0,.1 i<

C'I :3 n.1\'15 :;)'I q C):;

MINNESOTA'SQUALITY

INITIATIVE

'FEBRUARY 1993Pursuant to 1991 Laws, Chap 345,Article 1 1 Section 17, sd 9

This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARy 1

The quality improvement movement 1

CORE and quality improvement: The connection 1

The CORE quality improvement initiative 1

Recommendation 2

THE CORE QUALITY IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE 3

The quality improvement movement 3

Quality improvement in government 3

Quality improvement in Minnesota state government 4

CORE and quality improvement: The connection 8

THE CORE QUALITY IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE: GOAI..S 13

Quality improvement initiative activities 13

DIRECflONS FOR THE FUTURE 17

BmUOGRAPHY 19

1

EXECUTIVE SUMlVIARY

Over the past several years, qualityimprovement concepts and tech­niques have been promoted and

successfully implemented by the private sec­tor. The Commission on Refonn and Effi­ciency (CORE) believes that the use of con­tinuous quality improvement Concepts andPI3.Ctices will help create a state governmentsystem that works better for everyone, withenhanced services for customers, full valueto taxpayers, and an improved work envi­ronment for employees.

The quality improvementmovement

Quality improvement is a managementphilosophy that focuses on customers, em­ployee empowennent, and data-based deci­sion making. Quality pI3.Ctices, which havehelped increase theproductivity and competi­tiveness of U.S. businesses, are now gainingwidespread acceptance in the public sector.

Minnesota's business sector is considered anational leader in the quality movement, andits public sector is also gaining recognitionamong quality experts. Quality improvementefforts at several state agencies demonstratehow this philosophy can be successfullyapplied to enhance the efficiency and effec­tiveness of agency processes and improvethe delivery of services to the state's citizens.

.CORE and qualityimprovement:The· connection

Quality improvement is an essential compo­nent of CORE's activities for four reasons:

1. The basic tenet of the quality improve­ment philosophy is customer satisfaction,and CORE's vision defines customer­and client-driven service delivery as a toppriority in its refonn proposals.

2. A quality approach focuses on the contin­ual improvement of processes, andCORE recognizes that processes must beanalyzed and redesigned to make govern­ment operations more efficient.

3. A quality approach will precipitate acultural change in government, whichwill help ensure that CORE's structuralredesigns achieve success.

4. Building continuous quality improvementpIaCtices into CORE's long-tenn system­ic improvement strategy could mitigatethe need for future refonn efforts.

The CORE qualityimprovement initiative

The goal of CORE's quality initiative is toincrease the awareness and use of quality

I

2

improvement concepts and tools in stategovernment. The commission sought toachieve its goal by:

• completing a project to demonstrate theapplication of the benchmarking tech­nique to state government operations;

• assisting two agencies in conducting self­assessments based on Minnesota QualityAward criteria;

• planning and sponsoring a seminar forthe governor and his cabinet to learnabout quality management concepts andtechniques; and

• forging coalitions with private and publicentities that can assist state agencies withquality initiatives.

Recommendation

If the governor and legislature are committedto providing quality services to the state'scitizens, they must support and rewardinnovation, partnerships, and risk-taking inthe use of quality tools in state government.

The commission believes that developmentand implementation of quality initiativesshould be the responsibility of each cabinetagency. New initiatives should be developedwith the input of quality improvement ex­perts and key external and internal govern­ment stakeholders, including: state manag­ers, state employee bargaining units, interest­ed legislators, the Minnesota Council forQuality, pri~sector business executives,and the Minnesota Quality Initiative.

Cabinet strategies should seek to accomplishthe following:

• Establish vehicles to obtain regular cus­tomer and client feedback on state seIVicedelivery.

• Provide access to training on qualityconcepts and practices for state employ­ees.

• Develop coalitions with key stakeholdersin the public-sector quality movement,especially state employee bargainingunits, the Minnesota Quality Initiative,the Minnesota Council for Quality, andpri~sector business.

• Match public or private organizations thatare willing to serve as mentors or volun­teer consultants with state agencies imple­menting quality improvement projects.

• Determine how to dedicate resources tocarry out agency quality initiatives.

3

THE CORE QUALITY.IMPROVE:MENT INITIATIVE

The Commission on Refonn andEfficiency was created in 1991 byGov. Arne Carlson and the Minne­

sota Legislature to lead a comprehensiveeffort to improve the management ofMinne­sota state government.

In order to move state government closer tothe ideal depicted in CORE's vision state­ment (found on the inside front cover of thisreport), CORE has been conducting analysesin such functional areas as human servicedelivery, human resource management, envi­ronmental services, rule-making, budgeting,and local government services funding. As acorollary project, the commission has devel­oped a quality improvement initiative. Thegoal of this initiative is to increase theawareness and use of quality improvementconcepts and tools in state government,especially among cabinet-level managers.

The quality improvementmovement

Quality improvement is generally defined asa strategic, integrated system for detenniningand meeting customer expectations. Underthis system, all employees, from top man­agement to front-line workers, use statisticsand process measures to continuously im­prove an organization's operations, services,and products.

A growing number of U.s. companies haveembraced the quality improvement philoso-

phy to help them increase productivity,regain and maintain market share, and com­pete globally. Efforts at such firms as Xe­rox, Ford Motor, and Zytec have yieldedimpressive results: drastic reductions in errorrates and cycle time, motivated employees,satisfied customers, and increased profitabili­ty. Successes like these have spurred therapid spread of the quality managementphilosophy.

Minnesota's business sector is considered anational leader in the quality movement.Several grounds can be cited for this distinc­tion. First, two Minnesota companies ­ffiM Rochester and Zytec Corp. - havewon the prestigious Malcolm Baldrige Na­tional Quality Award, in 1990 and 1991,respectively. Second, Minnesota has thelargest chapter of the American Society ofQuality Control, with more than 3,000members. Also, the Minnesota Council forQuality, established by ~e 1987 State Legis­lature, has achieved national recognition for

. its development of two quality awards andits sponsorship and coordination of a state­wide network of private businesses that haveadopted quality management approaches.

Quality improvementin government

Quality improvement practices are reachingbeyond the boundaries of the private sectorinto all levels of government. Although the

4

approach originated in manufucturing ­where outputs are tangible, statistical mea­surement possible, and customers easier todefine - quality improvement is beingadapted for use in governmental systems.

The wholesale introduction of quality im­provement from the private to the publicsector has many critics. James E. Swiss, aprofessor at North Carolina State University,cautions governments to accept qualitymanagement only if it is modified to accom­modate the unique characteristics of thepublic sector. Swiss and others argue thatattempts to apply quality improvement togovernment culture and operations are oftendistorted because government services,which are labor-intensive and subject to highvariability, cannot withstand quality improve­ment's rigorous measures and controls.Experts also warn that quality managementneeds strong, committed leadership, anelement that can be difficult to sustain in apolitical environment.

On the other hand, applying quality im­provement in the public sector has strongadvocates in public officials who have ledquality initiatives and achieved positiveresults. Joseph.Sensenbrenner, former mayorof Madison, WIS., and an expert at imple­menting quality in the public sector, says:". . . [A] quality strategy is not simply amatter of adopting a new set of slogans or anew accounting system. It's a matter of radi­cal restructuring - part sociology, part sys­tems theory, and part statistics - all aimedat liberating human ingenuity and the poten­tial pleasure in good work that lie at leastpartially dormant in every organization."

Brian Marson,comptroller general andchairman of the Service Quality SecretariatofBritish Columbia, has drawn on principles

of quality management and the serviceindustry to develop service quality conceptsthat he believes are better suited for applica­tion to the public sector. Marson claims thattwo of British Columbia's central offices,Purchasing and Comptrolling, significantlyincreased quality by finding out what cus­tomers want, designing services to meetcustomers' needs, providing customers withextraordinary service, setting service stan­dards, measuring service performance, andempowering staff to meet customers' needs.

When an agency or government considerswhether to take the path of quality manage­ment, perhaps more important than cautionsfrom critics or encouragement from advo­cates are the pleas from citizens to makegovernment more accessible and less expen­sive. Disgruntled taxpayers and fiscal strainhave forced the emergence of a reformimperative. Government officials understandthat they must respond to a strong publicexpectation that government must be "rein­vented. " Somehow government must changecitizens' perceptions that they are not receiv­ing high-value services for their tax dollars.For a growing number of public managers,continuous quality improvement is the wayto answer that challenge:

Quality improvementin Minnesotastate government

The concept of quality improvement is notnew to Minnesota state government. Boththe Loaned Executive Action Program(LEAP) in the 1970s and the Strive TowardExcellence in Performance (STEP) programin the 1980s included quality management-

related aspects as part of high-profile, short­term efforts to inject private-sector savvyinto public enteqnise.

The :first movement toward a systematic,comprehensive quality improvement effort,however, did not evolve from any fonnalstate action but from the efforts of an infor­mal, unofficial group ofcareer professionals,the Minnesota Quality Initiative. MQI is aloose-knit group of state employees dedicat­ed to the principles of quality improvement.By intent, the organization has no fonnalleadership and no home agency. This orga­nizational design, or lack of it, allows thiscadre of employees to avoid being "owned"by a particular commissioner or administra­tion and therefore avoid the risk of dissolu­tion when administrations change.

MQI started about four years ago from thedesire of about 10 high-level state civil ser­vice employees to encourage intra-agencycooperation and systems improvementthrough the use of quality management toolsand techniques. The group gathers for meet­ings several times a year, holds an annualretreat, and sponsors monthly breakfastsusually attended by 80 to 100 people fromcity, county, state, and federal agencies.

The sponsorship and planning of an annualconference on quality management for Min­nesota governmentemployees is theoutstand­ing achievement of the Minnesota QualityInitiative. Since 1989, when approximately125 state employees attended the :first confer­ence, attendance has nearly doubled eachyear. This year's program, "Quality in thePublic Sector - Beyond the Theory,"attracted more than 900public employees.

MQI has been highly effective in building acritical mass of public-sector employees

5

interested in applying quality improvementconcepts and tools to improve the effective­ness and efficiency of state service delivery.MQI, however, is not alone in this effort.Several other state employee organizationsalso deserve credit for promoting the princi­ples of quality management. For example,the Minnesota Council ofManagers recentlyrewrote its mission statement and reset itspriorities according to quality improvementconcepts. Also, a state employee recentlytook the initiative to establish a Minnesotachapter of the International Society for Qual­ity Government, an association dedicated toenhancing citizens' quality oflife by workingto continuously improve the quality andproductivity of government.

These three organizations provide forums forpeople to talk and learn about quality man­agement. At the same time, the qualitymovement in state government has spread toagency-wide initiatives. The efforts of sever­al state agencies to improve services byadhering to the quality philosophy are de­scribed below. Besides these efforts, indi­viduals in a variety of agencies are exploringthe possibility ofconducting quality improve­ment projects in targeted areas and of exe­cuting department-wide" initiatives. The vari­ety of programs within Minnesota stategovernment illustrates that implementation ofquality improvement cannot be standardized.The following examples reported by agencystaff demonstrate how each agency hasdesigned an approach based on the uniqueexpectations of its customer groups.

Pollution Control Agency

The Pollution Control Agency (PCA) islinking its quality improvement initiativewith its strategic planning. A new missionstatement and five strategic indicators have

6

been designed to infonn agency stakeholdergroups about the PCA's programs andpriorities. The indicators also provide agencymanagement with infonnation useful toimplementing the strategic plan and enableline staff to monitor the effects of their workprocess improvement efforts.

The PCA initiative includes fonnation of agroup of 30 volunteer facilitators who trainagency staff on the use of quality tools andan innovations board composed of membersappointed by the commissioner. A qualityassurance program is also being developed.

Department of Revenue

The Deparbnent of Revenue began a qualityinitiative in 1988 to increase employeeawareness of the concepts of quality andinvolvement in systems improvement. Theinitiative also was designed to analyze theagency's structure and work processes todetermine the changes needed to ensure acustomer focus.

The focus of the department's initial qualityeffort, the tax. auditing division, is surveyingall taxpayers who have personal contact withstate auditors. Results of the survey will helpthe division determine a benchmark forimprovements in the tax. and auditing pr0­

cesses. The division is also using surVey datato identify training opportunities for auditors.

In addition to its foray into quality improve­ment, the department also began a "reengi­neering" project in its sales tax. division. Areengineering approach uses breakthroughthinking and technology to achieve dramaticimprovements in productivity and effective­ness. The project's goal is to significantlyimprove service to sales tax. remitters andincrease compliance, without increasing the

overall budget. The project's core system isexpected to be in place by June 1993.

Department of Natural Resources

The Deparbnent of Natural ·Resources(DNR) Bureau ofInfonnation and Educationembarked on a total quality managementinitiative in February 1992. The bureau'sgoal is to become the best service providerwithin the DNR. The major focus of thebureau's program for 1993 is to enhanceleadership, human resource utilization, andmonitoring 'of customer satisfaction throughuse ofquality training, surveying, and imple­mentation of other quality tools.

Department of Transportation

The Minnesota Deparbnent of Transporta­tion (MnDOI) made a commitment in 1988to undertake a long-term continuous im­provement process with a customer-eenteredfocus. MnOOf's initiative has been drivenby the department's strategic plan. Theinitial implementation strategy was to createsuccessful individual projects within eachdistrict and office through an in-house train­ing effort. Every district and office hascompleted or is completing at least oneproject. Since 1989, 23 projects - rangingfrom processes involving aircraft registrationto district highway project scoping and utilityagreements permit application - haveachieved some success.

MnOOf has created a quality improvementtraining manual; trained 80 trainers, 130managers, and 400 supervisors; and restruc­tured the department's Quality ImprovementSteering Committee to include representa­tives of various employee bargaining units.

Department of Jobs and Training

Committed to becoming a total quality orga­nization, the Department of Jobs and Train­ing (DIT) has launched an agency-widequality awareness and training program. Anall-day seminar introduced 250 agencysupervisors and managers to the approach.The commissioner, the agency quality coor­dinator, and a former United Auto Workerspresident have conducted 14 follow-upsessions for DJT employees across the state.DJT is the first cabinet-level agency toattempt a top-down approach, like thatemployed by many private corporations, tobuilding a total quality environment.

Department of Health,Public Health Laboratories

When its customer base began eroding as aresult of increased competition from theprivate sector, the Public Health Laborato­ries of the Health Department began pilotprojects in two units. The goal of the MetalUnit and Microbiology Unit projects was toimprove turnaround time of lab results byapplying quality improvement tools, such aswork flow diagrams and fishbone and Paretocharts, to analyze and measure lab process­es. Project results indicate that the applica­tion of these tools facilitated the sharing ofinformation, reduced process inefficiencies,and increased staff understanding of theeffect their individual efforts have on thework of the entire lab.

Partners for Quality Education

In 1991, the Minnesota Academic Excel­lence Foundation, the Minnesota Council forQuality, and the Higher Education Coordi­nating Board collaborated to foster systemat-

7

ic quality improvement in education. Eightelementary and secondary schools, eighthigher education institutions, and 12 busi­nesses participated in a pilot activity todetermine the impact of using a MalcolmBaldrige Quality Award-type self-assessmentand continuous quality improvement processto transform education. The results of thePartners for Quality Education pilots indicatethat the self-assessment process provided aframework for other education reform initia­tives and helped institutions identifystrengths, weaknesses, and opportunities forimprovement.

The Partners for Quality Education effortwas deemed so successful that close to 50schools, school districts, and colleges willbegin self-assessments this year. In recogni­tion of these efforts, the Minnesota Councilfor Quality is developing a quality award forschools for 1994.

These examples provide a broad view ofhow quality methods are being appliedthroughout state government. Expandingparticipation in quality associations and pilotprojects testifies to the fact that a growingnumber of government employees are at­tempting to transform· the systems withinwhich they work. These employees believethat continuous quality improvement canhelp mitigate the problems inherent in bu­reaucratic systems and rebuild citizen confi­dence in state government.

8

CORE and qualityimprovement:The connection

In "Imperatives for Change: An Assessmentof Minnesota State Government," COREpresented five significant opportunities forreform that cut broadly across all areas ofstate government. The commission's investi­gation of state agencies revealed that govern­ment is not held accountable for results,lacks a strong customer focus, and hasfragmented and overlapping services, outdat­ed and infI.exible administrative systems, anda structure that does not deal effectively withthe turnover of top management. COREbelieves that, by employing quality improve­ment concepts and tools in state agencies,government operations and services will besignificantly more efficient and effective.

Quality improvement is viewed as an essen­tial component of CORE's work for fourreasons:

1. The basic tenet of the quality improve­ment philosophy is customer satisfaction,and CORE's vision defines customer­driven service delivery as a top priorityfor its reform proposals.

2. A quality approach focuses on the contin­ual improvement of processes, andCORE recognizes that processes must beanalyzed and redesigned to make govern­ment operations more efficient.

3. A quality approach will precipitate acultural change in government, whichwill help ensure that· CORE's structuralredesigns achieve success.

4. Building continuous quality improvement

practices into CORE's long-term system­ic improvement strategy could mitigatethe need for future reform efforts.

Customer satisfaction

CORE articulates in its vision that stategovernment should be oriented toward quali­ty outcomes, responsive to clients, andrespectful of stakeholders. These are gener­ally recognized as factors integral to anenvironment steeped in the principles ofcontinuous quality improvement.

In the quality improvement context, qualityis determined by customer needs and expec­tations, rather than by agency standards. Themultiple and frequently conflicting roles ofgovernment, however, make it difficult todetermine the customers of government.

In the public sector, the definition of "cus­tomer" must go beyond the usual sense ofany person who receives a product or ser­vice to include any person with expectationsabout a public activity or with whom infor­mation is shared. Potential customer groupsinclude the general public, taxpayers, direct­service recipients, other levels of govern­ment, m~mbers of regl$.ted professions andindustries, unions, the legislature, organizedbusiness consumers and providers, and otherspecial interest groups.

When there are few incentives to drivechange, quality management raises the prob­ability of services being better designed,more effective, and more cost-effective.

In a continuous quality improvement envi­ronment, state agency staff begin askingsuch questions as, "How does this activityadd value to the service?" and "What couldI do to improve the customer's access tome?"

Given today's society of segmented marketswhere consumers choose products to suitspecific needs, the commission anticipatesthat Minnesotans are likely to becomedisil­lusioned with traditional one-size-fits-allpublic services. Although the state does notyet have a strategy in place to move towardtailored, cost-effective service delivery,quality improvement is likely to be a domi­nant component of such a strategy.

Continual improvementof processes

Many of CORE's recommendations in itsfunctional area analyses call for changes inagency processes, particularly those thatdirectly affect customers. A quality method­ology provides a continual improvementstrategy.

Quality improvement focuses on analyzing~d measuring work flow processes in orderto eliminate rework and activities that add novalue. It differs from a more traditionalunderstanding ofquality in that it emphasizesdoing things right the first time.

Businesses have found that customer satisfac­tion can be enhanced by improving theprocesses by which a service is· deliveredthrough increasing efficiency, reducing theamount of rework and cycle time, and elimi­nating processes that do not add value.These private-enterprise methods are trans­ferable to government. While the servicesdiffer, the processes generally are similar.For example, states are beginning to useoutcome measures to refocus legislativepriorities and administrative processes, suchas budgeting. Process measurement, in suchareas as mailing, accounts payable, meet­ings, and asset management, is now beingemployed in earnest.

9

Focusing on processes has its dangers:

• One element of administration may beemphasiz£d at the expense ofother, vitalelements. Many Minnesota agencies haveonly recently begun focusing on resultindicators related to final customer servic­es. Now, they are being asked to consid­er how well processes are performing. If

.agencies disregard results, they run therisk of losing sight of their customers.

• A tendency may arise to proceduralize,then institutionalize, everything. Whenthis happens ·to processes, short-termgains may be followed by long-termservice stagnation. A results orientationremains essential for building organiza­tional momentum and enthusiasm.

• Environmental factors can qffeet a cus­tomer fOCUS. For state agencies, thesefactors include changes in state policies,legislative mandates and involvement byconstituency groups. These can quicklychange an agency's expected outcomesand, accordingly, its operational process­es. Quality improvement as an internalactivity, however, can assist, throughmeasurement, the reorientation ofagencygoals and outcomes.

Despite the potential dangers, the demon­strated benefits of a quality improvementeffort make it an important component in arestructuring of agency operations. Resultsor outcomes are a composite. of many :fac­tors, with processes chief among them.Processes dictate both how and how wellagencies will operate; quality improvementprovides a comprehensive analysis of both.

10

Structural reform requiresa cultural transformation

In its functional area analyses, CORE willrecommend significant structural refonn ofstate government operations. Experience hasshown that structural change, unless accom­panied by other change elements, does notachieve the desired results. In the 1970s, forexample, three state employment agencieswere merged into one large agency withgreat hopes for efficiency gains. Two yearslater, the legislative auditor found not onlyno efficiency improvement but a mergeressentially in name only. All three originalagencies continued to work independently.What was missing was a change in theculture of the organization. There was nonew, unified mission or philosophy, no newapproach to how they did business, no newcommon language.

For a restructuring to be successful, anagency needs an appropriate new perspec­tive, a cultural transformation. An effectivequality program, such as total quality man­agement, depends on a cultural transforma­tion. An organization with a successfulongoing quality improvement program canbe better positioned for all its members tocomprehend, accept, and support a structuralrefonn consistent with quality principlesbecause:

• Quality improvement enhances involve­ment and reduces anxieties ofemployees.It attempts to affinn and build confidencein all employees by allowing for conflictand mistakes.

• Quality improvement is not a quick fix.But the time it takes is appropriate for thereal cultural changes that accompany it.

• Cultural change is enhanced when em­ployees can see how their individual workcontributes to the agency's overall out­comes. The more infonned employeesare about their work's effect on overallagency perfonnance, the more ownershipthey will have in the organization and themore likely they will be to invest theirenergy to improve the quality of theprocess and the product.

• Sustaining positive cultural change re­quires ongoing e,ffOlt, but this is easilydisrupted by massive layoffs, majorpolicyshifts by new leaders, or other internaltumwil. While the quality movement andother cultural change agents can benefitstructural and ~ms refonn, thoserefonns should undertaken to reduceor ~trict the nega: 've impacts of organi­zational upheaval. '

Citizen disenchantment with government isat an all-time high. This disenchantment,however, is an impetus for change. If thepublic is made aware of real changes withinagencies and those changes can be demon­strated through measurable results, then itmight be persuaded to· support the changeagents.

Quality improvement requirescontinuous, long-term reform

Quality improvement can enhance stategovernment operations in the longer tenn,but it cannot be the latest "quick fix" tobudget, personnel, or systems problems. Aquality approach will reduce workplaceinefficiencies and increase production, butthe savings will take years to realize.

Several years of fiscal restraint have cut stateagency discretionary funds and forced hiringfreezes. Simultaneously, demands for gov­ernment services have grown. Under sucheconomic pressures, state agencies are com­peting with each other for their portion ofthe state government pie and learning to "domore with less. " However, when employeesare admonished to do more with less but nottaught how to work differently, the resultmay be less effective service delivery.

Because the budget strain is unlikely to easesoon, government is wise to adopt a qualityimprovement methodology that will train

11

employees to analyze and measure theirwork activities. Equipped with the tools theyneed to eliminate unnecessary processes andimprove productivity, employees will "domore with less" effectively.

Further, policy-makers and managers mustunderstand that quality cannot be used as theexcuse for position reductions or organiza­tional restructuring. If employees are wor­ried about losing their job or being moved toa different division, they will be unable tofocus on improving processes or satisfyingcustomers.

13

THE CORE QUALITY IMPROVEMENTINITIATIVE: GOALS

CORE believes that a commitment to. an environment of continuous quali­

ty improvement will further itsagenda of long-term reform and mitigate theneed for reform commissions in the future.The goal of CORE's quality initiative is toincrease the awareness and use of qualityimprovement concepts and tools in stategovernment. The commission sought toachieve its goal through a four-prongedapproach:

• Complete a demonstration project thatwould illustrate how a quality manage­ment tool can improve the effectivenessand efficiency of a state agency opera­tion;

• Help two agencies conduct self-assess­ments based on Malcolm Baldrige Na­tional. Quality Award· criteria;

• Build on existing state quality efforts andplant the seeds of a quality improvementmovement among state government'sexecutive branch leaders by providing aforum for the governor and his cabinet tobegin to learn the language of qualitymanagement and to understand how thisapproach can transform the culturalenvironment of state agencies; and

• Forge coalitions with organizations andindividuals in the .private and publicsectors who can exchange valuable infor­mation and expertise with state agenciesembarking on quality initiatives.

Quality improvementinitiative activities

Benchmarking project

In January 1992, CORE staff began abenchmarking pilot project for the Depart­ment of Administration's Central Mail Unit.The project was to test the usefulness of thebenchmarking technique in a governmentenvironment and to determine its usefulnessto other CORE projects. Technical assistancewas provided to CORE by a consultant fromthe Xerox Corp.

Xerox, nationally recognized for its success­ful use of benchmarking as a quality im­provement tool, defines benchmarking as"the continuous process of measuring prod­ucts, services and practices against thetoughest competitors or those recognized asleaders. " Benchmarking identifies gapsbetween an organization's performance andthat of the best in the iildustry.

The practice benchmarked for the COREproject was the internal postage billing sys­tem of the Central Mail Unit of Administra­tion's Print Communications Division. Cen­tral Mail, the primary mail handler for stateagencies based in St. Paul, processes morethan 30 million pieces of mail annually.

According to the facility manager, CentralMail has faced increasing mail volumeswithout receiving commensurate increases inlegislative appropriation or staff positions.The manager was looking for ways to better

,

14

focus more existing resources on mail pro­cessing.

The project team developed 15 recommenda­tions that included imProVements to thespecific steps within the billing process andthe financial and strategic structures of theunit. Administration management found thedata and recommendations so persuasive thatit is acting on them immediately. The rec­ommendations call for a $60,<XX> capitalinvestment that will be amortized over aboutfive years and will allow the reassignment ofat least one position and reduce overtimecosts.

The study concluded that benchmarking,although it has not been common in thepublic sector, is a process with universalbenefits. Benchmarking provides an excellentopportunity to examine work flow anddetennine process measures. Managers inany line of work should benefit from beingexposed to new ways of operation resultingfrom conversations and site visits with othersproviding similar types of services.

Agency self-assessments

The Malcolm Baldrige National QualityAward has contributed to the popularity oftotal quality management. This prestigiousprize is awarded annually to several U.S.comPanies that have proven outstandingquality processes and products. ComPaniesthat compete for the award must undergo arigorous self-examination process to apply.According to information published by theMinnesota Council for Quality, which hasdeveloped and administers its own version ofthis award - the Minnesota Quality Award- the fact-based self-assessment is a valu­able management and strategic planning toolfor organizations because it inventories

current activities; clarifies how activities fitinto an overall system; Provides a nonpre­scriptive, fact-based evaluation; identifiesareas where additional effort is needed; andacts as a roadmap for a quality imProVementplan.

For these reasons, CORE recruited twoagencies to complete the Minnesota QualityAward application. Although the participat­ing agencies would not be comPeting for anaward, their applications would be reviewedby examiners for the Minnesota QualityAward.

The self-assessments examine seven catego­ries ranging from leadership to customersatisfuction. Both the process and the prod­ucts of a self-assessment give an agency aframework for designing a quality programand can help establish a benchmark forprogress measurements.

Minnesota Council for Quality staff hasprovided valuable time and expertisethroughout the initial stages of this project.The council gives the state access to a poolof quality businesses that can assist govern­ment agencies interested in conducting quali­ty pilot projects.

In August 1992, the Department of Jobs andTraining and the State Board of TechnicalColleges agreed to conduct self-assessments.A corporate coach - one from Honeywelland another from Xerox - was appointed toeach agency to guide it through the process.

In early October, teams from both agenciesattended a half-day orientation session wherethey were trained to collect data in each ofthe seven application categories. It is ex­pected that the two pilot sites will completetheir self-assessment reports by Apri11993.

In the meantime, they will track their prog­ress. They will use the results internally andcontnbute data to a report on the assess­ment's process and value.

Quality improvement seminar

The quality improvement initiative gaveCORE'a timely opportunity to act as catalystof a comprehensive state quality effort bysponsoring a forum for the governor and hiscabinet to learn about quality improvementpractices.

Two steering committees composed ofrepresentatives from agency management, anemployee union, the private sector, CORE,and the governor's office planned theseminar's agenda and detennined desiredoutcomes. The result was a seminar focusedon three major themes:

• Continuous quality improvement;

• Leaders' role in quality improvement;and

• How quality concepts can improve thesystems and transform the culture of stategovernment.

The steering committees also strongIy rec­ommended that the governor promote aquality improvement agenda throughout hisadministration and that he hold his commis­sioners accountable for initiating qualityimprovement pilot projects in their agencies.

Approximately 55 cabinet-level managersattended the quality improvement seminar onSept. 16, 1992. Attendees included thegovernor, his executive staff, and approxi­mately 45 commissioners and deputies.

15

Presenters included Wayland Hicks, vice­president of Xerox; Larry Welliver, vice­president of the Honeywell Solid State Elec­tronics Center; Maury Cotter, quality con­sultant from the University of WlSCOIlsin;Jim Buckman, president of the MinnesotaCouncil for Quality; and a team of threeconsultants from Business Incentives. Theseminar was moderated by Bill Sweeney,chief executive officer of ITT Life.

Gov. Carlson invited more than 200 execu­tives from Minnesota's business and non­profit sectors to join his cabinet for a recep­tion following the seminar to acknowledgethe successful quality efforts of Minnesota'sbusiness leaders and to request their assis­tance in initiating more state quality pilotprojects.

Attendees were surveyed about the seminar,and most rated the event as worthwhile.Overall, 97 percent said they were satisfiedor very satisfied with the seminar. Almosthalf indicated that they would like to learnmore about how they can use total qualitymanagement techniques in their agencies.

Coalition buDding

Government cannot be run exactly like abusiness, but agencies should be encouragedto learn about the continuous quality im­provement practices that have benefited somany Minnesota companies. In launching itsquality initiative, the commission wanted theeffort to be undergirded by a strong public­private partnership that could serve as avehicle for the exchange of valuable infor­mation between the sectors.

Each of the three CORE quality projectsprofited from the contributions ofgroups andindividuals both inside and outside govern-

16

ment. Experts were tapped for infonnationand advice throughout planning and execu­tion stages.

The private sector exhibited strong andenthusiastic support for a quality improve­ment initiative in state government. Xerox'sinvolvement with CORE began in Novem­ber 1991, when a Xerox quality managerbecame a part-time consultant to CORE.The consultant introduced quality improve­ment concepts and tools to CORE staff andwas the catalyst for CORE's pursuit of thebenchmarking and agency self-assessmentpilots.

The staff of the Minnesota Council forQuality provided valuable consulting on thequality improvement seminar and the agencyself-assessments. The council also helpedCORE staff gain access to individW;l1s andbusinesses in the community that contributedconsulting resources to the seminar.

It is important that this relationship betweenstate government and the council be main­tained. Several businesses involved in thecouncil's activities expressed their willing­ness to serve as coaches or mentors of stateagencies or divisions that want to beginquality pilot projects.

Members of the Minnesota QualitY Initiativewere consulted on several occasions forinfonnation about existing quality efforts instate government. This group is dedicated tobuilding the quality movement in the stateand wanted to help ensure that CORE'sinitiative would positively affect ongoingefforts. MQI members often shared criticalinfonnation that kept the CORE qualityinitiative on track

The development of liaisons and the collec-

tion of infonnation extended beyond stategovernment employees and Minnesota'sprivate sector. CORE staff also collecteddata on quality methodology from academi­cians and quality improvement coordinatorsin other cities and states.

17

DIRECTIONS. FOR THE FUTURE

A s a result of its effort on the qualityimprovement initiative, CORE~ that state government

culture and service delivery can be greatlyenhanced if state agency executives and staffemploy quality concepts and tools. If thegovernor and legislature are committed toproviding quality services to the state'scitizens, they must support and rewardinnovation, partnerships, and risk-taking inthe use of quality tools in state government.

The commission believes that developmentand implementation of quality initiatives arethe resrxmsibility of each cabinet agency.New initiatives should be developed with theinput of quality improvement experts andkey stakeholders internal and external tostate government, including: state managers,state employee bargaining units, interestedlegislators, the Minnesota Council for Quali­ty, private-sector business executives, andthe Minnesota Quality Initiative.

Cabinet strategies should seek to accomplishthe following:

• &tablish vehicles to obtain regular cus­tomer and client feedback on state servicedelivery.

• Provide access to training on quality con­cepts and practices for state employees.

• Develop coalitions with key stakeholdersin the public-sector quality movement,especially state employee bargainingunits, the Minnesota Quality Initiative,the Minnesota·Council for Quality, andprivate-sector business.

• Match public or private organizations thatare willing to serve as mentors or volun­teer consultants with state agencies imple­menting quatity improvement projects.

• Determine how to dedicate resources tocarry out agency quality initiatives.

Finally, CORE will incorponlt:e qualityimprovement practices into the implementa­tion strategies of its own long-tenn reformproposals.

Carr, David K., and Ian D. Littman. Excel­lence in Government: Total Quality Man­agement in the 1~. Arlington, Va.: C0o­pers & Lybrand, 1990.

Commission on Refonn and Efficiency.Imperatives for Change: An Assessment ofMinnesota State Government. St. Pdul,December 1992.

Hammer, Michael. "Reengineering Work:Don't Automate, Obliterate." HGJVard Busi­ness Review, July-August 1990.

Holmes, Elizabeth. "Leadership in the Questfor Quality." Issues & Observations, Vol.12, No.3, 1992.

Marson, Brian. "Government as a ServiceEnterprise: Implementation ofService Quali­ty in the Public Service of British Colum­bia." Paper delivered at the American Soci­ety for Public Administration national con­ference in Washington, D.C., 1991.

McLagan, Patricia. "The Dark Side ofQuality." Training, November 1991.

McLean, Gary N., and Beth Evans. "T~

ward a Deming Compatible CompensationSystem." Vaughn Communications, 1991.

Osborne, David, and Ted Gaebler. Rein­venting Government: How the Entrepreneur­ial Spirit Is Transfonning the Public Sector.New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing,1992.

Partners for Quality. Partners for QualityEducation Initiative. St. Pdul: MinnesotaAcademicExcellenceFoundation, Minnesota

19

BffiLIOGRAPHY

Council for Quality, and Minnesota HigherEducation Coordinating Board, June 1992.

Sensenbrenner, Joseph. "Quality Comes toCity Hall." HGJVard Business Review,March-Apri11991.

Walters, Jonathan. "The Cult ofTotal Quali­ty." Governing, May 1992.

Zemke, Ron. "1QM: Fatally Flawed orSimply Unfocused?" Training, October1992.