Impressions of Kaoru Ishikawa's "QC history in Japan," 1968.

Kaoru Ishikawa, a central figure in Japanese Total Quality Management (TQM), wrote an article in 1965 discussing the history of TQM in Japan. The interesting aspect of this article is that it was composed in the early days, emphasizing that different paths have existed from the beginning and have evolved to the present day.

1️⃣ Statistics QC

The first stage of Japanese quality control (QC) began with the importation of statistical quality control from the United States. It started after World War II and involved interactions with the GHQ. In 1950, the renowned Dr. Deming delivered an eight-day lecture on control charts, igniting interest in implementing Statistical Quality Control (SQC) in numerous Japanese plants.

However, from the outset, there was a growing sense that this approach was inadequate. Ishikawa described it as “unbalanced.” They began their search for a better approach. However, it is essential to note that Ishikawa never claimed that statistics are unnecessary. He has repeatedly emphasized the importance of statistics, even in this article.

2️⃣ Company-wide QC

In 1954, Dr. Juran visited Japan and held a seminar for the country's top management. He later described the Japanese TQM as not truly being TQM. It is “company-wide QM.” Probably the most famous activity is the “QC circle,” which involves frontline workers. What is important here is that, in parallel with the QC circles, they also focus on training top management. (That’s why Dr. Juran was invited.) In other words, “company-wide” should be understood as the involvement of the entire vertical hierarchy of an organization in quality. It represents a shift from a small group of specialists to all workers. Additionally, the foundation of this movement is “Respect for Humanity."

Around the time of Dr. Juran’s seminar in Japan, Dr. Ishikawa launched a radio program to educate team and group leaders about the “control chart.” The textbook for this radio program is available in some libraries. (They had to purchase this textbook. Otherwise, it would have been free. The textbook cost ¥150 at that time.) If the students of this program have genuinely grasped this material, there must be highly sophisticated control charts on the shop floor. It’s no wonder that quality has improved.

3️⃣ Kanri

Another critical discussion that emerged alongside the “company-wide” movement is “What is Kanri?” This is a fundamental discussion for Japanese QC, as they introduced the translation of “control” as “Kanri.” However, typically, “Kanri” means “Management.” This implies “Control = Management.” Ishikawa admits that there are instances in which TQM has focused too much on the control aspect and overlooked quality.

The primary discussion surrounding this topic is to determine the minimum level of control necessary to maintain quality. Often, we fail to define and manage this minimum level, resulting in poor quality conditions. Consequently, data is collected, but inspection and defect standards remain unclear, leading to poor decision-making. Escaping such chaos was the original intention, which remains relevant in most places today. Additionally, what is the minimum level of control required to implement Kaizen without compromising quality? When “Don’t do that” and “what is free to improve” are clear, people can focus on Kaizen. Frequently, these remain unclear. As a result, people may hesitate to change due to the fear of making incorrect modifications.

Many Japanese Total Quality Management (TQM) tools originate from this philosophy. One such tool is “Hoshin Kanri,” which is often translated as “Policy Deployment.” However, we must remember that it is based on quality control and process control. Implementing “Hoshin Kanri” without these foundations can be risky.

4️⃣ Quality assurance

Another prominent discussion is the return to the original question: “What is quality?” As they revisited this question, quality assurance extended from the design phase to the post-service period, making the activity broadly cross-functional. Toyota’s recent focus on “Jikoutei-Kanketu (Self-process completion)" is derived from such thinking.

This topic has generated considerable thought and discussion; however, unless we address other issues such as statistics, company-wide involvement, and Kanri, none of these approaches will be effective. A TQM expert came to discuss “Jikoutei-Kanketu,” but when he learned that little progress had been made on the topics mentioned, he turned pale. His message was, “Kaizen, Kaizen, Kaizen the genba.”

The four elements of TQM—statistics, vertical engagement, control, and quality assurance—identified by Ishikawa in this article remain essential. Interestingly, the focus tends to vary based on the individual we are conversing with and the timing of the discussion. Similar to many authors in this domain, they prioritize different aspects depending on when their articles were written. This illustrates the challenge of achieving a balanced viewpoint. It serves as a reminder of our inherent biases; yet, it is crucial to maintain a comprehensive perspective of the entire system.

References:

Ishikawa, Kaoru. (1968). "日本のQC史". Engineers, No.243, p. 26- 35.