Case 1
Fajardo, Jeanne Dagny June 15, 2015
QUALMAN M72
Case 1 – Xerox
1. Contrast Leadership for Quality and Lean Six Sigma as quality initiatives for Xerox. How did heir motivations differ? What differences or similarities are evident in the principles behind these initiatives and the way in which they were implemented?
The most important and primary motivation that wakened up Xerox and caused it to act and apply the Leadership Through Quality initiative was losing the market shares to the Japanese competitors. Due to its innovative products that gave it a competitive advantage over other competitors in the marketplace during the 1960s, Xerox’s top management got relaxed and ignored the subject of total quality in the following years, and viewed quality as a technical discipline rather as a management discipline. Eventually, the company sustained gross losses as a result of the absence of the total quality management concept and its associated principles and practices as well. On the other hand, the failure in mastering the new technology and predicting its social and economical impacts plus the deficiency in training and educating the employees about quality, which caused a decrease in the quality focus by the top corporate management, led to the second crisis. Thus, Xerox’s top management feverishly strived to find cures to recover the company’s focus on quality, which resulted in the birth of the Lean Six Sigma initiative as a strategic plan.
The Leadership through Quality was considered as the magical recipe for the improvement of the company’s performance and bringing it from running at a loss to profitability. During the 1970s and the early 1980s, Xerox’s products lacked quality and failed in satisfying its customers’ needs as well as exceeding their expectations. So, improving and assuring its products’ quality was the key aspect in the radical reform of the organization. And to achieve this objective, the total quality management’s principles and
QUALMAN M72
Case 1 – Xerox
1. Contrast Leadership for Quality and Lean Six Sigma as quality initiatives for Xerox. How did heir motivations differ? What differences or similarities are evident in the principles behind these initiatives and the way in which they were implemented?
The most important and primary motivation that wakened up Xerox and caused it to act and apply the Leadership Through Quality initiative was losing the market shares to the Japanese competitors. Due to its innovative products that gave it a competitive advantage over other competitors in the marketplace during the 1960s, Xerox’s top management got relaxed and ignored the subject of total quality in the following years, and viewed quality as a technical discipline rather as a management discipline. Eventually, the company sustained gross losses as a result of the absence of the total quality management concept and its associated principles and practices as well. On the other hand, the failure in mastering the new technology and predicting its social and economical impacts plus the deficiency in training and educating the employees about quality, which caused a decrease in the quality focus by the top corporate management, led to the second crisis. Thus, Xerox’s top management feverishly strived to find cures to recover the company’s focus on quality, which resulted in the birth of the Lean Six Sigma initiative as a strategic plan.
The Leadership through Quality was considered as the magical recipe for the improvement of the company’s performance and bringing it from running at a loss to profitability. During the 1970s and the early 1980s, Xerox’s products lacked quality and failed in satisfying its customers’ needs as well as exceeding their expectations. So, improving and assuring its products’ quality was the key aspect in the radical reform of the organization. And to achieve this objective, the total quality management’s principles and