124G, Sakthi Enclave, Narayanaguru Road, Saibaba Colony, Coimbatore
– 641 011, Tamil Nadu, Email
: abrachan@abrachan.com Web : www.abrachan.com SMS :
mobile@abrachan.com Phone : 0091 422 444 916 Mobile : 0091 9843112424 |
A Student,
Practitioner and Coach in software engineering, Quality and Organizational
Behavior |
I N D E X
Trainings
& Conferences Attended
Project
Management Competencies
1) The
Challenges in Building A World Class Quality Function
3)
Stepping Stones To Quality Business
Areas Of Interest
|
Academics
|
Articles Published
|
Certifications
|
Trainings Conducted
|
Trainings & Conferences
Attended
|
Software Projects
Associated
Project Management
Competencies
Functional Knowledge
Policy Definitions
|
Quality
Process Definition
|
Functional Knowledge
|
Management
|
Associations
|
Other Interests
|
Last Updated On 09/June/2001
Feedbacks
Dear Sir, How are you ? I am still in
Cyprus and I will be here for another one month or so. As you must be knowing
that I have come here for UAT and Post Implementation Support, and as usual
in all the UAT's there were some problems , some minor some major. Some
problem still exist in Post Live also, which I am trying to Fix. The modus
operandi is that , I have been asked to spend maximum one hour on a problem,
and If I can not fix it, it will be sent to Bangalore, where full fledged
Support team is waiting.. Here there is always somebody (in spite of the time
gap) in Bangalore to back me. It really helps the person on site in
concentrating on other problems and giving him confidence. Any way, my main purpose of
mailing was something else. I used to log the defects as usual and when I
came here, I added two more columns, Root Cause and Preventive action. And
just out of curiosity I did a causal analysis and now I am proud in saying
that the number of defects reported has come down to2 per week from 24 per
week. It has much to do with the CAP that I did than my technical knowledge.
I did not do anything other than drawing a fish bone diagram and finding the root
cause. And one more thing, my intention was to get result not to get promoted
or rewarded (as it is , still in some places ). Your QES training and the approach has really
helped me in this assignment . I am telling this to you because there will be
very few people who will appreciate this approach. It takes time to get the
results, but the results ,once they come will be unmatched. Sir, I sincerely
thank you for the knowledge and guidance that I got under your stewardship
and supervision. Best wishes and Regards Yours Anjan Dear Mr. Abrachan, |
1) The Challenges in
Building A World Class Quality Function
(This article was published in http://www.stickyminds.com/) If
the customer is important, Quality is also important. But in many organizations, the quality function is in
the lower strata. Most of the time, the responsibility for this situation is
with the quality department / function itself. Instead of playing a major,
complementing role to Sales, Engineering and Management, they prefer the
other route, resulting in isolation from the mainstream. When
one step into an organization as a leader for Quality Improvement, the
challenges are manifold. The most important among them is creating a team of
quality professionals with the ability to win, despite the obstacles on the
way. A winning team, with a shared mission, focus and tremendous amount of perseverance
and emotional quotient. Unfortunately, this aspect gets the least priority
due to several reasons. It is very easy to get immersed in the day to day
operations, and jump into the race without a proper team. What a disaster it
can be! It is very difficult to
inherit an excellent team. Even if one is lucky to inherit one of the best
teams, then gaining their acceptance as leader, and creation of a common
mission is never a cake walk. It will never happen accidentally. One need to have clear strategy for achieving the
above. One of increased production
capability and high level of emotional deposits. Without a committed team, it
is very difficult to implement the strategies for quality improvement,
organization wide , irrespective of the brilliance of the strategies
themselves. It is like attempting to
cut the forest without a sharp axe. Creating a winning team Quality profession, by the
very nature of it, is conceived as a fault finding job, without much
creativity involved. Majority of the quality professionals are psyched to
believe in this by their mentors (Quality without tears by Crosby). Hence, most of them, really don’t know
what can be their career path, in the long run. And nobody dares to show them
the career path, because, in the conventional organizations, it is not very
rosy (Have you ever heard of a quality professional becoming a CEO, very
rare!, but all successful CEOs have believed in quality. So if we go by the
definition of a quality professional as “One who takes initiative to improve
the quality of processes and products in an organization”, any one while
performing the quality improvement function, is a Quality professional, hence
there is no CEO who has not worked as a quality professional!!) . Lets have a look at the conventional career path and the skill
sets requirement for each position,
for two fresh engineers, who
joins a conventional software company,
one as a quality professional
and the other as a programmer.
Capital letters indicate major
skill sets Look
at that!. The skills required for a quality professional outweighs that of a
software engineer. To understand
this, objective analysis is required. If your organization is in the complex, high value, mission
critical software development segment
,this realization is very important
for the organization’s long term success. The
main symptoms of an inefficient quality organization are
Root
causes for this;
Here
lies the opportunity. The quality leader should have enough stamina,
knowledge and charisma to initiate the following;
And
most important, do all these at the right pace and at the right time. The
pace of this transformation should neither be too quick nor too slow. It
should be the ideal phase, varies from organization to organization and from
time to time. (When there is a recession in the US, hence a reduction in the
delivery pressures, then go at maximum pace!). The timing is also very
important. Excellent ideas can fail, because of bad timing for implementation (no point in proposing process
improvement to a team, who are already struggling to meet the deadlines, they
will surely reject it. The same team will cooperate, if the same idea is presented, after them
meeting the deadline) Start planting the seeds from the day one
and walk the talk. This much is enough, to have a winning, ticking team. The
rest of the journey is simple with the winning team. The approach is
Inside-Out. It is Simple. It is within the circle of influence. The positive
results of this, will result in the organization wide quality focus,
where quality becomes everyone’s
priority. That’s what every one needs
after all!! Manager
SEPG & QA |
2) Need Of The Hour
(Published in Data Quest) Building the appropriate organizational climate paves the way for qualitative enhancement of services. Most organizations embark on the quality journey due to pressure from competition. Normally this is pursued as a turnkey project with a stretch target and guidance from an external consultant. While enthusiasm peaks on the day of certification it tapers down later and the number of non-conformities increases linearly with time. Then the burn out and downward trends begin. As a corollary, adequate groundwork has to be done for quality improvement programs to bear fruit. Evidently then, the framework which will provide the right organizational climate for the quality tree to grow and yield robust fruits is critical. At the foundation level resides the corporate vision, mission and objective (VMO). In most organizations this is done top down, which reduces the ownership of VMO as you move down the hierarchy. Also, in most companies, around 60% of the employees do not even know the organizational mission. In certain cases the organization itself does not have a mission statement and so an opportunity to drive the organization along the right direction is missed. The improvement of quality should begin at the top management level where vision, commitment and an open approach are formulated. A well defined mission statement should ideally: · Focus on the future of the organization · Strategies and programs should flow from this future vision. · Be owned by all in the organizations to the lowest levels · Should focus on customer & quality All of these can be followed through by top-down and bottom-up orders. The next step is to build the right organizational climate. Especially in industries like software, where the manpower turnover is very high the only solution is continuous education focussed at continuous improvement. It is not that 100% improvement in one process, but it is that 1% improvement in hundreds of processes that grants an organization the competitive advantage. The whole process of building the right organizational climate rests on four pillars: ·
Philosophy: Masaki Imai’s ‘kaizen’ · Direction: W Edward Deming’s 14 points · Steps: 5 step methodology of Philip Crosby · Integrity: Seven habits of Stephen Covey These philosophies and practices can be imbibed into the organization by continuous education supported by well drawn out, structured training programs and recognition systems for the achievers. These training programs also should undergo continuous improvement and get institutionalized as part of the induction programs for new entrants to the organization. The next challenge lies in organizing the training through external or internal agencies. If external, then identification of adequate competence and enthusiasm to translate the required knowledge with conviction into concrete, viable outcomes forms the most crucial phase. If the training is carried out through internal channels, then it is advisable to get the trainers trained and proven before they embark on the training program. The programs should be aimed at creating opportunities to learn new skills, practice them and share the experiences which will undoubtedly result in improvement. Recognition programs to support the achievers must be part of the training programs. The ultimate objective of these training programs should be to generate conviction in each employee on the significance of continuous quality improvement. For the organization to experience this cultural change, each and every employee should first experience the benefits at a personal level. ‘Kaizen’ philosophy The ‘kaizen’ strategy is the single most important concept
in Japanese management—the key to Japanese competitive success. It rests on
the basic premise that our way of life deserves to be constantly improved.
(Masaki Imai) · Seiri— Separate out all that is unnecessary and eliminate it · Seiton—Those things found to be necessary are put in order so that they are ready for use when required. · Seiso—Clean workplace, equipment and prevent defects · Seiketsu—Standardize. Make cleaning and checking routine · Shitsuke—Discipline and training, personal cleanliness and applying ‘kaizen’ to the previous four steps The starting point for improvement is to recognize the need. This comes from the recognition of a problem. If no problem is recognized, there is no recognition for the need for improvement. Complacency is the arch-enemy of ‘kaizen’. Therefore ‘kaizen’ emphasises problem-awareness and provides clues for identifying problems. (Masaki Imai) CRITICAL QUESTIONS:
Using the 5Ws and one H encourages employees to look at a process and raise
critical questions. MONITORING ‘KAIZEN’
IMPLEMENTATION: The ‘kaizen’ axiom is about continuous improvement of
people, processes, procedures and any other factor affecting quality. An
effective way to identify problems and representing opportunities for
improvement is to formulate a checklist that draws attention to those factors
needing improvement. These could be: To utilize this checklist in the workplace, the immediate supervisors’ approval and co-operation is critical. A positive response from the boss encouraging his subordinates’ new ideas and techniques will then develop trust between them thus stimulating other improvements in its wake and making the work front a progressive one. However it is easier preached than practised. Very basic
questions like “ The procedures are fine with me, why should we change it? “
can emerge from the superior’s end. From your perspective, it would be risky
for you to change it using your own discretion. This could well be a case of
the ‘wet blanket list’, in Masaki Imai’s words, wherein your boss declined to
give you a chance for anonymous reasons. Those are the twelve wet blankets you frequently hear in
work situations which will tell on the productivity of the employees as they
typically put out the ‘fire of progress’. In order to avoid such a stalemate,
the following ten basic ‘kaizen’ tips can be adhered to: Crosby’s five step methodology The answer to these questions lies in the four absolutes
of quality. Covey’s seven habits The last word PA Abrachan |
3) Stepping Stones To Quality Business
(Published In Data Quest) An insight into why many organizations fail in implementing corrective measures which require only plain common sense for their solutions. Most organizations fail to progress on the quality front just because they are unable to prevent problems from happening even when the recurring problems are not alien to them. As a result, they end up with missed deadlines and dissatisfied customers and employees. An analysis of the causes leading to ineffective corrective actions help us to arrive at the following conclusions: NO DEFINED PROCEDURES: Even if we as managers, team members and entrepreneurs wonder why the team is committing the same mistakes again and again, we seldom take proactive steps to improve. We have even tried in vain to introduce a system for rewarding those who commit new mistakes unlike those committed in the past. The process for an effective preventive action should cover the following points: · Identification of perceived risks during project management reviews · The non-conformities reported in non-conformance reports or audits, defect logs or testing, review reports and customer complaints. Most of the customer complaints are not recorded. If we are willing to listen, these can be heard in client meetings. · Experiences from the past—experiences of other teams, locations who were on similar tasks, post-mortem reports of completed projects and lessons learnt from reports. Another point to be addressed is the onus of the preventive actions. Ideally, it can be the team who is directly involved in the operation where the error has to be prevented. However, in some cases it is better to have one-man teams. If the organizational climate is right it will be a good idea if the non-conformity is published and invite volunteers for preventive actions.
When can the preventive action be called effective? Will it be effective, if non-conformance is prevented in one project? Or when it is prevented in all projects in the same location? Or when it is prevented in all projects at all locations? It is advisable to test the preventive action in one project before implementing it at on a broader scale. Philip B Crosby’s five-step methodology can be effectively deployed for implementing preventive actions. The five steps comprise: · Defining the problem · Applying a fix to the problem · Identifying the root causes · Implementing preventive action · Evaluating and follow-up activities LACK OF MONITORING AND MEASUREMENT: Even if as part of a methodology, evaluation and follow-up methods are defined, it is advisable to include monitoring of preventive actions during: · Review of project plans to ensure that all preventive actions taken in the past and currently in progress are included either in the risk management section or operational processes of the project plans. · Review of the quality management system to ensure that the proofed and time-tested preventive actions are institutionalized by incorporating them into the QMS of the organization. · Internal and external audits. · Project management reviews. LACK OF RECOGNITION: This appears to be the simplest as well as the most complicated factor. The challenge lies in bringing in a system to identify the best contributions. In a highly matured organization, selection by peers can be adopted. However, this can lead to negative results if the team is not matured and different factors such as informal groups and formal groups can influence the selection. The other alternatives are to have a panel of external judges or to have an internal panel with credibility. NOT PART OF HANDOVER/TAKEOVER PROCEDURES: Especially in industries where the rate of employee turnover is high or the frequency of job rotation is high, the onus of preventive action may shift along with the person responsible for the area of operation. This would make it difficult for the person to proceed with the preventive action project. Most quality improvement initiatives fail due to this problem. This can be reduced to a large extent by laying out a careful process which involves the handing over the charge of preventive action to the successor in a formal manner. NO PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: In a competitive scenario where switching jobs is not an exception, the growth path of employees within the same organization is very narrow. However, there are a lot of exceptions and they are growing within the organization due to lesser competition. Apart from recognition, setting of performance standards like ‘at least one preventive action during the appraisal period to become eligible for promotion or exemplary performance’ will have a positive impact.
LACK OF KNOWLEDGE: Nobody generally takes initiatives in areas where they lack knowledge. Constant training on methodology and sharing experiences are the only way out. There are no short cuts. These can be part of the induction programs organized for new comers. Periodic refresher courses will help the team keep abreast with the latest developments. LACK OF COMMUNICATION: It is often found in many cases the enthusiasm evaporates before the preventive action reaches some meaningful stage. This results in lack of communication or ineffective communication across the team. The people responsible for communicating lives under the impression that every thing is fine and every body knows what is happening. Reality may be entirely different. Only the people directly involved in defining preventive action will know the facts while those who are supposed to carry out the task may be ignorant about the developments. While designing the channels for communication, care must be taken to ensure that they are effective. We can’t presume that the message has reached everyone, just by putting the matter on the notice board or by issuing a circular. Seminars and workshops can be better options. Effective communication can generate the awareness required to drive the whole movement forward. PROBLEM DEFINITION · During the acceptance testing of a module, 65 defects were reported by the client which resulted in customer dissatisfaction, employee dissatisfaction and rework. · Average rework time per program unit is one hour. ROOT CAUSES IDENTIFIED · Lack of experience among team members. · No performance standards available for coders and testers. · Lack of awareness of zero defects and price of non-conformance. · Tight schedule. · Lack of recognition. · Lack of communication. PREVENTIVE ACTIONS · Training on development tool. It could be 16 hours of theory and 25 hours of hands on. · Training on software testing for 10 hours. · Certification for coders and testers. · Performance standards for coders and testers were set and communicated which was zero defect during unit testing for coders and zero undetected errors for testers. · Peer reviews and peer testing were introduced. · Introduction to zero defects and price of non-conformance were given to the team for two hours. · Function point was used for estimation and the schedules were proofed. · ‘Best performer’ award was introduced. · ‘Lessons learnt’ reports were introduced and were made a part of the induction programs. · Institutionalizing the process by publishing it in the Process Improvement Procedures Manual (PIPM) and making it mandatory. RESULTS · Reduction of rework time from one hour per unit to 15 minutes per unit. · Better exposure to team. · Job satisfaction. · Savings to the tune of 13% of the projected profit. PA ABRACHAN |