I__. - International Military Testing Association

AN ILLUSTRATION
In 1988, the Air Force Human Resources Laboratory (AFHRL) started
a Total Quality Management (TOM) program in the laboratory. The
technique used to implement T4M was the Methodology for Generating
Efficiency and Effectiveness Measure6 (MGEEM) described by Tuttle
and Weaver (1986). MGEEM uses a group decision making technique
to clarify an organization's mission, identify its customers,
specify Key Result Areas (KRAs), and measure progress in the KRAs
using mission effectiveness indicators. Air Force Regulation 25-5
recommends using MGEEM to do TQM.
Despite top management support, the reaction to starting MGEEM at
AFHRL was negative. Had there been a vote at the TQM start-up
meeting, it is unlikely that a majority of the laboratory staff
would have endorsed implementing TQM or MGEEM. The commander saw
no reasonable alternative to MGEEM, however, so he directed its
implementation.
Twenty months after the program began, support for MGEEM was still
weak. Of the 94 (out of 380) people answering a laboratory TOM
newsletter, 80% said TQM/MGEEM was of 'No Value' or 'Some Value.'
Only 20% said it was of 'Moderate Value' or 'Significant Value.'
Several written replies said to stop MaEEM. The attitude toward
the TQM philosophy was more positive.
MGEEM was rejected because people in the laboratory did not have a
sense of ownership in the program. Although division-level
management participated in selecting the MGEEM KRAs and
indicators, they did not support using MGEEM in an R&D laboratory.
Thie attitude was passed on to lower levels of management, so few
people supported the program. This attitude prevailed, even though
several of the scientists in the laboratory helped develop MGEEM.
The finding that MGEEM was not widely accepted at AFHRL does not
mean that it is an ineffective technique for implementing TOM.
Some observers felt that MGEEM was rejected prematurely and did
not receive a fair test. Others felt that its rejection may have
been more a consequence of how management introduced MGEEM than
its methodology.
Had AFHRL used OD intervention techniques while implementing 'NM,
it is possible that they would have chosen a more acceptable TQM
approach. Three OD techniques which could have been applied are
survey feedback, the confrontation meeting (Beckhard, 19671, and
work teams. Advantages to this approach are that problem
identification is based on survey data; top management and work
teams define the problems and propose solutions: middle
management and workers develop the specific TQM procedures; and
the survey data provide a reference point for surveys administered
after changes have been made.
When employed by a skilled facilitator, these techniques increase
the chance of everyone developing a sense of ownership in the
procedures adopted. TQM tools, such as cause and effect diagrams,
461