Social Sharing block
Here is the story of two companies from the same industry. Let’s call them Company A and Company B. Both have a similar history, started in business at around the same time, are among the big players in the industry, and operate in the same markets. They even have approximately the same number of employees.
|
ADVERTISEMENT |
With all these similarities, however, they have one big difference—their quality departments. Company A has a small quality department of less than 25 people (in a company of about 18,000 employees). By comparison, Company B’s quality department is an army with more than 100 people.
Interestingly, both companies started their quality journey around the same time, about ten years ago. Their results from quality, however, couldn’t be more dissimilar.
In these ten years, at Company A (with the small quality department), the principles of continuous improvement and performance excellence have been the biggest and most consistent contributors to the company’s revenues, profits, and customer satisfaction. The company is also a regular winner of awards for its quality program and the results that it has generated.
…
Comments
The smaller the better
We hear this song since millennia, the legend of David winning Goliath might not be a legend only. Huge companies or organizations are notorious for their ineffectivenesses, we read and hear of them every day. But we keep not listening to these messages and keep therefore building costly and ineffective pyramids. I'm no financial expert yet I want to mention a recent example, the FCA joint venture: both companies were and are not well off on their markets, they are now merging in a big adventure, hoping to make big profits. One, competition is always there to fight; two, such a large organization will have to pay much money to support administrative costs. Will it be worth the effort? Let's Future speak for us.
Add new comment