Saturday, June 2, 2007

Innovation versus Quality

It is amazing how two decades can bring the same issues facing U.S. corporations back to the top of the pile. In an article in the June 11, 2007 BusinessWeek, "At 3M, A Struggle Between Efficiency and Creativity," the discussion centers on how the introduction of Six Sigma has brought cost reductions, improved efficiencies, and increased profit. At the same time, 3M has fallen from its time honored position as the number one corporate innovator.

The rush to Six Sigma has placed concentration on improved operating efficiency, driving up bottom-line profits. However, Six Sigma as most often implemented stifles creativity and innovation because it is aimed at improving existing processes, not determining when existing processes are outdated or no longer adequate. That is, Six Sigma does not describe how to address a process when that process is not capable of producing the desired output. I suppose one could argue that Design for Six Sigma is a process framework that enables an organization to design capable systems. Even so, what happens when an idea is conceptualized to which there is no practical use? Or what happens when there is a practical use for a concept, but one does not immediately recognize that use? From a Six Sigma point of view, it has no use and constitutes waste. Therefore, it should be discarded so as to simplify existing processes and reduce costs.

It reminds me of the days of Crosby quality where the goal was zero defects. It didn't matter whether the customer liked your product, just that you produced it with quality. As Dr. W. Edwards Deming used to note in his lectures, the last buggy whip manufacturer probably produced excellent buggy whips. Too bad nobody wanted them.

Innovation is not a process. Rather, it is a discontinuous act of creativity. It may spring forth while the mind is otherwise engaged. It may occur through the linkage of two or more unrelated ideas or concepts. It may emerge from the fog of vague ideas to a crystal clear concept in an instant. That is not to say that innovation cannot be planned. However, innovation must mature and ferment in the mind until it is ready to emerge. While the plan may be executed, innovation emerges on its own schedule.

Therefore, can a formal quality process such as Six Sigma and innovation coexist? It is doubtful. At least in the context of a formal Six Sigma process for innovation it is doubtful. Six Sigma is a tactical approach to improve an organization's performance in terms of efficiency, cost, and profit. Innovation is a strategic approach to provide the means for an organization to survive and thrive in the future.

3 comments:

Curious Cat said...

I do not believe process improvement is bad for innovation. Bad process changes can be bad for innovation. But if we are looking at a research and development organization where the output is new products then process improvement would be focused on improving the processes to make that happen. The type of process improvement would be different than those made to manufacturing a product better.

Some six sigma efforts are little more than cost cutting efforts. And they then might claim a “process improvement” that is really just cutting costs in R&D. But we should confused bad management with the good strategy of process improvement. Here is a good example: Fast Cycle Change in Knowledge-Based Organizations by Ian Hau and Ford Calhoun

Walt Casey, Ph.D. said...

Actually, you make a very good point. Ithink part of the problem is how innovation is defined. If innovation is defined as developing new processes, then there is a conflict with continual improvement. If innovation is defined as developing new processes, then they are very compatible. As you stated, in today's business environment process improvement processes such as six sigma often come to mean cost cutting.

Thanks for the comments.

Walt Casey, Ph.D. said...

curiouscat, let's try this again,

Actually, you make a very good point. I think part of the problem is how innovation is defined. If innovation is defined as developing new processes, then there is a conflict with continual improvement. If innovation is defined as continually improving on existing processes, then they are very compatible. As you stated, in today's business environment process improvement processes such as six sigma often come to mean cost cutting.

Thanks for the comments.