—

—

87,483

3

—

—

Green Belt

—

62,0001

—

Inspector

42,000

50,000

—

Manager

107,88824

81,08223

87,36030

Master Black Belt

—

—

—

115,0289

—

Other

—

—

68,000

Process/manufacturing/ project engineer

—

—

—

Quality engineer

90,74713

74,62912

86,5002

Reliability/safety engineer

—

—

—

106,0638

—

99,9459

103,65526

111,0001

Software quality engineer

—

—

—

104,3135

—

97,51312

95,2736

92,5002

Specialist

105,6673

70,0003

75,0001

91,36022

103,2502

77,56091

95,18732

62,32922

Supervisor

32,0001

62,2504

86,7101

88,46213

—

74,22636

84,95935

64,43614

Supplier quality engineer/professional

91,3937

—

—

92,88625

130,5001

89,93075

91,30280

79,0003

Technician

70,0001

49,00815

54,0001

52,7682

—

49,63020

57,77310

61,35517

160,0003

149,12524

140,0001

153,76828

173,57427

Vice president/executive

— 1

200,0001

—

55,000

2

108,828

2

101,000

2

110,0001

2

1

104,359285

—

2

135,000

117,400

1

5

60,5004

78,5002

73,5002

62,0001

65,510

50,667

37,5285

16

96,118410

3

80,41341

117,8686

119,10414

—

—

72,333

86,857

51,0004

112,50911

—

99,85715

93,39448

65,2005

91,82088

76,3412

83,422243

84,406425

77,80340

6

7

Table 4 includes results for: x Full-time employees, x Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees Superscript number denote the number of respondents. GMP = good manufacturing practice HACCP = hazard analysis and critical control point

In North America, the two certifications held by most respondents are certified quality auditor (23.9% of respondents) and certified quality engineer (22%).

48 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

—

100,094317

3

114,17510

120,125

140

Consultant Director

105,000

17

155,5002

2013

QP Salary Survey

Salary by ASQ certification and job title for U.S. respondents  /  Table 4 (Continued) Certified quality inspector

Certified Certified Certified Certified Certified Certified quality Six Sigma quality reliability Six Sigma Six Sigma process Master technician engineer Green Belt Black Belt analyst Black Belt

$74,921199

$74,40785

Analyst

43,3333

60,94210

51,3336

99,1254

70,58014

76,89118

—

Associate

27,0001

25,0001

35,0002

—

92,5003

—

—

Auditor

80,820

88,183

—

57,700

—

Certified software quality engineer

None

United States All respondents

Black Belt Calibration technician Champion Consultant Coordinator

5

141,833

3

$71,090407 $117,781156

6

$86,301405 $104,402472 $128,82733 $110,535122 $85,4542,348

5

80,7005

69,76787

—

54,79227

85,800

114,000

1

73,07270

1

103,0001

72,0001

103,0001

128,8754

92,5817

96,63066

—

105,6673

89,21045

52,625

—

47,750

—

—

—

—

—

47,12421

—

—

—

—

—

4

175,000

2

62,4297

6

72,526

5

51,7496

119,000

2

48,6119

131,917

6

—

138,0001

115,6282

—

99,192

102,216

—

13

60,6649

107,0001

126,800

—

—

126,313

148,322

Educator/instructor

115,0001

115,0001

120,5002

106,0001

Green Belt

—

45,0001

—

—

Inspector

50,767

20,000

54,785

—

Manager

86,32247

75,93314

79,964104

—

90,000

92,000

86,817

Other

55,0001

55,0001

54,0104

105,3333

49,7008

81,2876

Process/manufacturing/ project engineer

78,7333

77,0001

72,5717

115,0176

83,08728

Quality engineer

73,52648

74,83315

71,970103

97,37419

74,00195

Reliability/safety engineer

—

—

—

112,75743

98,6254

105,2005

—

109,5373

93,09628

Software quality engineer

—

70,0001

120,8001

104,5754

111,0002

110,8333

—

100,71342

91,64625

80,61315

91,6899

124,3333

—

70,343136

95,687

85,300

10

Master Black Belt

18

1

1

16

1

13

35

122,5002

3

88,47328

73,37522

—

—

—

74,46414

46,000

—

—

—

46,43749 87,766652

108,667

3

58,97716

Supervisor

62,740

57,250

67,259

Supplier quality engineer/professional

84,3336

93,9173

82,29020

111,4855

93,68015

Technician

46,26320

50,2682

49,07265

—

38,0297

Vice president/executive

150,000

2

158,333

3

100,000

1

116,6236

94,26699

62,1909

19

99,000

176,143

1

7

123,298269

—

67,97614

4

9

—

Specialist

5

10

124,5002

2

118,17531

60

144,798

59,37273

108,000

16

140,000

105,05048

122,236

2

130,365

87,6756 5

Director

11

115,464

14

144,714

9

7

110,197110

121,8005

117,99128

120,657

126,450

—

123,76124

—

—

71,27235

92,23938

77,0001

103,3333

84,54761

83,83068

86,0001

34

10

91,40313

75,570348

—

1

92,000

72,26879

106,87413

—

115,7502

79,69464

55,2682

—

55,5361

48,80393

156,545

11

178,000

2

162,333

6

153,86666

Table 4 includes results for: x Full-time employees, x Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees Superscript number denote the number of respondents.

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP

49

Salary by ASQ certification and job title for Canadian respondents  /  Table 5 (Continued on P. 51) Certified calibration technician

Certified HACCP auditor

Certified manager of quality

Certified pharmaceutical GMP professional

Certified quality auditor

Certified quality engineer

Certified quality improvement associate

Certified quality inspector

$73,0005

$56,8138

$96,62256

$87,5004

$84,05383

$83,27796

$83,54710

$66,10010

65,000

—

87,167

—

60,719

78,333

Associate

—

50,0001

—

—

Auditor

—

—

Black Belt

Canada All respondents Analyst

1

3

100,000

1

89,000

1

2

3

150,000

1

65,0001

68,0002

60,0001

—

—

84,920

95,5504

—

—

1

—

—

—

—

—

—

61,0002

—

—

—

—

50,0001

—

Champion

—

—

—

—

—

67,774

Consultant

—

69,0001

—

—

94,0002

116,0001

—

Coordinator

—

49,750

51,000

1

—

75,000

—

45,000

Director

—

—

131,4867

—

105,9006

125,0003

130,0001

—

Educator/instructor

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Green Belt

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Inspector

—

—

—

—

—

42,0001

—

65,0001

Manager

89,0002

81,0001

96,98825

87,0003

95,85223

90,51631

90,3502

80,0001

Other

—

—

—

—

—

—

42,0001

—

Process/manufacturing/ project engineer

—

—

90,0001

—

108,3333

98,8005

—

90,0001

Quality engineer

—

—

75,2867

—

73,40213

74,55125

75,0001

68,6673

Reliability/safety engineer

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Software quality engineer

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Specialist

—

45,0002

82,3715

—

71,8339

78,2867

—

50,0001

Supervisor

—

65,0001

92,0003

—

77,6676

84,5002

—

—

Supplier quality engineer/professional

—

—

—

—

—

84,0002

85,0001

—

Technician

—

—

—

—

46,2504

53,1258

60,0001

40,0001

Vice president/executive

—

—

—

—

—

—

Calibration technician

101,387

2

2

145,600

1

115,000

10 1

2

115,000

145,600

1

Table 5 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees,    U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Salaries are noted in Canadian dollars. Superscript numbers denote number of respondents. GMP = good manufacturing practice HACCP = hazard analysis and critical control point

Those with a job title of quality engineer report that holding the ASQ quality engineer certification brings them a 10.2% higher paycheck. For those with a title of process/manufacturing/project engineer, the premium is even greater—at 12.4%. 50 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

— 1

— —

1

65,0001

2013

QP Salary Survey

Salary by ASQ certification and job title for Canadian respondents  /  Table 5 (Continued) Certified quality process analyst

Certified quality technician

Certified reliability engineer

Certified Six Sigma Green Belt

Certified Six Sigma Black Belt

Certified Six Sigma Master Black Belt

Certified software quality engineer

None

$63,5258

$70,36750

$86,1005

$78,55329

$95,02625

$130,0001

$97,3333

$87,663149

Analyst

—

72,500

—

67,500

83,667

—

—

69,7728

Associate

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Canada All respondents

Auditor

42,000

1

Black Belt

—

—

Calibration technician

—

50,000

Champion

—

—

Consultant

—

Coordinator

37,500

2

1

— 2

2

3

—

—

52,2504

—

1

100,000

—

—

110,2003

—

100,0001

115,0001

—

—

130,0001

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

87,6001

—

—

—

117,5002

—

—

2

58,000

—

66,000

—

—

—

63,36810

1

Director

—

115,0002

—

90,0001

90,0001

130,0001

—

111,65819

Educator/instructor

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

125,0001

Green Belt

—

—

—

—

—

Inspector

—

—

—

Manager

93,7001

84,40911

Other

—

Process/manufacturing/ project engineer

—

—

68,0001

—

1

42,000

—

—

36,0002

85,0001

103,3867

119,8336

—

93,5002

95,17755

—

—

—

—

—

—

55,0001

—

76,6673

—

83,0002

96,0002

—

—

56,0001

Quality engineer

75,0001

76,0549

—

67,7488

89,6676

—

—

72,80010

Reliability/safety engineer

—

—

92,8333

—

—

—

—

77,5002

Software quality engineer

—

—

—

—

—

—

105,0001

102,0001

Specialist

81,2502

60,9523

—

64,2853

78,1673

—

—

86,05010

Supervisor

—

65,4297

—

58,7502

94,1501

—

—

66,3336

Supplier quality engineer/professional

—

—

—

85,0001

—

—

—

65,0003

60,0001

49,35010

67,0001

60,0001

—

—

—

54,0004

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

122,7504

Technician Vice president/executive

Table 5 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees,    U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Salaries are noted in Canadian dollars. Superscript numbers denote number of respondents.

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 51

Part 1. Regular Employee Results Section 5. Salary by Six Sigma Training

Rewards for Master Black Belts

Y

Year after year, QP’s salary survey demonstrates it pays to get Six Sigma train-

Salary by Six Sigma training / Figure 1

ing. As Figure 1 shows, U.S. respondents

$100,000

who’ve completed any level of Six Sigma

$90,000

training earn $16,826 more on average than those without any Six Sigma training. For Canadian respondents, that difference is $5,524. Beginning in 2010, we showed the average salaries for holders of Six Sigma training in a multiyear historical view, as

$80,000 $70,000 $60,000

$20,000

come from receiving Master Black Belt (MBB) training. This year, the premium for MBBs over holders of the Black Belt (BB)

Has completed at least one Six Sigma training program

$40,000

there are always minor variations from

pattern is the large benefit that seems to

Hasn’t completed any Six Sigma training

$50,000

$30,000

tent. An especially notable part of this

87,953 82,429

80,790

we do again in Figures 2 and 3. Although year to year, the pattern remains consis-

97,616

$10,000 0

U.S. respondents

Canadian respondents

Figure 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Canadian salaries are noted in Canadian dollars.

is $25,583 ($124,661 vs. $99,078). The BB itself is already valuable, bringing $18,709 more for its U.S. holders vs. respondents without and Six Sigma training ($99,078 vs. $80,369). These differences are shown in tabular format in Table 1.

Salary by highest level of Six Sigma training for U.S. respondents / Figure 2 81,477

None (52.8%)

79,258 80,369

Table 2 (p. 54) breaks down salaries by Six Sigma training and job title for

85,642

Green Belt (23.1%)

86,373

full-time professionals in the United

89,672

States and Canada. Along with the average salary in each cell, the superscripted

95,954

Black Belt (18.2%)

98,489 99,078

number shows how many respondents fit that category.

Figure 2 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees,    Canadian employees,    International employees

117,222

Master Black Belt (4.1%)

119,335 124,661 115,286

Champion (0.98%)

128,203 124,296 126,241

Executive (0.90%)

126,735 137,192

0

$20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 Average salary 2011

52 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

2012

2013

2013

QP Salary

Years of quality experience (percentage of respondents)

Salary by highest level of Six Sigma training for Canadian respondents / Figure 3 More than 20 years (26%)

Survey

95,240

10.1-20 years (38.6%)

84,403

6.1-10 years (17.9%)

83,711

3.1-6 years (9.9%)

71,735

1-3 years (5.9%)

65,327

Less than 1 year (1.1%)

66,125

None (0.5%)

73,000

0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

Average salary Figure 3 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees,    U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees

Salary differences with successive levels of Six Sigma training  /  TABLE 1

Money Talks

Champion (1.1%)

(4,350)

(9,994)

(1,937)

8,869

(366)

Master Black Belt (3.6%)

21,980

27,384

21,268

20,846

25,583

Besides or in addition to certification, what quality-related training have you completed? How has this advanced your career?

Black Belt (17.7%)

9,040

8,951

10,312

12,116

9,406

Attending my local chapter

Green Belt (22.7%)

4,763

7,306

4,166

7,115

9,303

—

—

—

—

—

Executive (0.1%)

(6,613)

6,000

Champion (0%)

(10,244)

(9,889) (15,564)

36,400

15,875

42,062

16,114

2009 Executive (0.7%)

United States



None (47.9%)

2010

2011

$8,802 $11,860 $10,955

2012

($1,469) $12,897

(3,750) (54,071)

11,667

Master Black Belt Canada (0.1%) Black Belt (0.8%)

30,894

14,265

12,683

13,294

7,486

1,727

13,205

Green Belt (1.4%)

2,510

4,303

7,085

10,300

(2,316)

—

—

—

—

—

None (3.8%)

11,220

2013

“

meetings has put me in touch with other quality

professionals whose advice and experiences have been helpful.

Lynne Sheets, quality system manager, Lucigen Corp.

”

Table 1 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Canadian salaries are noted in Canadian dollars. Numbers in parentheses following the training levels indicate percentage of respondents.

Sponsored by

December 2013 • QP 53

Salary by Six Sigma training for job titles  United States All respondents Analyst Associate Auditor Black Belt Calibration technician Champion Consultant Coordinator Director Educator/instructor Green Belt Inspector Manager Master Black Belt Other Process/manufacturing/project engineer Quality engineer Reliability/safety engineer Software quality engineer Specialist Supervisor Supplier quality engineer/professional Technician Vice president/executive Canada All respondents Analyst Associate Auditor Black Belt Calibration technician Champion Consultant Coordinator Director Educator/instructor Green Belt Inspector Manager Other Process/manufacturing/project engineer Quality engineer Reliability/safety engineer Software quality engineer Specialist Supervisor Supplier quality engineer/professional Technician Vice president/executive

/  Table 2

None

Green Belt

Black Belt

Master Black Belt

Champion

Executive

$80,3692,731 63,79199 52,38937 73,535162 90,0002 51,11342 102,0505 109,93050 56,34693 118,891235 84,31327 69,5002 49,79382 85,323736 — 69,51732 84,70354 75,339399 100,94138 95,12143 68,729186 69,645103 82,38384 48,742158 147,58562

$89,6721,293 71,42936 83,4176 85,31841 83,6254 62,5002 80,0001 103,55227 70,80533 120,889110 92,9384 74,15035 60,2005 96,737364 95,2501 57,59315 78,44744 80,908311 108,64325 105,05915 79,51454 81,08539 86,70273 47,38727 142,65521

$99,0781,011 84,45236 — 111,8005 92,451112 — 88,7504 102,73330 72,3628 126,713138 94,5005 57,2502 50,0001 102,924275 105,8568 90,49513 92,25757 84,783188 101,02619 106,5905 91,46627 83,57523 94,35335 37,4005 147,73315

$124,661203 81,0001 — 111,9333 105,07210 — 169,0501 165,86411 — 135,97439 135,0002 — — 114,14938 121,10363 97,0002 126,0004 106,16714 85,4001 96,0001 129,0002 90,7681 124,7502 — 167,6258

$124,29663 61,9004 — — — 38,0001 93,2561 125,6501 — 150,13020 95,0001 — — 117,73921 124,5002 — 91,0003 127,7504 — — 78,0001 — — — 161,2504

$137,19241 — — — — — — — — 125,91714 — — 58,0001 124,9969 125,0001 — 82,0001 — — 97,8001 45,0001 79,0001 75,0001 — 197,75311

$82,121217 69,3469 52,3336 93,46010 — 61,0002 77,6872 101,5004 56,54017 109,67722 125,0001 — 47,5002 94,22570 48,5002 56,0001 74,44321 77,5002 105,0001 64,90015 67,90911 56,0001 52,69213 127,3205

$79,80677 73,5002 90,0001 42,0001 100,0001 — — 86,0001 66,0001 — — 68,0001 42,0001 93,39627 — 82,0002 71,32014 95,0001 102,0001 78,4849 65,6437 76,7504 50,0003 —

$93,01147 83,6673 — 100,0001 130,0001 — 135,0001 — 80,0001 106,1676 — — 42,0001 107,21411 — 72,3333 88,3339 — — 91,5836 94,1501 — 53,8333 —

$109,1258 — — — 115,0001 — — — — 127,5002 — — — 97,0004 — 115,0001 — — — — — — — —

$125,0002 — — — — — — — — 130,0001 — — — 120,0001 — — — — — — — — — —

$136,6673 — — — — — — — — 250,0001 — — — 100,0001 — — 60,0001 — — — — — — —

Table 2 includes results for: x Full-time employees,    Part‑time employees, x U.S. employees, x Canadian employees,    International employees Canadian salaries are noted in Canadian dollars. Superscript numbers denote the number of respondents.

54 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Sponsored by

OFFICE USE ONLY

Membership Application

MBKDF32 PRIORITY CODE _______________________ Order Number ________________________



Member Number ______________________

Industry: ❑ Healthcare ❑ Service ❑ Government ❑ Education ❑ Male ❑ Female ❑ Manufacturing

Preferred Mailing Address: ❑ Home ❑ Mr. ❑ Ms. ❑ Mrs. ❑ Dr.

❑ Business

/ / Date of Birth _________________________________ M

D

1

Member Type: ❑ Full $143

2

The one geographic Section included with Full membership will be determined by your primary address.*

Y

____________________________________________________________________ First Name Middle Initial Last Name/Family Name

____________________________________________________________________ City, State/Province Zip+4/Postal Code Country ____________________________________________________________________ Home Address Apt./Ste. ____________________________________________________________________ City, State/Province Zip+4/Postal Code Country ____________________________________________________________________ Area Code/Business Telephone Area Code/Home Telephone ____________________________________________________________________ Preferred Email Address Fax

Which one of the following best describes your title? ❑ Accountant ❑ Administrator ❑ Advisor ❑ Analyst ❑ Associate ❑ Auditor ❑ CEO ❑ Chemist ❑ Clinician ❑ Consultant

❑ Contractor ❑ Controller/ Comptroller ❑ Coordinator ❑ Director ❑ Engineer ❑ Facilitator ❑ Foreman ❑ General Manager

❑ Inspector ❑ Instructor ❑ Machinist ❑ Manager ❑ Mechanic ❑ Nurse ❑ Owner ❑ Physician ❑ President ❑ Principal

❑ Professor ❑ Programmer ❑ Retired ❑ Scientist ❑ Six Sigma Black Belt ❑ Six Sigma Green Belt ❑ Specialist ❑ Statistician

❑ Student ❑ Superintendent ❑ Teacher ❑ Technician ❑ Unemployed ❑ Other

cccc cccc cccc

Contact ASQ to change your assigned Section.

3

Forum or Division Selection As part of your Full membership you receive participation in one topic- or industry-specific Forum or Division. Use the list below to indicate the Forum or Division number and name. included _____ ______________________ $______________ (#) Name Additional Forums and Divisions may be added to all levels of membership. Please indicate in the list below the additional Forums or Divisions you would like and total the number you have selected. ❑ Audit (19) ❑ Automotive (3) ❑ Aviation, Space and Defense (2) ❑ Biomedical (10) ❑ Chemical and Process Industries (4) ❑ Customer-Supplier (15) ❑ Design and Construction (20) ❑ Education (21) ❑ Electronics and Communications (5) ❑ Energy and Environmental (11) ❑ Food, Drug, and Cosmetic (7) ❑ Government (22) ❑ Healthcare (18)

❑ Human Development and Leadership (13) ❑ Inspection (9) ❑ Lean Enterprise (23) ❑ Measurement Quality (17) ❑ Product Safety and Liability Prevention (25) ❑ Quality Management (1) ❑ Reliability (8) ❑ Service Quality (16) ❑ Six Sigma (26) ❑ Software (14) ❑ Statistics (12) ❑ Team & Workplace Excellence (27) Additional Forum and Division selections: Full or Associate member ________ x $10 = $________________________ total

Total of all items (1-3):



Mailing Lists ❑ Occasionally ASQ shares its mailing list with carefully selected quality-related organizations to provide you with information on products and services. Please check this circle if you do not wish to receive these mailings.

Payment Information ❑ Check or money order (U.S. dollars drawn on a U.S. bank) Make check payable to ASQ. ❑ MasterCard

Member Referred By: _______________________ Member Number

❑ Visa

❑ American Express   (Check one)

____________________________________________________________________ Cardholder’s Name (please print) ______________________________________________ Card Number

WHY DID YOU JOIN? To help us understand what’s important to you, please tell us the top three reasons why you became an ASQ member. ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑

Career Development Certification Pricing In-person Networking Involvement in ASQ’s Cause Involvement in SRO Knowledge/Information Leadership Opportunities O  nline Networking/Communities Product Discounts Training

$ _________

Please submit your application with remittance to:

ASQ does not sell email addresses to third parties.

_____________________________________ Member Name

$___________________

Sections (geographic) may be added to any member type for an additional $20.00 each. Visit www.asq.org for a listing of available Sections. , , _ $_______ Sections

____________________________________________________________________ Company Name Job Title ____________________________________________________________________ Business Address Ste.

❑ Associate $85

___________________ Exp. Date

______________________________________________ Cardholder’s Signature ____________________________________________________________________ Cardholder’s Address

ASQ P.O. Box 3066 Milwaukee, WI 53201-3066 USA or fax to 414-272-1734.

You may also join online at www.asq.org or by calling ASQ Customer Care at USA and Canada: 800-248-1946 Mexico: 001-800-514-1564 All other locations: +1-414-272-8575

New memberships are effective upon receipt of payment. New members receive one year of membership from the date they join. Members are billed prior to the anniversary date of their membership for next year’s dues. Memberships, even those paid by employers, are nontransferable. All prices are subject to change. In becoming an ASQ member, you have the duty to follow the ASQ Code of Ethics and Society governing documents.

The Service Quality

platform A 5-step framework that lays the foundation for building a service quality program In 50 Words Or Less

• Compared to manufacturing, service quality can be difficult to define and measure. • A five-step framework helps service organizations establish customer needs, define quality, measure customer satisfaction, specify standards and develop performance measures. • The framework alone won’t solve quality problems, but it serves as the foundation for establishing continuous improvement initiatives.

after encountering indifferent and often rude employees on my visits to a local bagel restaurant, I wrote to the president of the organization, which is a national chain. In this restaurant, a customer joins a line, places his or her order, receives it and then pays the cashier. In my letter, I suggested to the president that a reasonable minimum service standard would require the server to greet a customer with, “May I help you?” while the server and cashier would end each service by saying, “Thank you” or “Have a nice day.” I told the president if that were the standard, I had never seen it met. In other words, if each service not meeting the standard was classified as unacceptable—or in manufacturing terms, nonconforming or defective—in my experience, this restaurant was delivering service that was 100% defective.

SERVICE QUALITY

by Arthur J. Swersey

December 2013 • QP 57

Compared to manufacturing, in service organizations it

from faculty; access to recruiters and to faculty for ex-

is harder to define and more difficult to measure quality.

tra course help and career counseling; and a reliable

The restaurant, like many service organizations, did not

and useful IT system.

specify service standards, and without them, had no way to

• Patients require: timely access to physicians, nurses

measure service quality. The quality of a product, such as a

and staff to schedule appointments and receive test re-

toaster, can be defined in terms of its features, performance

sults; notification of due dates for regularly scheduled

and ease of use, but how do you define the quality of a visit

tests and procedures such as mammograms and blood

to the doctor or the quality of an educational program?

tests; and physicians and staff members who listen and

Because of these difficulties, the approach to quality

provide simple and clear explanations.

management in many service organizations is informal and unstructured. The result is service that is highly vari-

Define quality, create a quality statement

able, inconsistent at best and uniformly poor at worst.

Defining quality for a service organization requires identi-

Quality can’t be improved if it isn’t being measured.

fying the key or critical dimensions that contribute to the

Service organizations need a structured approach to

organization’s success. A restaurant’s list of key quality di-

quality—a framework for defining and analyzing their

mensions would include:

quality programs and systems. The proposed framework

• Food: ingredients, preparation and serving temperature.

consists of five steps:

• Service: speed, accuracy, friendliness and knowledge of

1. Identifying customers and determining their needs. 2. Defining quality and creating a quality statement. 3. Measuring customer satisfaction.

servers. • Atmosphere: comfort, ambience, noise level, and cleanliness in bathrooms and throughout the establishment.

4. Specifying service standards.

• Access to and reliability of reservation system.

5. Developing key quality and performance measures.

Key dimensions for an educational program would include:

Determine customer needs

• Knowledge and capability of students.

Focusing on customer needs is the first step of the framework and a key element of the Six Sigma approach. A ser1

• Curriculum: range and depth of courses and course content, and teaching effectiveness.

vice organization consists of a web of provider and custom-

• Faculty research: quantity, quality and relevance.

er relationships. A customer of one provider, for example,

• Comfort and accessibility of physical facilities.

may be the provider for other customers, and each provider

• Placement program: number and quality of on-campus

must be dedicated to satisfying his or her customers. Meeting the needs of external customers should be the highest priority. Often, these needs can be determined by surveys, interviews or focus groups, but customers may not be fully aware of their own needs. They

recruiters and effectiveness of career advising process. • Support systems: availability and effectiveness of IT, health services and other support services. • Culture and learning environment. A physician’s office might identify these key dimensions:

may be conditioned to accept the services they receive

• Expertise of doctors, nurses and staff.

without envisioning what is possible or desirable.

• Quality of care provided.

A service organization must be creative in uncovering needs not yet formulated or recognized by its customers. Responding to these unrecognized needs will often surprise and delight customers. One example of responding to unrecognized needs is when a surgeon calls a patient at home a few days after the patient leaves the hospital.

• Patient outcomes. • Personal attention to customers—availability, and responsiveness and timeliness of services. • Comfort and attractiveness of physical facilities. Building on the quality dimensions defined, the next step is to create a quality statement. This is a detailed

The organization should develop an inventory and hi-

document that describes the key aspects of the organiza-

erarchy of customer needs. For example, here are two

tion’s quality philosophy, culture and activities. The lan-

partial lists of customer needs for an educational pro-

guage should be original and imaginative.

gram and a physician’s office.

One organization that has succeeded in accomplishing

• Student customers require: an up-to-date, relevant

this is the Ritz-Carlton Hotel Co., a two-time winner of the

set of courses that are taught effectively; feedback

Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award.2 Its motto, “We

58 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

SERVICE QUALITY

A service organization must be creative in uncovering needs not yet formulated or recognized by its customers. are ladies and gentlemen serving ladies and gentlemen,”

ing environment in which students and faculty challenge

is fresh and evocative. Consider what Ritz-Carlton calls

one another to meet the highest standards of excellence.”

its credo, which is filled with expressive adjectives and phrases that describe a visit to a Ritz-Carlton Hotel:

For a group medical practice, a quality statement might include these words: “We share a commitment and overrid-

The Ritz-Carlton Hotel is a place where the genuine care

ing sense that our patients are our customers, and we dedi-

and comfort of our guests is our highest mission. We

cate ourselves to their health, well-being and satisfaction.

pledge to provide the finest personal service and facilities

Our physicians, nurses and staff members practice state-of-

for our guests, who will always enjoy a warm, relaxed, yet

the-art medicine and deliver it with care, compassion and

refined ambience. The Ritz-Carlton experience enlivens

respect for our patients.”

the senses, instills well-being and fulfills even the unexpressed wishes and needs of our guests.3

Measure customer satisfaction

When I taught in an executive program at one of the

The late Edward Koch, the former mayor of New York

nation’s largest nursing home organizations, I divided

City, recognized the importance of customer feedback

the participants into small groups and asked them to de-

and was famous for stopping constituents in the street

velop a quality statement for the organization. Their task

and asking, “How am I doing?” Service organizations

was not to define quality as it existed at the time, but

need to have the same attitude.

to create a vision for the future. Their initial attempts

Ongoing, objective, accurate and reliable surveys are

lacked emotion and read like marketing brochures for

necessary to adequately measure customer satisfaction.

the organization and its competitors.

For years, researchers and service providers have recog-

I asked the participants what the effect would be of

nized the importance of listening to the customer.

including the statement, “We treat our residents the way

The American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI), de-

we would treat our own parents.” It was clear to every-

veloped by the National Quality Research Center of the Uni-

one that it would set the bar at a high level. It also would

versity of Michigan, is based on annual interviews of about

signify an incredibly strong commitment to quality. In re-

80,000 American consumers. The ratings of organizations

sponse to my encouragement, the group added originality

in the private and public sectors are on a 100-point scale

and passion to its quality statements and created prose

and are updated quarterly and published on a website.4

that led to emotional responses. One group described the organization’s nursing homes as “a great place to live.”

In many cases, surveys are most effective when carried out by independent third parties. But even then, reliability

In the 1980s, mission statements were especially popu-

isn’t guaranteed. For the last two new cars I purchased,

lar. The vast majority of them were similar in style and

the salesperson told me to expect a phone call from a rep-

unoriginal. Many still hang on the walls of hospitals and

resentative at a research organization asking me to take

corporate spaces and, if read, sound hackneyed and worn.

a survey on the service I received at the dealership. The

In contrast to mission statements, quality statements

salesperson said the dealership’s management expected

should be more detailed, fully developed and highly original.

the salespeople to receive the highest, most favorable re-

It takes more than a paragraph or two to define quality and

sponses to each survey question. The magnitude of bias

describe the substance of an organization’s quality activities.

introduced by such coaching is unclear.

The best organizations have a strong culture, and the quality statement should include descriptive phrases about

Develop service standards

it. A quality statement for a school might include the words,

Some time ago I visited an aged friend in a nursing home.

“an open, supportive community with a culture based on

The woman needed help undressing for bed and repeat-

mutual respect, cooperation and communication; a learn-

edly pressed the call button. She became increasingly ag-

December 2013 • QP 59

itated and my attempts to summon help were unsuccess-

might set a goal that at least 95% of students will arrive to

ful. Finally, after about 20 minutes, an aide responded.

class on time, but the actual standard is “arrive on time.”

The next day, I asked the head of the nursing home how

To develop service standards, a firm can begin with

long a resident should have to wait after calling for as-

a fairly short, initial list of key standards that will be ex-

sistance. Her reply was, “not too long.” Clearly the head

panded over time. For example, a healthcare organization’s

of the nursing home had not given much thought to the

list of standards might include: a provider should return a

service she was providing. The vague statement, “not

patient’s call within two hours; a patient should not need to

too long” was of no value. What she needed to do was

wait more than three weeks for an appointment; a doctor in

specify a required response time and then keep track of

a group practice should greet a patient with a smile and a

how well that standard was being met.

friendly remark; and a doctor should end a patient visit with

Standards for a service organization are analogous to

a supportive final comment. Other items might include: a

product specifications for a manufacturing firm. Manu-

nurse in an intensive care unit should follow a prescribed

facturers specify product characteristics such as the

approach when meeting with the patient’s family and pro-

horsepower of an engine, the maximum brightness of a

viding information, and a nursing home resident’s call for

computer screen or the breaking strength of a steel ca-

assistance should be responded to within three minutes.

ble. These specifications are a promise to the customer,

A college might set initial key standards such as: a fac-

and taken together, reflect the overall quality of the prod-

ulty member should be available at least two hours per

uct. Unfortunately, the norm for many service organiza-

week to meet with students outside of class; regular home-

tions is not to have such specifications or standards.

work assignments should be returned within one week; fi-

Consider the manufacture of printed circuit boards used

nal exams should be returned within three days; all course

in a host of electronic products such as televisions, comput-

materials should be clearly photocopied; classes should

ers and automobile antilock braking devices. Specifications

start and end on time; an email from a student to a profes-

define a product that is conforming or acceptable. Each

sional in the career development office should be answered

board must pass an electrical test, meet specifications for

within one day; and computer services should respond to

dimensions and flatness (absence of warping) and pass a

faculty emergency calls within 30 minutes.

visual inspection that identifies other nonelectrical defects. In addition, throughout the manufacturing process,

Develop key quality, performance measures

there are numerous specifications for critical process

Just as a manufacturer must identify critical process and

variables. These include specifications for drilled-hole

product variables, a service organization must define

locations, temperature and chemical compositions of

its critical service measures. For each service standard,

various baths, and copper plating thickness.

there will be a corresponding measure or measures.

The important and general manufacturing concept is to

For example, if the standard is to respond to a nursing

develop capable processes and control them by monitor-

home resident’s call within three minutes, the percentage of

ing critical process variables. The idea is to control the

calls that are responded to within three minutes and the av-

product by controlling the process. Service organizations

erage time to respond to a call are corresponding measures.

would benefit greatly from a similar approach—first de-

Given a standard for telephone etiquette, the fraction of calls

fining the process and then specifying service standards.

that meet the standard should be measured by monitoring

Ritz-Carlton is a good example of an organization that

calls with the knowledge of the callers and employees.

employs numerous service standards. The standards for

Some measures will not correspond to service stan-

telephone etiquette are to answer within three rings and

dards but still involve key variables that should be mea-

with a “smile,” or cheerful tone, and when necessary, to

sured. Examples of these measures include: the percent-

ask the caller, “May I place you on hold?” When talking

age of students who have a job by graduation; average

to guests, employees use phrases such as, “My pleasure,”

student ratings of courses; the fraction of patients who

but they are not limited to a script.5

die after open-heart surgery and the number of nursing

Standards or specifications are different from goals. For

home residents who attend various social activities.

a circuit board maker, having at least 95% of the boards

As with service standards, each entity within the ser-

pass the electrical test is a goal. The standard is for a board

vice organization can begin with a short list of measures

to function electrically. Similarly, a school administrator

to be expanded later. Measures at a college might include:

60 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

SERVICE QUALITY

Just as a manufacturer must identify critical process and product variables, a service organization must define its critical service measures. the percentage of students who have a job at graduation;

problem-solving steps of Six Sigma; statistical control

average salary by sector and industry; the percentage of

charting; failure mode and effects analysis; and design

applicants who are accepted to the college; comparative

of experiments, a tool from manufacturing that is now

ranking of graduates by employers by sector and indus-

being applied to service systems.12

try; various measures of faculty research output; student

Applying the five steps is an ongoing and iterative pro-

ratings of courses and instructors; and the percentage of

cess. Customer satisfaction surveys may reveal unrecog-

students absent from class.

nized needs that lead to a revision of the quality statement,

For a physician’s office, measures might include: the

and the development of new standards and measures.

percentage of target female patients who have a yearly

An organization’s culture is likely to evolve over time,

mammogram; the time from when a patient calls to

and the quality statement should reflect these changes.

speak with a physician until he or she returns the call; av-

Older measures will be discarded and new ones added as

erage waiting time for appointments; the percentage of

an organization grows. New approaches to quality improve-

patients who are satisfied with the service they receive

ment will surface and further revisions will be needed.

when calling for an appointment; and the percentage of patients who rate their office visit as outstanding.

In the midst of this dynamic evolution, however, there must be one constant: an organizationwide belief that quality must be continually improved. QP

The bigger picture This framework relates to broader efforts in the quality community to develop models of service quality. Two notable examples of this effort are work on the service quality body of knowledge (SQBOK),6,7 an initiative undertaken by ASQ Service Quality Division members, and the SERVQUAL model for measuring customer perceptions of service quality.8, 9 One of the papers on SQBOK provides an extensive, useful bibliography of papers on service quality.10 The latest version of the SERVQUAL model has a 22-item rating scale across five dimensions, which include tangibles (facilities, equipment and appearance of personnel), reliability (dependability and accuracy), responsiveness (the degree of prompt and helpful service), assurance (knowledge and courtesy of employees) and empathy (the degree of caring, individualized attention given to customers).11 The five-step framework in this article will not solve problems or improve quality by itself. Rather, it provides a foundation or starting point. The framework sets the stage for the development of a quality program and its process improvement activities, such as: benchmarking; cost of quality analyses; service system design valida-

References 1. Peter S. Pande, Robert P. Neuman and Roland R. Cavanagh, The Six Sigma Way: How GE, Motorola and Other Top Companies Are Honing Their Performance, McGraw Hill, 2000. 2. Sandra J. Sucher and Stacy McManus, “The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company,” Harvard Business School case # 9-601-163, 2005. 3. Ibid., p. 28. 4. The American Customer Satisfaction Index, www.theacsi.org. 5. Sucher, “The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company,” see reference 2, p. 28. 6. Rajesh Tyagi and Jen Piccotti, “A Service Framework,” Quality Progress, October 2012, pp. 40-45. 7. Rajesh Tyagi, Nikhil Varma and Navneet Vidyarthi, “An Integrated Framework for Service Quality: SQBOK Perspective,” Quality Management Journal, Vol. 20, No. 2, 2013, pp. 34-47. 8. A. Parasuraman, Valarie A. Zeithaml and Leonard L. Berry, “A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, No. 4, 1985, pp. 41-50. 9. A. Parasuraman, Valarie A. Zeithaml and Leonard L. Berry, “SERVQUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality,” Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64, No. 1, 1988, pp. 12-39. 10. Tyagi, “An Integrated Framework for Service Quality: SQBOK Perspective,” see reference 7. 11. Parasuraman, “SERVQUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality,” see reference 9, p. 23. 12. Johannes Ledolter and Arthur J. Swersey, Testing 1-2-3: Experimental Design With Applications in Marketing and Service Operations, Stanford University Press, 2007. ARTHUR J. SWERSEY is a professor of operations research at the Yale School of Management in New Haven, CT. He has a doctorate in operations research from Columbia University in New York. Swersey is a member of ASQ.

tion; the define, measure, analyze, improve and control

December 2013 • 61

3.4 Per Million

BY Forrest W. Breyfogle III

The Best of Both Methods

Combining business process management and lean Six Sigma

MANY ORGANIZATIONS have

provement opportunities for these

the tools of lean and Six Sigma when

deployed both business process manage-

deployments that can be mapped out to

executing projects, organizations often

ment (BPM) and lean Six Sigma. The

combine the best of both methods, which

undertake the task of project execu-

similarities and differences between

then can lead to a sum that is greater than

tion using differing approaches for Six

these two methods could be illustrated

the parts.

Sigma and lean. Six Sigma projects typically follow a

using a Venn diagram, shown in Figure 1.

First things first

define, measure, analyze, improve and

as some fundamental differences between

Before discussing the creation of an

control (DMAIC) roadmap for process

the two, but organizations can benefit

orchestrated method, it’s important to lay

improvement efforts or a define, measure,

from a structured integration of these two

out a general description of BPM and lean

analyze, design and verify (DMADV)

techniques in their business.

Six Sigma to understand how to integrate

step-by-step approach for design projects.

the two:

Lean improvement projects often use

• The Association of Business Process

kaizen events, which can involve the ac-

There is some natural overlap, as well

Organizations undertake the deployment of BPM and lean Six Sigma programs for various reasons, but there can

Management Professionals (ABPMP)

tive participation of operators, engineers,

be a great amount of difference in how

defines BPM as “a disciplined approach

maintenance technicians and others so

organizations actually implement these

to identify, design, execute, document,

immediate action can be taken.

programs. In addition, some organiza-

measure, monitor and control both

tional deployments of BPM and lean Six

automated and non-automated busi-

BPM and LSS’s process focus

Sigma have been successful, while others

ness processes to achieve consistent,

The efforts of BPM and lean Six Sigma

have been less so.

targeted results aligned with an organi-

highlight the importance of process

zation’s strategic goals. BPM involves

execution. This is good because overall

Six Sigma methods that are fundamentally

the deliberate, collaborative and in-

business performance is the result of

positive and other characteristics that

creasingly technology-aided definition,

the effectiveness of the organization’s

could be improved upon. There are im-

improvement, innovation and manage-

processes.

There are attributes of BPM and lean

ment of end-to-end business processes that drive business results, create value and enable an organization to meet its business objectives with more agility.”1 • Lean Six Sigma, on the other hand, is a method that provides a framework

greatly between organizations. Even though there are differences in the details of execution, consider a high-level perspective of the general focus for each deployment type. From my observation, those undertak-

to execute projects to

ing BPM often give much focus to process

improve quality, increase

automation. A Six Sigma deployment

speed and reduce waste

spotlights the quantification of monetary

through improved work-

savings from executing projects, and lean

flows. Lean Six Sigma

implementations target the reduction of

projects are often a onetime process event in which controls are established so gains from the project are maintained. Although I think it’s best to integrate

62 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

But the deployment of these methods has evolved over time and can differ

waste for their improvement efforts. A general question that typically arises when undertaking all of these methods (that is, BPM, lean Six Sigma and lean) is: Where should efforts focus when initiat-

ing a deployment? Where should they focus on an ongoing basis? Organizations

IEE BPM/EPM system

/ figure 2

BPM

as w Dail se ee y, ss kly m en ts

have various approaches to address this question; however, much of this selection process for all deployment options

Business process management

is based on opinions and can result in don’t provide whole-system benefits. A better way to address these questions is through an orchestration system,

Enterprise

which provides as a foundation an M q u on re arte thly vie rl , ws y

accurate view of what is being done in the organization from a process point of view and of the performance of how well these activities are being executed. With this readily accessible point of view, enterprise and operational efforts can be undertaken through the use of analyt-

Management rules and IT infrastructure Process management Process modeling analysis Process design 30K Tools and methods analysis BPMN and and hyp. Maintain and RCA simulation testing sustain current Risk performance analysis

Mi vis ssio Va ion n p lue as erfo cha se rm in ss a n a m c nd en e t

organizational silo enhancements that

EPM

IEE strategic EPM

analysis Enterprise goals and improvement strategies

Process

Strategic planning

EIP and improvement planning

Design for BPM

ics so the big picture benefits from their

PDCA

Lean Improve and implement

efforts.

LSS

An orchestrated system The ABPMP book that contains the BPM body of knowledge2 provides at-

LSS

Maintain the gain and sustain performance

Sustained business management and success using the value chain

tributes for inclusion of the enterprise in a BPM deployment using the tools of enterprise process management (EPM). But this book and other literature do not describe how to best orchestrate these methods or provide details on how to execute an actual process im-

BPM = business process management BPMN = business process model and notation EIP = enterprise improvement plan EPM = enterprise process management hyp. = hypothesis

IEE = Integrated Enterprise Excellence LSS = lean Six Sigma PDCA = plan-do-check-act cycle RCA = root cause analysis

Modified from Forrest W. Breyfogle’s The Business Process Management Guidebook: An Integrated Enterprise Excellence BPM System, Citius Publishing, 2013.

provement project. The roadmap in Figure 2 addresses this need by outlining an Integrated En-

BPM and LSS methods / figure 1

terprise Excellence (IEE) integration of

initiation of an IEE BPM/EPM imple-

In this IEE BPM/EPM figure, the applica-

mentation, which involves two steps

tion of BPM methods is described across

in which the first initiation step is the

the top, while the execution of EPM is described vertically on the left side.3 The application of lean and lean Six

Business process management (BPM)

Lean Six Sigma (LSS)

• The upper-left corner describes the

BPM, EPM and lean Six Sigma methods.

organization’s vision and mission. • The next step shown in the upper-left corner of the roadmap is “value chain

Sigma improvement undertakings is high-

and performance assessment.” This

lighted in the roadmap step’s “improve

IEE value chain provides a description

and control,” in which these efforts from

of what an organization does and how

a lean Six Sigma point of view could fol-

it measures its performance. The IEE

low a DMAIC roadmap, DMADV execu-

value chain is an extension of Porter’s

tion, kaizen event or a just-do-it project.

value chain.4

Also in Figure 2, note that:

• A split in the flow next occurs in the

December 2013 • QP 63

3.4 per million roadmap with the use of information provided in the organizational value chain and its performance reporting. The figure’s top horizontal branch shows the path for a BPM implementation beginning with process analyses, while the vertical branch addresses analyses and other activities of the EPM system. • Both paths then recombine in the lower right, which represents the

Analytically and innovatively determined targeted strategies are created with an alignment to the financial needs and organizational objectives.

sustainment of business success when BPM and EPM together are emphasized in an organization.

performance metric6 can be one form

The approximate time sequence of

The EPM execution (the left side of

of controls for maintaining a project’s

potential tool applications in the IEE

benefits.

BPM/EPM structure is shown as oblong

Figure 2) step-by-step process begins after an enterprise analysis and realistic

The step called “sustained business

circles in Figure 2.

financial goals are established with a

management and success using the

timeline for achievement. Next, ana-

IEE value chain” (lower right) shows

Move to the 3Rs

lytically and innovatively determined

an arrow that looks back to enter-

Organizations have benefited from BPM

targeted strategies are created with an

prise analysis. This is equivalent to W.

and lean Six Sigma methods, but often

alignment to the financial needs and

Edwards Deming’s plan-do-check-act

these benefits have been short term and

organizational objectives.

(PDCA)7 improvement method for the

the deployments were not sustainable.

entire enterprise.

Organizations profit when they orches-

Whenever possible, these strategies should lead to targeted operational

Figure 2’s BPM execution (top of the

trate the methods of BPM and lean Six

value-chain performance goals, in which

figure) includes the methods that are

Sigma so they can move toward achieve-

process owners become highly mo-

considered BPM components in which:

ment of the 3Rs of business: everyone

tivated for the execution of lean Six

• The creation of an IT infrastructure

doing the right things and doing them

Sigma projects in their area so that the

includes implementation of the IEE

completion of these projects will benefit

value chain with automatic perfor-

their performance metrics.

mance data updates, which can be

REFERENCES AND NOTE

accessed readily by those authorized

1. Association of Business Process Management Professionals, Guide to the Business Process Management Common Body of Knowledge, second edition, Association of Business Process Management Professionals, 2009. 2. Ibid. 3. Forrest W. Breyfogle, The Business Process Management Guidebook: An Integrated Enterprise Excellence BPM System, Citius Publishing, 2013. 4. Michael E. Porter, Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, Free Press, 1985. 5. For an example of an enterprise improvement plan, see Forrest W. Breyfogle’s “Inputs Into Action,” Quality Progress, January 2012, pp. 52-55. 6. Forrest W. Breyfogle, “Insight or Folly?” Quality Progress, January 2010, pp. 56-59. 7. W. Edwards Deming, Out of the Crisis, MIT Press, 1986.

Successful completion of these projects will have a positive impact on the entire organization because project selection is based on the needs of the business. An enterprise improvement plan approach is a means to obtain the alignment of projects to business needs.5 Lean Six Sigma projects that improve operational metrics in the IEE value

in an organization. • The IEE value chain is used for the day-to-day management of processes. • An approach for systematically maintaining and sustaining current performance is applied. • Process design for effective implementation. • Process modeling for assessing the

chain, which positively affect the entire

risks of new process designs’ imple-

enterprise to the magnitude desired, are

mentation and the optimization of

considered successful. Controls then

processes is applied.

must be established in the organization-

• An EPM analysis is used to deter-

al value chain to maintain the gains and

mine where the automation of IT

sustain performance.

processes should focus so that the

An IEE value chain 30,000-foot-level

64 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

enterprise as a whole benefits.

right at the right time. QP

FORREST W. BREYFOGLE III is president and CEO of Smarter Solutions Inc. in Austin, TX. He earned a master’s degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Texas. Breyfogle is an ASQ fellow and recipient of the 2004 Crosby Medal.

The ASQ

Global State of Quality

RESEARCH

View Our Groundbreaking Reports! The ASQ Global State of Quality Research is an unprecedented research project pioneered by ASQ. It evaluates how the quality discipline is being practiced and performed around the world. Gathered from 2,000 organizations in more than 22 countries, it uncovers trends throughout the world, providing benchmark data to help you compare your organization to the current state of quality. You’ll also gain a solid understanding of local, regional, and global landscapes, allowing you to pinpoint new growth opportunities.

View our reports at globalstateofquality.org. TRAINING

CERTIFICATION

CONFERENCES

MEMBERSHIP

PUBLICATIONS

The Global Voice of Quality

TM

Quality in the First Person

BY Jennifer J. Stepniowski

Be the Change Applying the social responsibility standard to your life Corporate social responsibility

I prefer to use products and services

Labor practices. We manage our

(CSR) is a significant issue that continues

from socially responsible organizations.

households and the relationships within.

to gain traction among all demograph-

However, my big-ticket purchases tend

By improving how we manage our lives

ics. As someone who tries to hold others

to get more CSR consideration than low-

at home, we make ourselves and those

to the same standards I hold myself,

cost convenience items. Also, I am proac-

around us happier and healthier.

I take CSR personally. If we insist on

tive when it comes to ensuring my 401(k)

organizations being accountable for CSR,

and other investments in my portfolio

family and I decided on four values that

shouldn’t we do our part as well?

contribute to the greater good.

we agreed to hold each other accountable

During a recent summer vacation, my

Recently, I began to wonder: If I

Environment. Our attention to

to. I’ve noticed that my kids are enjoying

were to issue my own CSR report, how

resource use and pollution prevention

a more active role in family administra-

would I measure up and appear to my

requires careful examination. We must

tion and a marked improvement in all of

stakeholders? With this in mind, I looked

review our habits and make conscious

us when it comes to pitching in.

to the seven core subjects outlined in

decisions that positively affect the envi-

ISO 26000:2010—Guidance on social

ronment.

responsibility and audited myself. I’ve

My family and I spend as much time

Community involvement and development. Community involvement gets people talking to each other and caring.

outlined my general observations of each

outside as possible. It’s important to me

Whether it’s volunteering at a shelter,

of the core subjects and related them to

that my children have an appreciation

joining a book club, or even participating

my lifestyle.

and respect for nature so they under-

in a homeowners’ association, there are

stand the weight of lifestyle decisions.

plenty of opportunities to make a differ-

consumers holds significant power. It

From turning off the lights in unused

ence. We find time for things that matter.

defines us and the marketplace. So-

rooms to reducing our consumption of

cially responsible purchasing decisions

fossil fuel by walking and biking, as a

tion chair for my local ASQ section, and

and an eye toward the future support

family, we take deliberate actions to

I’ve recognized a number of opportuni-

sustainability.

reduce our environmental impact.

ties to raise the voice of quality in the

Consumer issues. Our position as

Recently, I took on the role of educa-

community. I also try to stay active in activities offered by my kids’ schools. I think parental involvement and support makes a big impact on academic success. Human rights. Corporate culture boils down to how we treat one another. Actions must be consistent with communication. We must not discriminate— respectfully resolve grievances and practice due diligence. If there is one permeating theme in my household, it is respect. I experienced a proud moment as a parent when my son came home from school recently and shared how he helped a peer being mistreated during a group activity. Fair operating practices. Actions

66 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

that are dishonest or otherwise negative

for Standardization as “the most crucial

ning to work out the details. I made at-

tend to bring short-term benefits that

factor in enabling an organization to

taining ASQ certification a SMART goal: I

are followed by long-term consequences.

take responsibility for the impacts of its

selected the certified manager of quality/

Cooperation is often more powerful than

decisions and activities,” organizational

organizational excellence certification

competition.

governance is a question of values. It

because it was the best fit, registered for

asks: “At our core, are we consistent?”

the exam, studied and passed that year.

My 4-year-old daughter cheats when she plays games and it drives my son cra-

“Do we have a vision?”

Engineer Henri Fayol’s six functions

I’ve found strengths, weaknesses, op-

of management—forecasting, planning,

but she insists on manipulating the rules

portunities and threats (SWOT) analyses

organizing, commanding, coordinating

to her advantage. Lately, he refuses to try

to be a helpful way to gain perspective.

and controlling—are a logical way to ap-

when playing games, which upsets my

It’s an introspective way to prioritize ac-

proach the present and future.

daughter. She doesn’t understand empa-

tivities and ensure continuous improve-

thy yet and claims he doesn’t try because

ment. My last SWOT analysis identified a

tion the benefits of an improved reputa-

she always wins. Sometimes, it’s the little

personal threat—a lack of certification—

tion, competitive advantage and im-

things that happen that best demonstrate

that I also identified as an opportunity.

proved relationships. Of course, the same

zy. He’s talked with her about playing fair,

Specific, measurable, achievable, rele-

an example. My daughter’s priority is the

When making a case for CSR, we men-

benefits of CSR apply to the individual as

short-term benefit of winning a game, but

vant and timely (SMART) goals are useful

well. Social responsibility is win-win for

in the process, she does not realize her

because they encourage me to expand my

all. QP

actions have resulted in no one wanting

thoughts into a more well-rounded and

to play with her in the long-term.

attainable objective in a format that also

Organizational governance. Con-

holds me accountable. In response to my

sidered by the International Organization

SWOT analysis, I used SMART goals plan-

take action

To learn more about the connection between quality and social responsibility (SR) and how ASQ is involved, visit the new SR website, www.thesro.org. You’ll find a rich library of research, case studies, videos and ways you and your organization can join the SR movement.

Share Your Quality Journey

Bibliography International Organization for Standardization, ISO 26000:2010—Guidance on social responsibility. JENNIFER J. STEPNIOWSKI is the communications director for Pro QC International and a management and marketing adjunct instructor at Hillsborough Community College in Tampa Bay, FL. A senior member of ASQ, Stepniowski is an ASQ-certified manager of quality/organizational excellence and is an ASQ Influential Voices blogger at www. ijenn.me.

QP occasionally includes an interesting, personal quality story in its Quality in the First Person column. If you are interested in sharing your story—how you got into the quality field, how it has helped your organization or your career or how quality has enhanced your personal life— email [email protected].

December 2013 • QP 67

Career Corner

BY Russell T. Westcott

Switch Gears Beat job boredom and burnout with reinvention Is your job fulfilling, bearable or drag-

opportunity or that available jobs don’t

crisis. Rather than return to the field

ging you down? Do you hate, tolerate

compare to the one that they left. Move

he loved, he surveyed the occupa-

or love your job? If you’re unemployed

on. It’s unrealistic to try and win an old

tional landscape. After he learned that

or underemployed, what are you doing

job back or to find a job that is an exact

healthcare was hiring in droves, he

about it?

match to individual requirements.

focused on a career in that field and

Take a moment to ponder these ques-

With diligent introspection and using

dipped into his family’s limited savings

tions. If you chuckled, remembered the

a few proven approaches, you can learn

to pay for the necessary training and

good old days or shrugged and groaned,

how to leverage your talent, skills and

certification. He secured the job of his

that’s OK. Now, take a deep breath, get

knowledge. I know a man in his 60s who

choice and recently received a second

up and get productive.

did just that when he was laid off from a

promotion. He still repairs vehicles in

sales job. Instead of vacationing or wait-

his spare time to sustain his love of

Disdainfully unemployed

ing for the phone to ring, he established

cars.

People who fall into the unemployed

himself as a craftsman of one-of-a-kind

You have many years of experience,

category may feel like their age makes

knives that sell for hundreds of dollars.

skills and considerable knowledge. Over

them undesirable candidates or that

Even though his income is somewhat

the years, you may have forgotten things

potential employers see them as expen-

lower than it used to be, so are his

here and there, but you can always

sive or obsolete. There will always be a

expenses. Not bad for someone who is

unearth your experience and turn it into

place for mature talent in the workforce

doing work he enjoys immensely.

a marketable skill. Find work that can

because it is the most experienced segment. Some in the unemployed category may feel like they haven’t found the right

New skills can give you an edge. I

get you back on your feet, literally and

know a former auto dealership parts

financially, and bring some enjoyment to

supervisor who bounced from job to

your new self.

job during the auto manufacturing

Unfulfilled but paying the bills You have a job that pays the bills, but you’re not thrilled with it. You’re not alone. Many American workers are in the same situation, but that doesn’t make it OK. Being unhappy about your work situation drains your energy, affects your personal life and could endanger your present employment. It’s time to assess your assets. What do you have to sell to employers and what are they likely to buy? What kind of work would be more fulfilling for you? But before you make a career change, examine the risks. When a highly talented employee in his 40s at a technology-threatened organization realized he needed a change, he explored his knowledge, experience, skills, aptitude

68 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Statement of Ownership, Management, and Circulation (Act of August 12, 1970; Section 3685, Title 39, United States Code)

Assess your current work situation and scan the future to avoid becoming a fruit withering on the vine. and attitude. In addition to his day

what you produce at work not going

job, he wrote music, played three

to be needed in the future? Is your

instruments, organized and managed

physical capability going to prevent

a band and was an accomplished pho-

you from doing the same fulfilling

tographer and writer. Because he was

work in a year or so? Do you have a

a happily married father of two young

plan B or C?

children, he thought it would be risky

If you’ve been in the workforce

1. Title of Publication: Quality Progress 2. Publication Number: 0033-524X 3. Date of Filing: 09/30/2013 4. Frequency of Issues: Monthly 5. Number of Issues Published Annually: 12 6. Annual subscription price: $102.00 7. Location of Known Office of Publication: ASQ, 600 N. Plankinton Ave., Milwaukee, WI 53203 8. Location of Headquarters or General Business Offices of Publisher: Same 9. Name and Address of Publisher: Brian LeHouillier, ASQ, 600 N. Plankinton Ave., Milwaukee, WI 53203; Editor: Seiche Sanders, 600 N. Plankinton Ave., Milwaukee, WI 53203 10. Owner: ASQ, 600 N. Plankinton Ave., Milwaukee, WI 53203 11. Known Bondholders, Mortgagees, and Other Security Holders Owning or Holding 1% or More of Total Amount of Bonds, Mortgages, or Other Securities: Not Applicable 12. FOR COMPLETION BY NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS AUTHORIZED TO MAIL AT SPECIAL RATES. The purpose, function, and nonprofit status of this organization and the exempt status for Federal income tax purposes: has not changed during the preceding 12 months

to pursue a full-time career in the

many years, be mindful that complete

13. Publication Title: Quality Progress

arts. Instead, he explored opportuni-

retirement is not always fulfilling.

14. Issue date for Circulation Data below: August 2013

ties that wouldn’t interfere with his

Sure, there are a lot of fun things to

family obligations. Within a year,

do given money, time and health—but

he took on a high-paying corporate

how long will they be fulfilling, fun or

managerial position that enabled him

feasible? Taking an occasional vaca-

to balance a fulfilling work life and

tion instead of fully retiring could be

family life.

the right strategy for you. I’ve personally changed careers

Happily employed … for now

(not just jobs) six times so far. I’m

If you love your job, you’ve either

just eager to have work that is fulfill-

made smart choices or are extremely

ing and pays the rent with some left

lucky. You can lean back and savor

over. The secret to career success

your good fortune, right? Not quite.

is to continually reinvent yourself.

Those familiar with the Kano model

If you’ve been fired, or feel tired or

of customer satisfaction know that

mired in your career, it’s time to get

what delights eventually becomes a

inspired. QP

must-have. What is fulfilling today may be mundane, predictable and boring tomorrow. You should continually assess your current work situation and scan the future to avoid becoming a fruit withering on the vine. For example, is fast-changing technology causing you anxiety or threatening your job? Are your skills becoming obsolete? Is

wisdom from westcott

Russell T. Westcott, based in Old Saybrook, CT, consults on strategic planning, project management, quality management systems, work life planning and career coaching. He is an ASQ fellow and an ASQ-certified manager of quality/ organizational excellence (CMQ/ OE) and quality auditor. Westcott is editor of the CMQ/OE Handbook, third edition, co-editor of the Quality Improvement Handbook, and author of many other books and articles. He serves on the Quality Management Division Advisory Committee and Thames Valley Section executive board.

Russell Westcott is a regular Career Corner columnist. To read his other columns about career development in quality, visit the “Career Corner” page under the “Departments & Columns” tab at www.qualityprogress.com.

15. Extent and nature of circulation Average no. of copies each issue during preceding 12 months



A. Total No. Copies Printed (Net Press Run)

61,108

Actual no. copies of Single Issue Published Nearest to Filing Date

57,500

B. Paid Circulation 1. Paid/Requested Outside-County Mail Subscriptions Stated on Form 3541 51,056 48,501

2. Paid In-County Subscriptions



3. Sales through dealers and carriers, street vendors, counter sales, and other non-USPS paid distribution

0





0

8,549

8,200

4. Other Classes Mailed Through the USPS 39 5

C. Total Paid Circulation

59,644

56,706

D. Free or Nominal Rate Distribution (Samples, Complimentary, and Other Free) 1. Outside-County as Stated on Form 3541 0

0



2. In-County as Stated on Form 3541 0



3. Free Mailed through the USPS



4. Free Outside the Mail

0

75

51

584

363

659

414

F. Total Distribution (Sum of 15c and 15e) 60,303

57,120

E. Total Free Distribution

G. Copies not distributed H. Total

805

380

61,108

57,500

I. Percent Paid and/or Requested Circulation (15c divided by 15f times 100) 99%

99%

16. Publication of Statement of Ownership is printed in the December 2013 issue of this publication. 17. I certify that the statements made by me above are correct and complete. Brian LeHouillier Publisher

December 2013 • QP 69

ASQ Enterprise and Site Members These organizations have pledged their commitment to quality by becoming ASQ Enterprise or Site members. Learn more about these membership levels, and the benefits, by visiting asq.org/organizations.

Enterprise Quality Roundtable Members 3M Company Abbott Laboratories Abbvie Abu Dhabi Water & Electricity Authority Alcoa Inc. Baxter International BD Bechtel Bharat Electronics Limited Blackberry/Research In Motion BMW Manufacturing Co., LLC The Boeing Company

Booz Allen Hamilton CareFusion Corporation Caterpillar Inc. Cisco Systems The Coca-Cola Company Cummins Deere & Company Defense Contract Management Agency The Dow Chemical Company DuPont Company FedEx Corporation Ford Motor Company

General Electric General Motors Genpact Hewlett Packard Honeywell Ingersoll Rand Intel Corporation Ivy Tech Community College Kimberly-Clark Corporation Kohler Company Kraft Foods L-3 Communications Lockheed Martin

Mattel (Fisher Price) Microsoft Corporation Northrop Grumman Corporation PepsiCo Raytheon Roads and Transport Authority Siemens Industry, Inc. Tata TE Connectivity Textron Turkish Airlines Inc. UTC Xerox Corporation

Arab Inspection & Q.A. Company Arbitron Inc. Arctic Cat Inc. Arthrex Inc. Asco Valve Manufacturing Ashley Furniture AssurX Inc. ASTHO Atco I-Tek Auto Club Insurance Association B&W Pantex B&W Technical Services Y–12 LLC Bard Peripheral Vascular Inc. Bartush-Schnitzius Foods Co. Barwa Bank Bastion Technologies Inc. Baycare Health System Beacon Converters, Inc. BeautiControl, Inc. Benchmark Electronics BEPC Inc. BG Products Bio-Rad Laboratories BeautiControl, Inc. Biomet Inc. BioReliance Corporation BJC Healthcare Blue Cross Blue Shield Arizona Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee Bonfils Blood Center

Bonneville Power Administration BorgWarner Turbo Systems Boston Scientific (3) Botswana National Productivity Bridon American Corporation Briggs & Stratton Corporation Brookhaven National Laboratory Bunn-O-Matic Corporation Business Excellence Consulting Inc. The Business School Cameron International Candu Energy Inc. Cangene Corporation Cardinal Health Cargill Inc./Business Excellence Carolinas Healthcare System Carpenter Technology Corp Casa Cuervo S.A. De C.V. Cedarburg Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Celestica International Inc. Cementos Lima S.A. Center for Applied Technology Development Center Quality Office Cerner Corporation Cerveceria Polar Los Cortijos C.A. CGS Administrators Chemonics International Cherokee Nation Industries

Chicago Department of Public Health ChildNet Inc. Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Children’s Services Council Christian Brothers University Chrysler Group CIBA Vision Corporation Cincinnati Precision Instruments, Inc. Climax Portable Machine Tools, Inc. Coherent Inc. Coloplast COMFRC Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, Ltd. Composite Engineering Inc. ConAgra Foods Conceptus Inc. Conemaugh Memorial Medical Center Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. Convergys Cosmetica Laboratories Inc. Council on Aging of Southwestern Ohio Covidien (3) CPI Aero CR Bard Glens Falls Operations Craig Technologies Creation Technologies LP

Site Members Abu Dhabi Systems & Information Centre Accellent Accuride Wheels-Camden Actavis Elizabeth LLC Aditya Birla Management Corporation Ltd. Advanced Scientifics, Inc. AECL Aflac (2) AFPSL/Bionetics AGCO Hesston Operations Agilent Technologies AIB International Aitheras LLC Albany Engineered Composites Alcon Laboratories, Inc. Alere Allergy Laboratories Inc. ALP Lighting Components Altria Client Services Quality Amazon American Airlines Inc. (2) American Axle & Manufacturing American Eurocopter American Packaging Corp. American Red Cross Ammroc AMN International S.A. De C.V. Ana G. Mendez University System Andersen Corporation Applied Medical AQS Management Systems

( ) Indicates number of Site members in this organization.

70 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

ASQ Enterprise and Site Members Credit Suisse Crosspoint Engineering Crown Equipment Corp. (3) CSL Behring CSP Technologies CVS Caremark Cygnus Manufacturing Company Czech Society for Quality Deaconess Hospital, Inc. Decra Roofing Systems Delaware Division of Public Health Dell (China) Ltd. Co. Dendreon Inc. Department of National Defense, Canada Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS/ASPR) DeVry Inc. Didlake, Inc. Digi-Key Corp. Digital Payment Technologies DLA Troop Support Dormont Manufacturing Co. DTI DiversiTech Inc. Dubai Silicon Oasis Authority Duke Energy Dwight David Eisenhower Army Medical Eagle Wings Industries, Inc. East Penn Manufacturing Co., Inc. Eastman Chemical Company Edward Jones Eldre Corporation Elsevier BV Bibliographic Databases Embraer Executive Jets EMD Millpore EMI Industries Emirates Telecommunication Corp. (Etisalat) Energizer Personal Care Energy & Environmental Research Center EnerSys Erickson Air Crane Ethicon Evans Capacitor Company Evans Consoles Corporation Excelitas Technologies Express Scripts, Inc. FAA DOT FDA Federal Bureau of Investigation

First Quality Retail Services Fleet Readiness Center East Fleet Readiness Center-Southeast Flexial Corporation FLIR Systems Inc. FMC Technologies Inc. FMI-Medical ForceOne Solutions Inc. Fort Hays State University Fort Wayne Metals FRCSW IQAD DoD Fujifilm NA - GSD-K Fujitsu Frontech North America G&D America GECOM Corporation General Systems Company Genzyme Getinge Infection Control Gilchrist & Soames GM Nameplate, Inc. Gopher Resource Corporation Grande Cheese Company Grant Thornton Great Lakes Institute of Management, Chennai Greene Tweed Co. Inc. Grifols Academy Biomat USA Grupo Antolin Silao S.A. de C.V. GTS Guyana National Bureau of Standards Harris Corporation (2) Harris IT Services (2) The Harvard Drug Group Haworth Inc. HCL Technologies Ltd. (2) Hemofarm Stada Hengst of North America Henkel Corporation (2) Hertzler Systems, Inc. Hitachi Computer Products (America) Honda Lock America Honeybee Foods Corporation Hospira Hospira, Inc. HSN Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. Humana, Inc. Hunting Dearborn Hussman Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama IACT Global

iBASEt ICS - ABSG IEC Electronics Igate Computer Systems Ltd. IIT Delhi Illumina Inc. IMS IMSM Inc. Incertec INPRS Integrated Project Management Co., Inc. Integrys Energy Group International Game Technology Intralox LLC Ipsen Biomeasure ITM University ITT Aerospace Controls Ivy Tech Community College Jabil Technology Services JCB India Ltd. Jeppesen JetBlue Airways John Moore Services Johnson Controls Inc. Johnson Matthey Chemicals India (Pvt.) Ltd. Judd Wire Inc. Kao USA Inc. Kelly Services Inc. Keystone Steel & Wire Company Kiekert de Mexico S.A. de C.V. KnowWare International Inc. Korean Standards Association Labinal Salisbury Inc. Labs, Inc. Lakeland Regional Medical Center LAM Research Corporation Land O’Lakes Lastar Inc. Lauren International Lemcon Networks Ltd. Level 10 NZ Post House Lexmark International Inc. Lfoundry Avezzano Lifescan Scotland Ltd. Linamar Corporation-Quality and Launch Group The Lincoln Electric Co. Liphatech, Inc. Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance Logistics Co. Lohmann Animal Health Luleå University of Technology

Mabamex SA de CV Mahamaya Technical University Mako Surgical Corp. Malaysia Productivity Corporation (MPC) Manroy Defense Systems Market Probe, Inc. Martin-Baker America Inc. Maruti Center For Excellence Mass Precision Inc. Master Lock Mayday Manufacturing Mayo Clinic (2) MBT Repair Inc. Medela Inc. Medical University of South Carolina MedImmune Inc. (2) Medivators Medtronic Cardiovascular Medtronic Inc. Mental Health Center of Denver Mental Health Partners Merck Consumer Care Meta Payment Systems Metagenics Michelin North America (Canada) Ltd. Microfabrica, Inc. Micron Technology Microsemi Lawrence Midway USA MillerCoors LLC Mine Safety Appliances Co. Mitsubishi Polyester Film Inc. MOBIS Alabama, LLC, GA Plant Moog Inc. (4) Moore Norman Technology Center Moses Lake Industries Mountz Inc. Mylan LLC NALCO An Ecolab Company Nammo Talley Inc. The National Graduate School of Quality Management National Marine Dredging Co. National Quality Review National Security Technologies Nationwide Children’s Hospital Naval Dosimetry Center Naval Sea Logistics Center Portsmouth Nelson Laboratories Inc. New Balance Athletic Shoes Inc.

( ) Indicates number of Site members in this organization.

December 2013 • QP 71

ASQ Enterprise and Site Members New Zealand Post Nokia Solutions and Networks Noramco Norfolk Naval Shipyard Northeastern LLC Northwestern Mutual Life Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc. Norwood Medical Novartis Consumer Health Inc. Novo Nordisk Pharmaceutical Industries Inc. Novozymes NSF-ISR Nu Skin Enterprises Nusil Technology LLC (2) Nypro Inc. (2) ODL, Inc. Office of the Comptroller (Puerto Rico) Ohio Army National Guard Olympus Gyrus Medical Inc. Omega Diagnostics LLC OMNEX Orchid Orthopedic Solutions Orthofix Oshkosh Corporation - Defense Paccar Engine Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company Pacific Precision, Inc. Pacific Southwest Container PakTech Palmetto GBA Panasonic Avionics Corp. (2) Panduit de Costa Rica Ltda Par Pharmaceutical Parker Hannifin Corp. Paychex, Inc. Pearson Pelco Pella Corporation Pera Global Pernod Ricard USA Perrigo (3) Petroleum Helicopters PGT Industries Pharma Tech Industries Pharmaceutics International Inc. PHH Arval Placon Plow & Hearth LLC PMT Corporation Point Lepreau G S Polyone - DDS Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú

Premier Bankcard PSI Repair Services Puget Sound Energy QAI India Ltd. Qatar Petroleum Qatargas Operating Company Ltd. QMI-SAI Global QualiWare Inc. QualTex Quantum Professional Academy RS Software India Ltd. R Stahl Inc. Rauland-Borg Corp. Refineria ISLA Rhein-Minapharm B.G. Ricca Chemical Company Riedon Inc. RIT/CQAS RJ Lee Group Inc. Robert Bosch Mexico Sistemas Automotrices S.A. de C.V. Robert Heely Construction Roche Diagnostics Corporation Rohmann Services RTI Biologics Inc. SAFC SanDisk Corporation Sani-Tech West Sanofi Pasteur Ltd. Santa Clara County Probation Department Sauder Woodworking Saudi Airlines SC Johnson (2) Schleifring Medical Systems Schneck Medical Center Seattle Children’s Hospital SED Systems Shaw Industries Shenzhen Hangsheng Electronics Co. The Shepherd Color Company Sid Richardson Carbon Co. Sigma-Aldrich Biosciences Simon Fraser University Singapore General Hospital Singapore Health Services Pte Ltd. Singapore Quality Institute Skyworks Solutions de Mexico Sorin Group Canada Inc. Southern California Edison Southern Management Corp. Span Packaging Services LLC Spansion Inc.

Sparta Systems, Inc. Sparton Medical Systems Colorado LLC Spectralytics Inc. Spectrum Surgical Spellman High Voltage SRA International Inc. St. Louis Children’s Hospital Starkey Labs, Inc. Strategic Solutions, Inc. Stratosphere Quality LLC Stryker (2) Sunpower Philippines Manufacturing Ltd. Suomen Laatuyhdistys Ry Supreme Council of Health Symmetry Medical Manufacturing Inc. Syracuse Research Corporation T & S Brass and Bronze Talon Innovations Techmetals, Inc. Technicolor Technip USA Inc. Telephonics Corp. (2) Tenneco Terumo Cardiovascular System Corp Texas Health Resource TG Missouri Corp. Therma-Tru Corp. Thunder Bay District Health Unit ThyssenKrupp (2) The Timken Company TIP Technologies Inc. Torqtek Design & Manufacturing LLC Toyota Motor Manufacturing North America Inc. Trivascular UAE Exchange & Financial Services Ltd. United Space Alliance United States Pharmacopeia Convention Universidad Continental Universidad de Guanajuato Universidad DeLaSalle Bajío A.C. University of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy University of Northern Colorado University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics University Rovira Virgili URS

( ) Indicates number of Site members in this organization.

72 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

U.S. Army ARDEC U.S. Army CERDEC U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense (USAMRICD) U.S. Cellular Corp. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Food & Drug Administration USANA Health Sciences, Inc. Usiminas Cubatao UT MD Anderson Cancer Center The Vanguard Group Vari-Form Inc. Vascular Solutions Inc. Ventana Medical Systems Verify Inc. Viastore Viega LLC Vinfen CT Viracon Visit Milwaukee Vistakon Volvo Group Trucks Technology W. W. Grainger, Inc. Wackenhut Services, Inc. Walt Disney World Warner Chilcott Company LLC The Washington Consulting Group, Inc. Water Corporation Watson Drill Rigs Waupaca Foundry, Inc. Webco Manufacturing Inc. Wellmark Wells Fargo Home Mortgage WePackItAll Western Digital Thailand Wilden Pump & Engineering WMATA Xandex Inc. XLI Corporation Zippo Manufacturing Co.

SITE MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION

The Global Voice of Quality

TM

OFFICE USE ONLY MBKEA73 PROMO CODE_____________________

All employees at a single site are entitled to Site membership benefits. If your organization has more than one site, each site must have a Site membership to share membership benefits with its employees. Identify one primary contact who will receive all ASQ-related information and can disseminate this information to employees.

Order Number______________________ Member Number____________________

PRIMARY CONTACT INFORMATION  Mr.

 Ms.

 Mrs.

 Dr.

 Male

  First Name

 Female Middle Initial

  Company

Last Name Job Title

  Business Address (If address is a P.O. box, please provide a street address for deliveries)

Ste.

  City, State/Province

Country

Zip+4/Postal Code

  Area Code/Business Telephone/Ext.

Area Code/Fax

Preferred Email Address

If you were referred to ASQ by another member, please tell us who referred you.   Member Name

ASQ Member Number

Mailing Lists  Occasionally ASQ shares its mailing list with carefully selected quality-related organizations to provide you with information on products and services. Please check this box if you do not wish to receive these mailings. ASQ does not sell email addresses to third parties.

WHY ARE YOU JOINING? To help us understand what’s important to you, please tell us the top three reasons why you are becoming an ASQ member.

    

Career Development Certification Pricing In-person Networking Involvement in ASQ’s Cause Involvement in SRO

    

Knowledge/Information Leadership Opportunities Online Networking/Communities Product Discounts Training

ASQ FORUMS AND DIVISIONS Your company’s primary contact will belong to one ASQ Forum or Division as part of your Site membership. Additional Forums and Divisions may be added for $10.00 each. Please check one box indicating your included Forum or Division. Add additional Forums and Divisions at right.

            

Audit (19) A  utomotive (3) A  viation, Space, and Defense (2) B  iomedical (10) C  hemical and Process Industries (4) C  ustomer-Supplier (15) D  esign and Construction (20) E  ducation (21) E  lectronics and Communications (5) E  nergy and Environmental (11) F ood, Drug, and Cosmetic (7) G  overnment (22) H  ealthcare (18)

           

H  uman Development and Leadership (13) Inspection (9) Lean Enterprise (23) M  easurement Quality (17) P roduct Safety and Liability Prevention (25) Q  uality Management (1) R  eliability (8) S  ervice Quality (16) S  ix Sigma (26) S  oftware (14) S  tatistics (12) T eam and Workplace Excellence (27)

PAYMENT INFORMATION 1,000.00 Site Member Annual Dues $___________________ ASQ Sections Your company’s primary contact will belong to a local ASQ Section determined by your company address. If you wish to choose a specific Section, please visit asq.org/sections for a listing of Sections. Additional Sections may be added for $20.00 each.

   ,

,

$___________________

Quality Press Book Collection Establish an outstanding resource library for your organization and strengthen and extend quality knowledge and application. Subscribers will receive a minimum of 10 books selected by Quality Press editors. $480.00 (does not include shipping and handling)

$___________________

Book Collection Shipping & Handling (United States $20.00, Canada $30.00, International $100.00)

$___________________

Additional Forums and Divisions

    ,

,

,



TOTAL OF ALL ITEMS

$___________________ $___________________

 Check or money order (U.S. dollars drawn on a U.S. bank) Make check payable to ASQ.  MasterCard

 Visa

 American Express   (Check one)

Cardholder’s Name (please print) Card Number



Exp. Date

Cardholder’s Signature Cardholder’s Address

For more information about Forums and Divisions, visit asq.org/forums-divisions or call 800-248-1946.

Please submit your application with remittance to: ASQ, P.O. Box 3066, Milwaukee, WI 53201-3066 USA or fax to 414-272-1734. You may also join online at www.asq.org or by calling ASQ Customer Care at USA and Canada: 800-248-1946 Mexico: 001-800-514-1564 All other locations: +1-414-272-8575

QPToolbox Automotive testing

•

Mars Labs has unveiled the Titan modular data acquisition (DAQ) system for largerchannel automotive durability and fatigue testing requirements. The Titan DAQ is available in standard and custom models and can be used for durability and fatigue, noise and vibration, shock, compression and acoustics measurements. It is specifically designed for direct integration with a range of sensing technology types. Additional features include 8-pole Butterworth filters and an improved 10-pole linear-phase filter. It supports sample scan rates commonly used in simulation-based systems. It also has a direct interface to specialty automotive sensors, such as

design of automotive electronics assem-

Calibration

wheel force transducers and instrumented

blies. The silicone technologies include the

The P3100 series from Fluke Calibration

steering wheels.

TC-2030 and TC-2035 thermally conductive

are deadweight testers that can calibrate

• Call: 301-470-3278.

adhesives.

a range of pressure-sensing devices

• Email: [email protected].

The TC-2030 thermally conductive adhesive is a thermal management solu•

Thermally conductive adhesive

tion for standard automotive electronics.

including transducers, transmitters and gauges. Each instrument is supplied with a

Dow Corning’s two thermally conductive

It reduces thermal resistivity with a high

detachable lid, making it portable, and the

adhesives have been developed to enable

thermal conductivity of 2.7 W/mK. It is

weight masses are stored in a case with

a suitable thermal interface material for

a self-locking mechanism to protect them

high-power underhood electronic applica-

during transit.

tions, such as power steering, antilock breaking and electronic control modules.

All units are provided with weight mass details, operating fluid and spare

The TC-2035 thermally conductive

seals. The piston and cylinder assemblies

adhesive reduces thermal resistivity by

come standard with accredited calibration

delivering 3.3 W/mK thermal conductivity

reports.

and BLT as low as 50 µm. A two-part, heat-

• Call: 877-355-3225.

cured silicone bonds reliably to thermal

• Visit: us.flukecal.com.

substrate types, including direct bonding copper, high-density interconnect, low-

Switches

temperature co-fired ceramic and printed

ATC Diversified Electronics has released

circuit board.

the ISO/ISL series of switches designed to

• Email: [email protected].

control energy loads from hazardous

• Visit: www.dowcorning.com/

locations. The series is available in single-

electronics.

74 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

•

and multi-channel models and it offers up

to four channels.

Scope Plus comes in two levels: basic and

The ISO/ISL series performs under

professional. Basic EasyShaft software

normal and abnormal conditions without

provides touch-screen operation using

releasing energy values that could lead

selectable feature icons, many of which

to ignition of a flammable or combustible

are easily recognizable from the standard

atmospheric mixture in its most easily

feature control frames the user sees on

ignited concentration.

their part drawings. ProfessionalShaft

The ISO/ISL series switches feature a

script-level programming allows expert

fully isolated output, which turns on when

users access to the machine’s capabili-

the control switch input from the hazard-

ties.

ous location is closed. The multi-channel

All MarShaft Scope Plus systems are

series is available with choice of latching

equipped with touch screens with intel-

or non-latching output.

ligent multi-touch gestures built in.

• Call: 304-387-1200.

• Call: 401-784-3100.

• Visit: www.marshbellofram.com.

• Visit: www.mahr.com. monitor performance from many loca-

Temperature sensor

•

Turck has introduced the TS530 tem-

tions. Turck’s TS530 temperature sensors

perature sensor, featuring an integrated

are designed for easy mounting and

resistance temperature detector (RTD).

installation, allowing users to mount

The TS530 combines the display, process

them directly to a tank or pipe—without

connection and RTD all in a single part.

a mounting bracket—using a 1/2NPT

The LED rotatable display can turn up

process connection. For performance in

to 340 degrees and allows for flexible

harsh manufacturing environments, the

viewing in the field. The sensor also sends

sensor meets IP69K protection ratings

feedback to a PC, allowing operators to

and operates in temperatures ranging from -50° C to 150° C. • Call: 800-544-7769. • Visit: www.turck.us.

Measurement

•

Mahr Federal has redesigned the MarShaft Scope. The MarShaft Scope Plus offers micron-level measurements, and includes a MarWin-based controller and system architecture that opens levels of machine capability. Operational software for the MarShaft

Got a quality product?

Send your product description and photo to [email protected].

December 2013 • QP 75

QPReviews Communication Across Cultures Elizabeth Christopher, ed., Palgrave Macmillian, 2012, 424 pp., $55 (book).

ing the content in an academic setting or course.

each metric. • Ways to present and use data.

For those involved in multicultural and multinational activities, this textbook is a

• Going beyond traditional statistical control charts to facilitate learning and

This book was cre-

useful resource. It also serves as a model

ated as an academic

for organization and presentation of other

• The psychological impact of metrics.

textbook—written

course-related textbooks.

• The concept of a metric life cycle and

by a group of au-

Jerry Brong

thors—that explores

Ellensburg, WA

communication groups where it is necessary to build

Duke Okes, ASQ Quality Press, 2013, 128

successes in projects, activities, meeting

how it can be used to evaluate the continuing relevance of each metric. If more information is needed, there

Performance Metrics: The Levers for Process Management

across cultural

decision making.

pp., $24 member, $40 list (book).

are good index and reference sections and appendixes. Metrics are also one way to know if a plan was implemented and if it achieved

of standards and delivery of quality in

If you are looking for

desired results. After use, metrics evolve

outcomes. Works in this textbook are

a list of key process

and should be reviewed regularly. Good

organized by four dimensions: commu-

performance indica-

metrics programs will improve processes,

nication across cultures, communication

tors (KPI), this is not

but even if you can’t affect process devia-

at work, going global and the planet, and

the book for you,

tion, monitoring the correct things can

cyberspace.

although examples

help explain them for better understand-

The format of the book supports

of common metrics

ing.

teaching and learning. Each section

are provided. If you

provides outcomes presented with a

wish to learn how to

Management and employees will be happier if the uncomplicated concepts

reference to leadership responsibilities

craft a meaningful set of metrics to help

presented here are used with your moni-

and actions that should increase positive

you personally or in business, this is the

toring systems.

outcomes and results. Though it is a use-

book to read.

ful reference for an operational program,

Marc A. Feldman

The book is an easily understood

Solvay Chemicals Inc.

it primarily serves as a core resource

discussion of process metrics, giving

supportive of questioning, seminar-type

background and reasoning for choos-

discussions and experimental exercises

ing various metrics and implementing

for groups or individuals.

them for any process or sub-processes.

The Basics of Project Evaluation And Lessons Learned

This is not a book on quality methods,

Houston

To ensure that the metrics you select or

Willis H. Thomas, CRC Press, 2011, 146 pp.,

standards or systems. Rather, it focuses

design are aligned with your goals and

$20.95 (book).

on moving messages across cultures and

objectives, Okes simply—but thorough-

The book relates to

knowing the impacts of successful mes-

ly—discusses:

the discipline of proj-

sage movement.

• Core processes and process manage-

ect management.

A detailed index is offered and online resources are referenced for further study related to the book’s broad content. Also, a dedicated website is

ment. • Measurement theory, different types of

Thomas provides his perspective

metrics, how their functions differ and

based on lessons he

example metrics.

learned in the pro-

referenced by the publisher that offers a

• The thinking behind selecting metrics.

fession, supported

manual for a lecturer or professor cover-

• Details and factors to consider for

by widely known

76 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

project management techniques and

experiences and knowledge—combined

the authors’ understanding of structure

case studies from organizations that have

with a large amount of data collected

of leadership leading to development of

executed successful projects as well as

from various studies involving hundreds

the VAE model, and the book needs more

those that had major project manage-

of thousands of participants—to create

testimonials on the successes and chal-

ment failures in the process.

guidelines for leadership that are realistic

lenges of applying the model. However,

to work with, but more importantly, that

the authors have clearly succeeded in

structure is not user friendly and there is

are accessible and can be followed by

achieving their goal of providing easy-

an excessive use of bulleted information

everyone.

to-apply steps and useful guidelines for

The title of the book is misleading. The

and acronyms. Project management tech-

The book is

making the model achievable. That makes

niques such as Pert and Gantt charts—

divided into three

this book required reading for current and

which are explained in the book—have

sections based on

would-be leaders.

critical visual elements that I did not see

the three principles

Herzl Marouni

once.

of the VAE: model,

ABS Consulting

The individuals who can benefit most

vision, alignment and

by reading this book are those in mana-

execution. An ap-

gerial positions who can choose their

pendix also provides

staff. Supervisors should experience im-

a more thorough

proved efficiency in resource and people

explanation of the 10 stages of develop-

management based on this book. On

ment of the VAE model.

Houston

Recent Releases

from understanding how the interaction

tion, followed by three drivers, and a

The Certified Manager of Quality/Organizational Excellence Handbook

between team members, project leaders

concluding summary. A driver is defined

Russell T. Westcott, ed., ASQ Quality Press,

and resources could affect the overall

as a basic element that paves the way

2013, 688 pp., $99 member, $139 list

project goal when a project manager is

for each step in the process and helps

(fourth edition, book).

not trained enough to perform the job.

make the process achievable. Two best

the other hand, employees may benefit

For each section, there is an introduc-

Roberto Guzman

practices are included with each driver

Morrisville, NC

showing how this behavior can support

The Process Improvement Handbook

the driver.

Tristan Boutros and Tim Purdie, McGraw-

The Work of Leaders: How Vision, Alignment, and Execution Will Change the Way You Lead Julie Straw, Mark Scullard, Susie Kukkonen, and Barry Davis, Pfeiffer, 2013, 240 pp., $24.95 (book).

There is a lack of adequate coverage of

Hill Professional, 2013, 416 pp., $90 (book).

Advertisers Index

It is refreshing to read a book on leader-

Advertiser

ship that is written by following scientific

ASQ Membership Application

55

800-248-1946 www.asq.org

research methods. The book outlines the

EtQ Inc.

1

516-293-0949 www.etq.com

MEIRxRS

28 800-507-5277 www.meirxrs.com

development of a leadership model based on three principles of vision, alignment, and execution, namely the VAE model.

Quality Council of Indiana

The authors draw from their personal

StatSoft Inc.

Page Phone

Web

10, 11 800-660-4215 www.qualitycouncil.com OBC

918-749-1119 www.statsoft.com

December 2013 • QP 77

For information on placing an ad, contact Media Sales at 866-277-5666.

ProfessionalServices

Lean Six Sigma Training and certification online by Thomas Pyzdek

Save 10%! Enter coupon code ASQ10 at checkout

www.sixsigmatraining.org /store +1 520-204-1957

Quality Institute of America, Inc.

Since 1994 Complete Quality, Environmental, Safety, Six Sigma, Consulting, Auditing, and Training Services. Comprehensive Quality Management Software (QISS). • QISS-based ISO-Easy Program • Quality Management Software (QISS) Automating Document and Records Control, Communications, Nonconformance, Corrective-Preventive Actions, Calibration, Maintenance, Training, Audits, and Management Reviews. PH: 281-335-7979. Houston, TX Email: [email protected], www.qi-a.com www.qisssoftware.com

Quality Systems Registrars, Inc. Recognized industry leader in rapidly expanding registration industry is seeking a highly motivated quality professional to join our organization as a Lead Auditor. ISO 9001 • AS9100 • TL 9000 • ISO 14001 • RC 14001 • OHSAS 18001 22375 Broderick Drive, Suite 160 Sterling, VA 20166 Phone: 703-478-0241 • Fax: 703-478-0645 www.qsr.com

Statistical Analyses??? StatSolver!!! 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 the United States

www.imdsdata.org • 734-205-8874

TQM Associates Inc. “we’re here to support you” • Established in 1994 • Women-Owned • Quality Assurance Professionals • Across the U.S. and Worldwide • Temporary or Permanent • Source Inspection • Surveys • Audits • Expediting

Visit us at: www.qualitytng.com Email [email protected] for brochure

800-424-4729 3990 Old Town Ave. #C109 Fax 619-297-3251 San Diego, CA 92110 tqmassociates.com email: [email protected]

Ph: 248-641-7030 Fax: 248-641-7031 PO Box 611 Troy, MI 48099-0611

78 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

Classroom Training Aids… g Quincunx Boards g Sampling Bowls g Catapults g Deming Funnels g And lots more …

Download a free trial www.StatSolver.net

ProfessionalServices For Accredited Certification Look for the Symbols of Quality

EAGLE Registrations Inc.

EAGLE Food Registrations Inc.

Highest Ranked Registrar in an independent customer survey! ISO 9001 · AS 9100 · ISO/TS 16949 ISO 14001 · ISO 13485 · OHSAS 18001 Safe Quality Food (SQF) · ISO 22000 FSSC 22000 · SQF Ethical Sourcing Call 800-795-3641 | www.eagleregistrations.com

Consulting on Reliability, Risk Management, and Quality www.HaibelConsulting.com (425) 458-0202

For information on placing an ad, contact Media Sales at 866-277-5666.

Hands-On Root Cause Analysis Training/Coaching!

9 9 9 9 9

ISO 9001, AS 9100, ISO 13485, ISO 20000 FDA QSR, Canadian MDR, European MDD Planning, Implementation, Training Process Improvements, Process Validation QMS Internal Audits, Mini-audits Camille Delmotte, MBA, President Phone and fax: 410-426-2269 [email protected] www.QualityEdgeConsulting.com

• Four Hours of Training, then … • Hands-On Application w/Teams … • On Your Toughest Problems!! • Outputs—Solutions and Actions • Guaranteed results!

Mike Micklewright

CSSBB, CQMgr, CQA, CQE Arlington Heights, IL PH: 847-401-0822 [email protected]; www.mikemick.com

Beijing Enertic Engineering Technical Co., Ltd. A 3rd party inspection company 10 years’ experience for boiler, steel structure, pipes, pumps, valves, etc. in China and Asia. China Headquarters: Tel: +86-1350-023-1596 Email: [email protected] US representative: Tel: 843-810-4805 Email: [email protected] Website: www.enertic.com

eAudits.org Learn how to conduct audits remotely.

Experience ASQ TV on videos.asq.org TM

December 2013 • QP 79

Back to Basics

BY Marcia M. Weeden

Pyramid Scheme A framework for stronger standard operating procedures an important element in the quality

SOP ownership ensures proper oversight

them. Include how to manage unusual or

professional’s quest for compliance and

and approval, and provides users with a re-

unplanned situations. Details are not neces-

excellence is the standard operating pro-

source when questions or problems arise.

sary; simply point the reader in the right

cedure (SOP). Often regarded simply as a

Include the SOP’s revision history to show

direction.

document with a set of work instructions,

how methods evolved and when decisions

SOPs can provide much more. A well-

were made. This knowledge is valuable

process flows and decision rules. They

written SOP eliminates confusion and dis-

when performing a gap analysis.

permit quick visuals when fast answers are

putes, ensures repeatability, and provides

Because employees can sometimes for-

Second-tier flowcharts show high-level

being sought.

a means for continuous improvement.

get their manager and facility are governed

The bottom tier provides details for car-

Breaking the SOP into three tiers of

by organization and external requirements,

rying out required activities. Consequently,

information elevates an SOP to a precision

referencing customer, organization, indus-

it is the largest and most detailed tier.

quality tool. A pyramid is a helpful model

try, and regulatory standards and policies

to use to structure and communicate

help employees understand and comply

associated tasks and step-by-step instruc-

information because its tiered composi-

with SOPs. List records associated with the

tions. Illustrations and screenshots are

tion allows for varying levels of detail and

SOP so it is easy to locate records that can

often helpful aids. Flowcharts provide a

complexity (Figure 1).

demonstrate compliance with procedures

visual representation of the process and

if a liability issue occurs.

decision points.

The top tier contains high-level information—the SOP’s purpose, objectives and

The SOP’s middle tier provides a basic

For each process stage, specify the

Address records by indicating the tasks

scope, who uses the SOP, as well as train-

understanding of the main processes. Keep

to be documented, who performed them,

ing and qualifications that are all critical

it brief. The person reading the SOP, such

and where to file or forward them. Make

for correct execution. Because strong dif-

as a customer or auditor, may not require

sure records contain the who, what, when,

ferences of opinion can arise, be objective

specifics. Managers typically refer to this

where and why for compliance and trace-

from the start and define responsibilities

section for quick insights.

ability. The “how” is detailed in the SOP.

by department or job function. Indicating

Define the words, terms or acronyms used in the SOP if there is

Tiered structure of a standard operating procedure / Figure 1

Overview Purpose Scope

Requirements related to: • Training • Responsibilities • References • Governance • Records • History

Definitions Policies High-level processes

Flowcharts for: • Complicated processes • Approvals • High-level decision making

Detailed information How-to steps for carrying out specific tasks Checklists Final steps and records Source: Quality Excellence Services © 2013

80 QP • www.qualityprogress.com

any chance someone may

complete. Checklists constructed in progressive

be unfamiliar with them or

work order are optional but helpful tools

if the possibility of multiple

to manage complicated or critical activi-

meanings exists.

ties, and workflow interruptions. They

People feel most comfortable doing something when

serve as reminders and records. Well-written SOPs are a mainstay for

they know why it must be

reducing costs and ensuring customer

done. Detailing policies

satisfaction. When it comes to policies,

specific to the SOP resolves

regulatory directives and liability risks,

disputes and instills worker

SOPs are excellent insurance for achieving

confidence.

compliance. QP

Processes provide an overview of the stages the

Flowcharts for: • Complicated tasks • Decision making • Start-to-end activities

Providing these details ensures records are

main activities go through. Briefly describe what initiates the processes, the steps to carry out and what concludes

MARCIA M. WEEDEN is the owner of Quality Excellence Services in Barrington, RI. An ASQ member, she holds a master’s degree in textiles, clothing and related art with specializations in quality assurance and adult education from the University of Rhode Island in Kingston.

What’s Online in the ASQ Knowledge Center? CASE STUDY Systematically Improving Operating Room Patient Flow Through Value Stream Mapping and Kaizen Events Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals in Philadelphia, PA, used a value stream mapping approach to identify and execute seven lean projects within the perioperative department over four years.

BENCHMARKING Manufacturing Tune-Up Diagnostic See benchmarking data updated for 2013 and compare how your organization is performing related to key performance indicators of cost effectiveness, process efficiency, and cycle time.

WEBCAST Getting the Defects Out of Root Cause Analysis ASQ Fellow Duke Okes provides an overview of root cause analysis (RCA), covering terminology, process steps, and advice on creating a culture that sees this methodology as a learning process.

Access this month’s featured content and more Web exclusives in the ASQ Knowledge Center at asq.org/knowledge-center/featured.html.

TRAINING

CERTIFICATION

CONFERENCES

MEMBERSHIP

PUBLICATIONS

The Global Voice of Quality

TM

• 2300 East 14 Street • Tulsa, OK 74104 • USA • +1 (918) 749-1119 •

•