1-02-30 Charting Service Quality Improvements: ACase Study

Jeanette Newman

PayoffFor one IS department, quality improvement began with a simulated application of theMalcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, which provided much-needed direction to theIS staff. This case study describes the resulting principles of quality, the quality planningprocess, and the tools used and developed by IS in its quest to deliver better service quality.

IntroductionMedtronic, Inc., is a leading manufacturer of pacemakers, heart valves, and othertherapeutic medical devices. It is a $3.6 billion market growing at a rate of 8% annually.With its worldwide headquarters based in Minneapolis, Medtronic has 9,300 full-timeemployees worldwide serving 80 countries. Medtronic is ranked 331 in the Fortune 500.

The mission of the Corporate Information Services (CIS)department is to support andadd value to Medtronic's overall objectives by becoming a world-class applier ofinformation technology (IT). The IT professionals’ responsibilities are to enable Medtronicto:

· Track and analyze technology.

· Reformulate paradigms and business processes.

· Promote an understanding of and commitment to business change by working with thebusinesses, understanding their objectives, and providing education on how newtechnologies can optimize objectives and solutions.

· Transfer technology into the mainstream.

The SafeKeyper Certificate Issuing System department is responsible for theestablishment of corporate IT strategies, architectures, and standards; core businessapplications development and support services; worldwide network management;client/server and microcomputing support services; and related training. The CISorganization has implemented Self-directed Team since 1988. Today, there are 18 teamstotaling nearly 100 employees. Some of the larger business units and facilities have theirown IT professional providing direct guidance and support, as well as serving as a partnerwith CIS counterparts on new development and the establishment of strategic directions.

Defining Service QualityQuality is essential in Medtronic's products. For instance, six sigma quality is not a highenough standard for heart-valve-replacement products. Zero defects is the only acceptablestandard.

The quality movement at Medtronic has reached deep into the organizational valuechain, affecting everything from the actual manufactured product to the backroomCorporate Information Services. The focus on SafeKeyper Certificate Issuing System

Previous screen

service quality began in late 1987 at Medtronic. The quandary is how to make sense andmeaning of all the influencers and jargon—for example, the Malcolm Baldrige NationalQuality Award, PONC (price of nonconformance),10X improvement, benchmarking,measurements, process management, six sigma, customer-focused quality, andreengineering—as it relates to the service side of quality in IS.

The Quality JourneyFor CIS, the journey began when the executive management and the corporate quality

department prepared to deploy the corporate quality improvement goals throughout thecompany. Initially, the company focused on issues related to defining what quality is, whatneeds to be done, and what could be done to achieve it. A quality improvement processwas formulated with four underpinning concepts:

· Exceeding customer requirements. This involves knowing the customers and theirexpectations of CIS services and products are essential regardless of where they are onthe value chain.

· Error-free performance. Measuring the service requirements to achieve error-freeperformance enables CIS to understand the root causes of problems and how changesin service approaches affect the error rate.

· Measurement. This quality concept involves establishing methods of measuringmeaningful information and events so that progress can be demonstrated.

· Problem prevention. There are two sides to this quality concept. First, after a problemhas occurred, it is necessary to determine the initial course of action to take to fix thecurrent situation. These methods are for complex and large situations rather thansmaller problems. Second, problem prevention involves contingency planning. Often,management recognizes the fire fighters or situation fixers rather than those whopurposefully prevent problems from ever occurring. Problem preventers are moredifficult to find, although measurements are expected to help.

These four concepts were used to define what quality means at Medtronic. The entireCIS staff went through a three-day training course to learn the concepts and theterminology associated with them. Quality concepts rank right up there with apple pie andbaseball—it is hard to resist buying in to these concepts—but at this point CIS staffmembers felt as if they were being asked to play ball without being told how to keep score,how to begin, or how to recognize victory or accomplishments. SafeKeyper CertificateIssuing System staff members struggled for several years pursuing the integration ofquality performance into the methods of doing business.

Initial Mistakes

Hands-Off Management Style Too Quickly.The management staff felt that this was a perfect opportunity to allow the newly

created Self-directed Team(SDTs) to take on the task of quality improvement as one of

Previous screen

their team objectives. However, the self-directed teams needed more coaching andmentoring than anticipated.

Management needs to remain actively and visibly involved in the quality improvementprocess. It is not just another task that can be delegated to the self-directed teams or thequality improvement teams—everyone needs to be actively and visibly involved.

Measuring Anything.As a result of the first mistake, the self-directed teams were encouraged to establish

measurements in their service area. Although some of the teams measured valuableinformation that assisted them in improving their services to their customers, most teamsmeasured anything that was simple and relatively risk-free, which proved to be easy butmeaningless.

Measurements need to be meaningful to the provision of services to customers;therefore, the measurements must be meaningful to the self-directed teams providing theservices to the customer. Measurements also need to be humanly possible to have animpact; likewise, goals must be meaningful.

For example, the help desk initially measured the number of calls it received each day.This measure in and of itself tells very little. This information helps with the scheduling ofresources, but would the long-term quality goal be to increase the number of calls? Morecalls may indicate that more people are having trouble. A decrease in call volume mayindicate that fewer people are having problems, or that they no longer find help deskservices useful.

Malcolm Baldrige Award SimulationBy early 1991, a representative from the SafeKeyper Certificate Issuing Systemdepartment became involved in the Society for Information Management(SIM), of whichMedtronic has been a long-standing member. Society for Information Management wasforming working groups to discuss the relationship between quality and IS. Several qualityworking groups had been established across the country and Medtronic's CIS departmentjoined one in the Midwest. The goal of the working group was to approach quality fromthe perspective of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. The quality workinggroup was challenged to answer the questions: How would the group rate against theBaldrige criteria if it were a stand-alone company? What are some of the best practices inIS organizations participating in the group?

Step One: Reviewing CriteriaThe process was to review one or two of the seven sections in the Baldrige Award

criteria each month and present to other members of the group information that could beincluded in that section of the application; for example, strengths, weaknesses, and issuesneeding clarification. No one company represented in the quality working group hadsuccessfully deployed all seven sections of the Baldrige criteria. Most companies weredoing well in some sections and not well in others. A few companies were just beginningto address quality in information systems.

The quality working group in which Medtronic participated had representatives fromcompanies with experience in applying for the Baldrige Award, namely, IBM-RochesterMN and Tennant Co. Other companies represented in the Midwest quality working groupwere: Burlington Northern, Cargill Inc., Data Card Corp., Donaldson Company Inc., Land

Previous screen

O-Lakes, Lifespan, Mayo Clinic Sieben 7, Minnegasco, Onan Corp., Schreiber Foods,Inc., Thermo King Corp., and UFE, Inc.

Step Two: Identifying Leading PracticesThe group discussions encouraged the identification and selection of leading practices

that the group felt deserved acknowledgment. These were eventually combined withpractices identified by SIM's other quality working groups. Examples of leading ISpractices (along with their section listing in the Baldrige criteria) include:

· Leadership (Section 1.0). The vision for IS established and rolled out to thecorporation.

· Human Resources Development and Management (Section 4.0). Thecompanywide communication vehicle to senior management for ideas and suggestions.

· Quality and Operational Results (Section 6.0). Supplier quality results to ensure theQuality Of Service and products provided by suppliers.

· Customer Focus and Satisfaction (Section 7.0). Customer account teams toimprove customer/supplier relationships and partnerships.

Step Three: Performance LevelsUpon completion of this exercise, the group began the task of describing the levels of

performance or achievement for each section of the Baldrige criteria according to thecriteria's deployment scale. The language in the Baldrige criteria does not always apply tointernal organizations and is not always easily interpreted in relationship to IS specifically.That added to the group's task.

A matrix was used to determine at what point on the scale the business communitywas performing, according to the criteria in the Baldrige Award and from the SoftwareEngineering Institute (SEI). The outcome is the tool called the Matrix BenchmarkingGuide; it is illustrated in Appendix A.

Step Four: Creating an Assessment ToolThe SIM working groups developed descriptors to assist in the simulation of the

ranking from an IS perspective. The assessment tool shown in Appendix B describes thelevels of performance an IS organization can achieve with regard to Section 1.1.--SeniorExecutive Leadership—of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award.

Step Five: The Actual Baldrige SimulationNext, the companies represented in this working group used these tools to simulate the

ranking of the IS department by actual Malcolm Baldrige examiners. This simulationprovides baseline measurements at the macro level, presenting a picture of the current stateof the IS department and the areas in which it is most deficient. Decisions can then bemade as to where more effort needs to be applied based on this process. Exhibit 1illustrates an internal ranking that was the outcome of this assessment simulation process.

Previous screen

Previo s screen

Previous screen

The final output of the award application simulation exercise by the various qualityworking groups was a workbook entitled SIM Working Group: Focus on Quality—Quality Assessment and Planning Tools for IS.(The Appendixes include materials fromthis workbook. For more information, contact the SIM International, SIM Headquarters,401 North Michigan Ave., Chicago IL 60611-4261; phone (312) 644-6610; fax (312) 245-1081.)

Methods for Quality Improvement and InnovationAs a result of the process, the Baldrige Award criteria were effectively used to develop acommon perspective on quality and the current state of Medtronic's SafeKeyper CertificateIssuing System organization, so that it can make diligent contributions toward thecompany's goals. Because of the understanding and knowledge gained from the simulationapproach using the Society for Information Management quality assessment tool, the CISdepartment was able to assess and rank itself according to recognized standards andcriteria. This method is more structured, understandable, and beneficial in the long run thanany previous approaches.

According to the assessment of Medtronic's CIS department, two areas that neededfocus for quality improvement were leadership and quality and operational results.Leadership refers to the ability of upper management to influence the positive progresstoward quality improvement and innovation. Leaders put actions behind their words whenit comes to investing in quality, conversing about quality objectives, encouraging thosewho are struggling, and providing direction regarding the quality journey. To address theleadership issues, principles of quality and a quality planning process were established.

Principles of QualityAs a result of experience and the strong influence of the Baldrige Award criteria,

several principles of quality were established to articulate values and concepts that areencompassed by the term quality and to encourage all IS employees to act according tothese principles. The organization, especially IS management, is expected to understandthese principles and use them to guide quality improvement efforts. The principles are:

· Understanding the IS customers' wants and needs. It is important to appreciate roleson the value chain in order to realize more satisfied and delighted customers. This iscustomer-focused quality.

· Seeking opportunities that contribute to the improvement of the quality of products,services, and relationships. IS must also execute and follow-through on theseopportunities. This relates to process management.

· Gathering, analyzing, and measuring process data to make business decisions thatimprove quality. This involves monitoring progress and benchmarking to the best inpractice.

· Being empowered and accountable to take action as a team member to improve thequality of business processes. Skills and behaviors necessary to be successful in these

Previous screen

endeavors have to be identified and developed. The key words here are adaptation andteam work.

· Upon introducing new products and services, focusing on problem prevention, anddoing it right the first time and doing the right things first.

Quality Planning ProcessThe quality planning process describes the steps that assist in the quality journey.

Exhibit 2 illustrates this process of improvement. The process begins, as do the Baldrigecriteria, with leadership.

Quality Improvement Process

Leadership provides the process with values, concepts, expectations, requirements, andany necessary adjustments to the quality vision. The organization uses this process as atemplate for assessing its services and products. Most parts of the CIS organization havejust begun to understand their services and the processes associated with them. There aresome parts of the organization that have taken the quality planning process through stepfour—benchmarking implementation with external organizations. Subsequent changes willbe determined by the results of the process.

Process Management.Process management is the source of quality improvement and innovation. The

assessment of the department's processes and their value to the external customer, throughthe IS department's internal customers, assists the CIS department in fully understandingits services and how they are requested of IS. This knowledge positions CIS to realizesignificant quality improvements. The output of this step is the clear definition of theclient's (i.e., internal customer's) requirements and the definition of the processes involved.

Opportunities.Through communications with clients and a thorough understanding of processes,

CIS is prepared to identify key services that, in the eyes of the client, require IS attentionand improvement. With the identification of key services or products, and their respectiveKey Performance Indicator, CIS can then channel its energy and efforts more effectively.The client must be involved in these steps. As a result, key performance indicators supportthe focus on the client and the IS partnership.

Information and Analysis (Prebenchmarking).With a focus on the key service or product area, CIS is in a position to spot current

performance data trends and set goals that are in line with Medtronic's corporate goals of10X improvement in cycle time reduction, defect-free performance, and customersatisfaction. This step concludes with established baseline measures.

Previous screen

Benchmarking ImplementationDuring the implementation step, CIS looks outward at how others perform similar

processes. This step can be accomplished with other departments in Medtronic or withexternal companies. The establishment of benchmarking partners and methods of datacollection are decided in this step.

Information and Analysis (Postbenchmarking)Information collected and analyzed during benchmarking is assessed for innovative

ideas to improve processes. The department then decides which part of what it has learnedit is willing to apply to improve IS processes. It may be necessary to take the risks that arerequired for learning and challenging the status quo.

Adaptation.Once the IS group has selected changes to implement, this step entails the work to

adapt the current process to the new environment.

Changes and Actions.Any changes implemented need to be reviewed and assessed after their

implementation so as to continually improve the process. This part of the process bringsthe IS group back to the beginning of the cycle.

The end product of these changes and improvements to IS processes is the satisfactionof IS customers and clients. During periods of change, it is sometimes hard to rememberthat daily operations continue to require an amount of resources. It is imperative to plan andinvest in the human resource sides of the process. In an IS organization of nearly 100people, one member of the management team is charged (in addition to otherresponsibilities) with the orchestration, leadership, and application of the quality methodsand processes. However, it is everyone's responsibility to be actively involved in qualityimprovement. The staff is expected to participate in various quality improvement effortsrelated to quality goals for the department.

Measurements--The Key Struggle in Information SystemsThe SafeKeyper Certificate Issuing System department discovered that Section 6.0 of theBaldrige National Quality Award criteria—Quality and Operational Results—emphasizedmeasurements and demonstrable evidence of progress in graphical form. Likewise, allother sections of the Baldrige Award criteria require data to support statements ofaccomplishments.

Measurements appear to pose the most difficulty when applied to a serviceorganization. The idea of measurements produces a lot of handwringing. There are threetypes of measurements, and they are experienced in order. They can sometimes beconsidered like stages.

Stages of MeasurementFor the CIS department, three stages of measurement were experienced (and continue

to be experienced) at different times.

Previous screen

Historical Measurements (Or Measuring What HappenedYesterday).Measuring history is, for the most part, like trying to drive an automobile by staring

in the rear-view mirror. IS measurements such as Central Processing Unit uptime, diskerrors, and response time are historical measurements.

These measures lack long-term goals and as such could not advance the department'squality goals. Historical measurements cause service providers to measure to fix the pastrather than anticipate and manage the desired future—in this case, the goal of encouragingand rewarding problem prevention.

Superficial Measurements (Or Measuring for Measurement'sSake).With such measurements, luck is the primary success contributor. In many IS

service areas, there were meaningless forms of measurement to satisfy some managementinfatuation with quality charts and graphs. Few of these measurements had anything to dowith what was important to the department's Self-directed Team and the services theyprovide their customers. Some of the measurements were out of their control, with theself-directed teams needing additional information from other groups to makeimprovements; however, groups did not always keep each other informed.

For example, the data center operators were measuring the number of processes thatabended or errored during the nightly production runs. The operators knew the primarybusinesses and the applications that were giving them the most trouble. They hadcategorized the roots causes (i.e., operator error, machine error, or application error) andwere graphing this information. That is where the data was recorded and that was where itstayed. The data center operators did not communicate the information to others in theorganization. As a result, the measurement was meaningless.

Incremental Measurements (Or Measuring Something in theHope It Will Move IS in the Right Direction).Subliminal thought is the primary success contributor in these instances. For

example, in May 1991, which marked the beginning of the SafeKeyper Certificate IssuingSystem department's fiscal year and the process of objective setting, each self-directedteams was required to have a quality goal for fiscal year 1993. The CEO gave somedirection for long-term quality by providing nine customer-focused quality goals. Eachdivision was required to have a formal quality plan in place, with quarterly reports going tothe operating committee. CIS commenced with the development of its quality plan andrelated five-year objectives. The self-directed teams were required to have within theirobjectives a five-year quality objective with the first-year goal.

The result was 18 quality objectives measuring 18 different events or situations, mostof which were not meaningful to the respective self-directed teams or the department. Theteams were measuring something that was easy and would satisfy the objective for theyear. This was not only wasteful, but it was difficult to report on in a concise fashion to theupper-management committee. Much effort and energy was being spent to develop,monitor, and measure these events. In addition, these events were all focused in differentdirections. All the self-directed teams were trying hard, but in the end were standing still.

Previous screen

Innovative Measurements (Or Measurements Meaningful toCustomers with 10X Improvement Goals).It became evident that the approach to measurement was ineffective. There had to

be another way of orchestrating the self-directed teams and the successful integration ofquality in CIS. The new approach to measurement the department employed is outlined inthe following sections. Process reengineering and risk-taking are the primary successcontributors.

Identify Primary Businesses.The first step involves identifying the primary businesses the IS group was in—not

by cost center numbers or organizational structure, but by type of service offered to internalcustomers. Four primary businesses were identified: software development and support,network operations, client/server support, and customer services.

Determine Areas of Focus Relative to Measurement.The measurements need to focus on primary target areas so that all self-directed

teams can realize the role and contribution they are able to make. The primarymeasurements are established relating to defects and waste. Complementary measurementsare established that are necessary to monitor the whole quality service picture. Thesemeasures are for cost-effectiveness and customer satisfaction.

Mentor Teams/Work Groups on Measurements and Goals.The CIS department has learned from experience that it is imperative to provide

reassurance and coaching. The posture of letting the teams take on the quality objectivesand goals on their own was not successful. Some teams enjoy this challenge, but mostneed coaching and encouragement from the management staff. Not only does thisencourage the teams to move forward, but it also reinforces the management'scommitment to live through the measurement process with the teams.

Mentoring efforts include both formal and informal coaching by the quality managerand the team's direct manager. The formal aspect involves meetings scheduled by thequality manager to ensure that there is discussion about the measurements beingmonitored. Initially, the behaviors associated with measurement are the focus until processreengineering occurs and staff members are educated in and aware of their role relative tothe quality goals of the department. Thus, the need for formal mentoring is reduced andmore informal mentoring can take its place.

Establish an Easy Reporting System.Information should be published for all to see in its simplest form. The CIS

department chose to use the technology that it advocates with its customers. The samesoftware the department uses for other CIS internal reporting, such as project tracking andfinancial reporting, was selected as an appropriate system for the Quality InformationSystem(QIS).

The QIS is available to the self-directed teams for entering their data and observing itsimpact on the department's goals. The self-directed teams can see their measurementsgraphed automatically with actuals according to month or quarter and year to date, actual to

Previous screen

plan, and variances to plan. All teams in the department not only have access to their owninformation, but they are allowed and encouraged to view each other's progress. (Furtherdetails are provided in the section “More on the QIS Reporting System.“)

Provide the Quality Reporting System to Upper Management.The quality reporting system, as well as other internal reporting systems, is

available to upper management. It is to become the medium for SafeKeyper CertificateIssuing System project, financial, quality management, and status reporting systems,thereby eliminating the monthly report. It is also the medium for the SafeKeyper CertificateIssuing System department's vice-president to communicate to others within thecorporation on the department's progress.

Follow Through with Tactical Objectives Annually.Though the quality reporting system allows for the recording of measurements

associated with various services in CIS, it also allows for establishment of long-term goals.Long-term goals provide the basis for interim, annual objectives for the teams. The timespent on reestablishing quality objectives for the year is established through the long-termgoals.

Invest in 10X Improvements. The innovations that need to take place to achieve 10Ximprovements require investments in capital and expense. Innovations and 10Ximprovement cannot take place by expecting people to work 10 times harder, longer, andfaster with the resources, processes, and methodologies currently in place.

Revisit These Steps Annually.The CIS department must conscientiously review these steps and the progress that

it has made over time. The department can then recognize achievements, adjust the courseof direction as appropriate, and reaffirm any doubts about service.

In the next five years, the department is to set meaningful goals and achieve measurable10X improvements in key service areas. To avoid wasting time and energy pursuinghistorical, incremental, or superficial measurements, innovative improvement challengesare instead being sought. Among them is an approved plan to bring Object-OrientedProgramming into the department and to pilot it as a more effective and efficient alternativeto traditional programming.

More on the QIS Reporting SystemThe CIS QIS was developed using PILOT Decision Software(Pilot Software, Boston

MA). Medtronic uses this software for other executive information systems and for majorSafeKeyper Certificate Issuing System project reporting and CIS financial reporting. Theexhibits provide conceptual data rather than actual corporate data for the purposes ofexplaining the system.

In the first screen on the QIS (see Exhibit 3), the column headings reflect the fourprimary businesses. The primary areas of improvement important to the CIS departmentwere decided in the next step—determining areas of focus relative to measurement. Thatinformation is presented in the various row headings: defects, cost-effectiveness, waste,and customer satisfaction. The screen allows the user to view all these pieces ofinformation together, which is the most effective way of presenting the informationbecause it gives the user the big picture. For example, it may take a financial investment toachieve zero defects. A financial investment may affect cost-effectiveness and translate to

Previous screen

fluctuations in customer satisfaction. Balancing all of these measurements is necessary andit is the challenge CIS is pursuing.

Sample Screen of QIS Reporting System

Defects.Defects include problems or incidents that do not meet the original intent of the

system or service. The ratio for this information is based on total defects divided by totalopportunities for the period being reported, which in this case is monthly.

Cost-effectiveness.This measure is intended to establish an awareness and understanding of the total

expenses in the primary business functional areas to a denominator that is understood byMedtronic executives. That ratio is: total expenses divided by the total number of USemployees (the primary customers). This information helps to establish a baseline forcomparison and goals to establish and achieve.

Waste.This is a new category of focus and its purpose is to identify and address the

ineffectiveness of the CIS organization. It includes any time spent on an activity that did notbring value to the process. For example, when members of the CIS staff feel that their timehas been wasted on a particular activity, they record this information. Core areas of focuswith regard to waste have been initially identified by the Self-directed Team. They are:

· Unproductive meetings.

· Equipment failures.

· Inadequate documentation.

· Inadequate test data base.

· Project re-startup time.

Wasteful activities that are not included in these categories are available for the SDTs'discretion.

Customer Satisfaction.Customer satisfaction is measured using a survey in which CIS asks its customers

about service levels. The department has identified several attributes and asks customers torate the four primary services against them. The biggest area for improvement is currentlyin client/server support services. To see the detail associated with this data, the user of theQIS highlights client/server and activates the system for more details. Exhibit 4 displayswhich attributes the customer survey addressed and the respective rating. The total is

Previous screen

displayed as under plan according to the goal for 1997 established by the CEO. Thatchallenge lies ahead for the department.

Customer Survey Results

Quality GoalsTwo 1997 goals that have been established so far: customer satisfaction at 4.8 on a 5-

point scale and defects to zero. The waste and cost-effectiveness measurements requireseveral months of baseline measures before establishing potential long-term and short-termgoals. The CIS department intends to have interim, annual goals established for eachquality focus area and each business service area by mid-1994. However, once the goalshave been established, they will be reflected automatically in the QIS and variances willthen be available. The variances will be reported on the screen depicted in Exhibit 5, and thegraphical representation is illustrated in Exhibit 6.

Variance Report

__________________________________________________________________________| CIS || Quality Information System || Waste Measurement || July 1993 Actuals ||__________________________________________________________________________||GOAL: Five-Year Goal Is 0% Waste ||--------------------------------------------------------------------------||Group: Software Development MTD QTD || and Support | Ratio |Variance/Goal| Ratio | Variance/Goal||-----------------------------|-------|-------------|-------|--------------||Total |16.15% | | 16.15%| ||901 Unproductive Meeting | .64% | | .64%| ||902 Equipment Failure | 1.06% | | 1.06%| ||903 Inadequate Documentation | .85% | | .85%| ||904 Inadequate Test Data Base| 1.06% | | 1.06%| ||905 Project Re-startup Time | 1.91% | | 1.91%| ||-----------------------------|-------|-------------|-------|--------------|| RETURN | | MAIL | | QTD/YTD | | Utilities ||________| |________| |_________| |___________|

Variance Report Graph

The initial screen shows indicators in various colors (shown as patterns in Exhibit 3) toillustrate areas that are over plan, under plan, or on target. At a glance, the viewer can seewhere the potential opportunities for improvement are. The degrees of variability withinwhich the different colors are activated depends on the exceptions. Upon activating theExceptions button, the screen reflects the information as shown in Exhibit 7. The systemadministrator has established defaults for the variability; viewers can also set their ownexception reporting to their specifications, perhaps more or less stringent than those in the

Previous screen

default. Their graph will change the patterns respectively. Other features available from anyscreen are:

· Change reporting period.

· Send mail.

· Provide comments for customer feedback (shown as CFBK in Exhibit 3).

· Refer to documentation assistance with the ? button.

· Identification of support personnel by activating Support.

Exception Report

___________________________________________________________| | Exceptions || |_____________________________________|| | ||Defects | Under 1% or Over 2% || | ||Cost-Effectiveness | Under $170.00 or Over $275.00 || | ||Waste | Under 5% or Over 10% || | ||Customer Satisfaction| Over 4.0 or Under 3.66 ||_____________________|_____________________________________| | RETURN | | DEFAULT | | UPDATE | |________| |_________| |________|

Graphs and Variance Reports.The QIS graphs data in a variety of methods. The example in Exhibit 6 shows the

quarter to date with goals established through fiscal year 1997. All the viewer needs to dois highlight the field desired to display it and the graph is automatically generated.

The same is true of the variance report in Exhibit 5. The variances are calculated ascompared to the month-to-date and year-to-date goals. The data is reflected in textual ratherthan graphical form on this screen.

ConclusionParticipation in the quality working group allowed Medtronic's SafeKeyper CertificateIssuing System department to collaborate ideas on the Malcolm Baldrige National QualityAward goals; the working group also sparked energy into the department and provided theimpetus for the next steps on the departments quality journey. Although the CISdepartment does not have complete hard-data evidence to illustrate its progress toward 10Xquality improvements, the staff has a sense of direction that was missing before.

In summary, the following list highlights the steps that are important in IS qualityimprovement and measurement processes. IS management is advised to:

Previous screen

· Maximize the intelligence reflected in the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awardcriteria and use it as a guideline for standards of quality improvement processes andconcepts.

· Determine key IS products and services.

· Focus on one to three major areas of IS service.

· Mentor teams/work groups on establishing measurements and service goals for thesemajor areas.

· Publish progress in its simplest form and use the information technology that ISpromotes to other parts of the organization.

· Look inside and outside the organization for best practices and learning experiences.

· Follow-through with tactical objectives and commensurate reward systems annually.

· Invest in 10X improvement.

· Revisit these steps at least annually.

BibliographyBrown, M.G. Baldrige Award Winning Quality: How to Interpret the Malcolm BaldrigeAward Criteria (White Plains NY: Quality Resources, a Division of The KrausOrganization Limited, 1991).

Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Criteria. US Department of Commerce,Technology Administration, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Route 270and Quince Orchard Road, Administration Building, Room A537, Gaithersburg MD20899.

Working Group: Focus on Quality—Quality Assessment and Planning Tools for IS.Society for Information Management International(SIM), SIM Headquarters, 401 NorthMichigan Avenue, Chicago IL 60611-4267.

Author BiographiesJeanette NewmanJeanette Newman has worked for Medtronic, Inc., for more than 12 years, with the

past 7 years in the Corporate Information Services (CIS) department. Her managementresponsibilities include Medtronic strategic and architecture planning, providing leadershipto the quality improvement program, and co-mentoring the self-directed teaminfrastructure. She has held management positions in the areas of administrative services,data center, help desk, technical support, data base management, and microcomputerservices. She received a bachelor's degree in science from Western Illinois University andhas begun work on her master's in business from the University of St. Thomas.

Previous screen