Question

What were the early indications that the system was not working as planned and why they were ignored? Why weren't improvment efforts more effective?

Case study below:

and supervisors, who were asked to implement appli cable elements in their departments, was minimal Consequently, many of the procedures and instruc tions did not reflect work realities. They depicted an ideal and were ultimately challenged as supervisors and process operators tried to implement them. But, since the clock was ticking and Megaproducts was threaten ing to cancel orders, implementation proceeded with promises of a complete quality management system revision once improvements were in place Making the quality system operable was chaotic Managers, not wanting to appear unsure of their changed responsibilities and authority, clung to the status quo. Training-when done -focused on lo level employces, which left supervisors without a goo understanding of new requirements. They were caught saying one thing but doing another. Interfaces between departments and individuals, although described in an organizational chart and statements of authority and responsibility, were not truly func tional. System workflow faltered because new rela tionships and interdependencies encountered ol departmental barriers. Audit reports and corrective actions languished because the president periodically overrode the quality manager's authority, fearing delivery promises might be compromised. Hou owever early implementation steps were handled well. Gaps and shortfalls were identified, and proposed solutions recommended. But, because of time, it was assumed that acceptance and adoption would be automatic Steering committee members rationalized that every one knew what needed to be done because solution finding had been such a fervent effort. However, like many improvement projects, concluding steps were inadequately thought through and poorly managed Proposed solutions were not completely integrated into daily activities Eventually the Steering Committee realized that they lacked a comprehensive plan that would make system changes truly operational. The Committee understood that t his created indecision at supervisory levels, plus inadequate coordination and dissatisfac tion by those trying to make the changes workable They saw that first-line design project managers, wri ters, and artists were trying to maintain a sense of order and get their work done by falling back on cus omary routines. Amazingly, their "stopgap" actions allowed them to get some of the Megaproducts pro- jects back on schedule, but they realized that they must go back to the drawing board to develop a com prehensive plan. Time was running out