QMS or Quality Management System

An organization defines standard processes and procedures to ensure its activities are performed in a consistent manner (regardless of the person or persons doing that work). These standard processes and procedures are typically codified in the form of a QMS (quality management system). Sometimes organizations brand the QMS with a more catchy term. In this post the term QMS is used to represent a codified system of standard processes and procedures.

Why is QMS an important asset for any organization? The answer lies in the fact that any organization needs to capture its learning and good practices in a way such that it is available not only to its existing employees but also the future ones. Employees join and leave an organization however an organization must attempt to outlive all incoming and outgoing employees. In such a context a QMS is like an evolving knowledge base of an organization's experiences and learning.

What make a QMS a good QMS? A system becomes better when those using it provide their feedback on its effectiveness and also there is a group of experts which keeps on evolving that system. This cycle of defining a process, using it, providing feedback based on its usage, refining it based on the feedback and using it again is critical to a good QMS. The first version of a QMS may not be the best but it is a good starting point for the organization.

Systems and Processes

The importance of systems and processes can be gauged from the fact that CEOs and business leaders the world over are willing to invest the company dollars in areas like in-house excellence programs and improvement initiatives, ISO certifications, CMMI rating, six sigma, TQM, etc.

It is true that the strategy management consultancy firms that focus on the financial well-being of an organization score higher (in terms of consultant man-day billing) over those firms that advise on systems and processes. 'What' a company should do is of paramount importance (right strategy) but how successful a company eventually is depends on 'how well' the company does the 'what'. In a mature company the 'what' part or strategy development can emerge as an outcome of the of systems and processes for strategy development by the company. And in that sense systems and processes become extremely important.

The other aspect is to do with the company's products and services becoming obsolete in the marketplace. This could mean the systems and processes may not come to the rescue of a company if the market forces leave the company behind. In this case again the power of systems and processes can be leveraged by having in place systems and processes for enterprise risk management by the company. Enterprise risk management provides comprehensive framework of systems and processes to ensure the company can live forever.

So no matter whatever the need of a company be a systematic approach based on well-defined systems and processes to handle various business challenges, risks and problems will always prove to be a very powerful asset. In fact, it may be wise for a company desiring long lasting success to have systems and processes in place to define, refine and retire the various systems and processes employed by it.

Appraising CMMI Appraisals

CMMI appraisals are technically known as SCAMPI, a mouthful of acronym which expands into Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement which incidentally contains another mouthful of acronym CMMI which expands into Capability Maturity Model Integration. Confused already?

Confusion or no confusion, a CMMI appraisal is an exercise by an external agency which involves analyzing the systems and processes of an organization in an attempt to verify or discover, as you like it, whether and to what extent the organization is following the CMMI model's expectation as encapsulated in the form of specific and generic goals and practices. Confused again?

For those who find ISO certifications more familiar CMMI appraisals are like ISO certification audits. CMMI purists however prefer the term appraisal over audit (interestingly another term assessment is also used for such an activity). Audit, appraisal, assessment - whatever term one may use - the objective is essentially the same. A framework or standard is taken as the benchmark and the organizations' systems and processes are compared against that to determine the gaps in terms of intent, implementation and effectiveness.

Coming back to CMMI appraisals, it is quite revealing to analyze some of their typical characteristics as compared to ISO certification audits. The following section lists down some of these characteristics:

• CMMI appraisals are performed by an Internal Appraisal Team led by an External CMMI Lead Appraiser whereas ISO audits are performed by a team of External Auditors led by an External ISO Lead Auditor. In final effect, CMMI appraisals require more calendar days and manpower when compared to ISO audits.
• CMMI appraisals rely on rigorous, comprehensive and extensive document review as compared to ISO audits. CMMI uses something called PIID, another mouthful of acronym which expands into Process Implementation Indicator Database or Document. Preparing PIIDs becomes a mammoth exercise in certain organizations if due care is not taken. In final effect, CMMI appraisals require higher effort from the organization to get prepared when compared to ISO audits.
• CMMI appraisal assignments generally involve both consulting and lead appraiser services both for first time appraisal and subsequent re-appraisals. In the case of ISO audits however use of consultants is generally limited to first time ISO certification. This in some sense shows the higher stability of ISO as compared to CMMI (this is also reflected in the fact that version 1.3 of CMMI was in some sense necessitated by the confusion created by its earlier version 1.2). In final effect, CMMI appraisals are generally costlier when compared to ISO audits.
• CMMI appraisals rely on statistical methods (starting from v1.3 of course) to select the sample for appraisal as compared to ISO audits which select a representative sample based on discussions. In final effect, the result of sampling may not vary too much since an organization will offer work from various lines of business and type of work to ensure adequate coverage of its business operations and processes (the scope statement of ISO certification also necessitates that).
• CMMI appraisals rely on interviews with both managers and those who "work in the trenches" from both the core and support functions. The interviews involve something called FAR group (FAR expands into Functional Area Representative). ISO audits involve interviewing auditees who can be area or department managers and other personnel. In final effect, the people who get interviewed may not be really different.
• CMMI appraisals generally focus on core function and quality/process function whereas ISO audits focus in addition on Admin, HR and IT functions also. In final effect, the functional coverage of CMMI appraisals is generally horizontally lesser but vertically deeper when compared to ISO audits.