The Culture Quality interface
Culture and Quality has been a
long-time interest of mine. I have
stated with total certainty that an organization needs to have a palpable
Culture of Quality in order to succeed in Quality Improvement.
I still believe that to be an
absolute truth, although I have moved a little bit from the absoluteness of the
statement. Today I am more comfortable
with the saying that having a Culture that supports Quality may or may not lead
to significant improvements in Quality Improvement, but if the acceptance and
interest in Quality is NOT there
(i.e. if there is no Culture of Quality) there is absolutely no chance to
creating any lasting Quality Improvements.
Said another way, even if
everyone sees the value and importance of Quality, improvements may not last
because financial, or changing dynamics, or other interferences get in the
way. But with absolute certainty, if no
one in the organization gives a damn, the likelihood of improvement is not only
zero, the greatest expectation will be that more errors will occur, staff will
be more indifferent and whatever level of Quality there is, will get
worse. It is stunning how often we see
that in action.
So understanding Culture is
essential and integral to implementing Quality Improvement.
With that in mind, the last
few days have been really enlightening for me because I was able to change out
of my teaching and investigation mode and became a student by taking a course
in culture improvement. The centerpiece
of the course was exploring the Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument
(OCAI) which can be used to define and characterize the competing values of
culture types.
The course was given by
Marcella Bremer who lives in The Netherlands and is a major player in the
international community of Culture improvement.
The course was just what I
needed; away from the office and intrusions for 3 days and the opportunity to
focus. Most participants were
consultants from across 5 continents wanting to explore and dabble in
OCAI. I also met a kindred spirit; a
person working in another university setting and struggling with all the same
issues that I also have to deal with, and maybe worse.
Without going into too much
detail, the developers of OCAI were deeply interested in the nature and
personality of organizations (all organizations) and studied many cultural characteristics. Through comparative analysis, they were able
to weed down to 4 major personality influencers and types:
Hierarchy
the processes that bring order
and CONTROL to an organization such as standards and guidelines, top down
management, process and procedure, quality control, accreditation etc.
Clan
The processes that bring
collective COOPERATION to an organization such as staff engagement, kaizen, etc.
Adhocracy
The processes that bring CREATION
to an organization such as research and development, new programs, new methods,
new strategies, etc.
Market
The processes that lead to
COMPETITION such as methods that increase market share such as market strategy,
market growth, customer satisfaction.
(note: in healthcare, there are
elements of competition that exist such as wanting to find more patients, or
more studies or more grants, but mostly what we are try to focus on is more and
better satisfaction).
What is, or should be
intuitively obvious, is that each of these elements is essential and the choice
is not one of exclusion, but of balance.
Sometimes an organization’s improvement needs a little more top-down
support. Other times the opposite may be
what needs to happen.
We spent little time talking
abut the OCAI itself (it is after all only one management tool), and much more
on what organizations can do if they believe there is room for culture adjustment
and how the information within OCAI results can give some guidance. What is pretty clear, is that (a) it is not
as easy as snapping your fingers and (b) it can be a lot more straight forward and
not as hopeless that you fear it might be.
I left with some definite ideas how I could make things happen.
For me, this time away from
the office was a total success; what could be better than getting to spend 3
days with people pretty much of like mind exploring new thoughts and new
ideas.
But as I said at the
beginning, strengthening a laboratory’s collective culture and interest in Quality
Improvement does not guarantee there will be success. But doing nothing will assure that
improvement efforts will not lead to success, and more importantly, will either
remain static, or slide down the pipe to more error and failure.
What a choice!!