Business administration has used for decades the hierarchical, rigid and repressive organizational model, which has brought serious problems and setbacks to small and large entrepreneurs in Puerto Rico. The excess of centralized administrative controls, the lack of genuine participation of employees in decision-making, the absence of internal and external public relations, the lack of customer orientation, among some, are decisive factors in the survival of companies. in this extremely changing 21st century.
This model that functioned properly decades ago has serious limitations today, since it does not take into account the direct participation of employees and customers to provide the company with valuable information about its surroundings and surroundings.Customers and employees are practically excluded when making important decisions for the company, even though it is their reason for existing. The hierarchical model of much control limits the development, access to technology and information, and the fundamental changes in the business world of the 21st century. Today, many small, medium and large entrepreneurs insist on the use of this model and limit to their companies and even cause their bankruptcy. In Puerto Rico, hundreds of companies fail due to a centralized, hierarchical and repressive orientation.
It is time for dramatic changes in the development and focus of our companies. A philosophy that has created a lot of benefit in the business world, public administration, non-profit organizations, and even in the United Nations.
This new management paradigm was initially developed as a system that measures variations in production controls. Interestingly, the initial application of these concepts occurred in the United States defense industry and was considered decisive in the effort deployed during the Second World War. Later, the Japanese were quick to adopt and modify these techniques, and since then the practice of Total Quality Management (ACT) has taken center stage in leading Japanese companies. However, the institutionalization of these practices in the US private sector is relatively recent, since it took place between the mid and late 1980s.
At its core, ACT is related to organizational change, where quality and customer satisfaction are the basic motivations. While traditional management practices assessed customer needs and quality standards through an internal process, ACT is based on external feedback and requires improvement in quality and performance. The ACT deals with the flattest management hierarchies and the empowerment of employees. Traditional management relies on procedures for evaluating performance and finished products, while ACT focuses on improving the processes by which goods and services are produced. In this practice, general changes are frowned upon. Instead, what is most valued are small, gradual, small-scale changes for the continuous improvement of the work system.
Adoption of this approach by governments was not of interest until the early 1990s and was essentially born out of local government innovations in the United States, California in particular. The performance measurement tools and systems for management arose, to a large extent, from experiences in the private sector and, only to a limited extent, from innovations in the public sector in developed countries during the 1960s. Even then, only a few local governments in developed countries fully embraced the concept. The concept of government reinvention is based on the idea of doing more with less, prospering from local performance, and being more oriented towards results than compliance.; it is also supported by the granting of powers to citizens through continuous feedback mechanisms; efficiency and pragmatism prevail; the government deals with the rudder more than with the oars; it is mission oriented and not rule oriented; instead of preventing, it anticipates; it is participatory and not hierarchical; enterprising instead of routine.
The concept of quality, as explained by theorists, arises and has its origin in the management of the industrial environment. Unlike the public sector, private industry requires mechanisms to survive the inclemencies of the market. In this sense, it is logical for us to see Quality as a management tool in this context of continuous industrial subsistence.
In this article, Quality is necessarily interrelated with participatory management. Participatory management, in addition to collecting the institutionalized democratic spirit, commits the employee to the quality of the processes.
Total quality and participatory management necessarily respond to three objectives, being these; better productivity, innovation and management of human resources. Unlike the industrial environment who operates under the light of commercial law, in public administration statutory regulations are given in the context of administrative law itself. This difference, in some way explains why the development of Quality in the industrial environment has been very accelerated and in the public sector, it has not yet begun. In other words, it can be affirmed that the obligation to manage better has not yet been integrated into the mission of the public service. All the current regulations in light of the administrative law itself, in no way imposes or demands quality as a criterion for customer satisfaction. Using this same reasoning,Therefore, we can conclude in this regard that the administrative regulations do not prohibit the use of the same, which provides the public servant with a vast field of action for this purpose. The rules and traditions of the administration are not opposed to the introduction of the concepts of quality in the state.
Many theorists, like Deming, have established some basic rules to start the path towards Total Quality:
- The first rule is " choose the most opportune moment well ". This implies not selecting a moment where lightness produces some trauma that reverses the process. The second rule is " proceed by successive stages ". It is convenient to develop the march in stages without precipitating events improperly:
- The first stage is to " sensitize the leading cadres of the government”Through awareness-raising seminars, under the guidance of a specialized consultant. The second stage consists of“ developing a project for governance, a statute of quality circles and a global launch or focus strategy. The third stage is about with the "information": The descending information must mobilize all the managers and first of all the governor himself. This informative stage is decisive for the success of the Participatory Quality and Management project. The bottom-up information, this action is carried out through a survey conducted by an external consultant, based on anonymous interviews with officials from all spheres through a random sample.The fourth stage consists of developing an extensive educational training program regarding Total Quality and the integration of Participatory Management. Tools for this training are the quality awareness seminars, the deep training seminars and the Total Quality management seminars. The fifth stage consists of theelaboration of quality improvement plans. They must define the encrypted objectives to be achieved, for example; the reduction of deadlines, photocopies, waiting lines at the windows, etc. and to establish indicators of measures that allow evaluating the progress made. Rather, it is a collective reflection. The sixth stage is the creation of quality circles in the work units. Many of the most common problems at various levels can be addressed through problem solving groups.
For the implementation process to occur, it is necessary to avoid countless errors. One of the things we should not do is go too fast, each Phase has a value in itself, and it is imperative that it proceed without haste. Another mistake that we cannot fall into is thinking that the quality approach is a panacea and that it will solve all the problems of the Business Administration. There are three effects which we must avoid; "The Jourdain effect": it is thought that quality has been made in the organization since always, another effect is "the Fox effect", it is thought that in the organization things have always been done badly and to think that we are the worst as an organization, and Finally, the "fashion effect", being part of the whole simply for fashion. Another mistake to avoid isdecouple the total quality of participatory management. According to the author, no quality experience can be successful without participatory management. The fundamental principles in participatory management are reflected in the following points: recognizing initiative and creativity to all staff, sharing responsibility at all levels, the objectives of the company are understood and shared by all, having work groups interconnected, that human contacts are based on cooperation, that the profits obtained benefit everyone. The Quality approach is not intended to make you work more but better.
The results of the Total Quality approach in public management are, among others, improving the services provided to clients. We seek greater customer satisfaction by simplifying processes.
Another expected result is to increase the quality of life at work, favoring the exercise of individual responsibility. Another expected result is the reduction of costs and burdens. The elimination of waste, productivity gains, improved management, allow to eliminate what is conceived as the “invisible administration”. Finally, another expected result is to give the company a modern look.
The quality approach is a modern approach to participation and mobilization of the creative capacities of staff. They improve working conditions and increase productivity. In the case of business administration with respect to the quality approach, it is to provide a better service to the public. This idea demands that employees at the service of the public can express their sense of initiative and responsibility. The needs of companies and administrations to have a staff capable of taking initiatives coincide with the needs of people to be more "responsible" in their work unit.
In summary, total quality management every day requires new mechanisms that promote a system of quality, excellence, efficiency, effectiveness and effectiveness. The current crisis in our country is due to a deficit of legitimacy in the government and the private sector and a lack of opportunities. To a large extent, this situation has caused the best business talent in Puerto Rico to migrate to the United States in recent years. We must retain our best entrepreneurs and implement administrative theories that encourage them to stay and develop our companies to the maximum to avoid bankruptcies, often unnecessary.
Bibliography
- Armenikis, Achilles A.; Harris, Stanley and Feild, Hubert, (2001). Paradigms in Organizational Change: Change Agent and Change Target Perspectives. In Golembiewky, RTHandbook on Organization Behavior (Public Administration and Public Policy). chap. 25. pp. 631-658. New York: Marcel Dekker, Chiavenato, Idalberto; (2000). Fifth Edition. Introduction to the General Theory of Administration. México.McGraw Hill.Daft, Richard; (1997). Management: Model of Planned Change. P.383-400.ELA (2004). Government Transition Reports: 2004 Elections, ELA; San Juan, Puerto Rico.Galbraith, Jay R., (1982). Designing the Innovating Organization. Organizational Dynamics, winter, 10 (3), 4.Galbraith, Jay R., (1983). Strategy and Organization Planning. Human Resource Management, Spring / Summer, 22 (1/2), 63.Galbraith Jay R., (2002) Designing Organization:An Executive Guide to Strategy, Structure, and Process, John Wiley & Sons, California, USA Golembiewski, Robert T., (2002). Does the administration of governments matter? Yes, but how will depend on at least three possible scripts. Current Topics in Management, 7 - p221Isaac, Robert, G & Pitt, Douglas, C., (2001). Organizational Culture: It´s Alive! But There´s No Fixed Address !. In Golembiewky, RTHandbook on Organization Behavior (Public Administration and Public Policy). chap. 7. pp. 113-145. New York: Marcel Dekker.Laboucheiz, Vicent (2001). Total Quality Treaty. Mexico, Lumusa Noriega. Lawrence, Paul R. (1986). How to deal with resistance to change. Harvard Business Review, Mar / Apr, 64, (2), 190 Lawrence, Paul R.; Kolodny, Harvey F.; DAvis, Stanley M., (1967). The Human Side of the Matrix. Organizational Dynamics, summer, 6,(1), 43.Nathler, D. & Tushman M. (2001). The design of the organization as a competitive weapon: The power of organizational architecture. Oxford University Press.Noordegraaf, Mirko; Abma, Tineke., (2003). Management by Measurement? Public Management Practices Amidst Ambiguity. Public Administration, 81 (4), 853.Olshfski, Dorothy and Cutchin, Deborah Ann, (2001). Management Training and Development. In Golembiewky, RT Handbook on Organization Behavior (Public Administration and Public Policy). chap. 18. pp. 445-456. New York: Marcel Dekker.Osborne, D. & Plastrik, (1997). "Banishing Bureaucracy" Addison-Wesley.Osborne, D. & Plastrik, (2003). Tools to Transform Government. Paidós Publishing House. Spain.Rossi, P. Lipsey, M.and Freeman, HE (2003) Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. 7th Edition. California, USA Sage Publications.Simons, Robert (2005) Levers of Organization Design: How Managers Use Accountability Systems for Greater Performance and Commitment, Harvard Business School Publishing. Mass. USA Scott, Richard, (2001). Organization: Rational, Natural and Open Systems. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.Stevenson, William B., (2001). Organization Design. In Golembiewky, RTHandbook on Organization Behavior (Public Administration and Public Policy). chap. 8. pp. 145-175. New York: Marcel Dekker.Handbook on Organization Behavior (Public Administration and Public Policy). chap. 8. pp. 145-175. New York: Marcel Dekker.Handbook on Organization Behavior (Public Administration and Public Policy). chap. 8. pp. 145-175. New York: Marcel Dekker.
