QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
Secret to Success May Lie W
hen standards work, they’re in- visible. When they don’t, there’s trouble.
That’s one of the messages from a pair
of author/scholars who have become the spokespeople for the importance of standards and maintenance. At a time when innova- tion, disruption, and breaking down walls are touted, they illuminate the importance of the agreements that hold it all together. The pair has drawn attention from media
and Silicon Valley leaders for their research not only on standards, but on prioritizing maintenance over untethered innovation. For instance, when the Big Ideas person is prized over the Maintenance person, the whole enterprise can crash. And when standards aren’t set, they say, that lack tends to surface in a crisis—exactly when you don’t want it to. Andrew Russell is a computer technolo-
gy expert, and Lee Vinsel’s fi eld of study is automobiles, but they off er a holistic under- standing of how standards work in all fi elds.
‘Codify existing patterns’ Setting standards is a tough and laborious process, but at heart, it’s about doing what you’re already doing: “The way standards should work is that they codify existing pat- terns,” Russell says. Most of us have a passing knowledge of
standards in tech and manufacturing—we recognize diff erent types of light bulbs, for instance. But there are other kinds of stan- dards: Process standards, which designate how something can be done; or performance standards, which specify a goal or objective, but off er fl exibility about how to get there.
‘A fair outcome’ The distinction, Russell says, is that stan- dards for service industries are at a “meta
44 SENIOR LIVING EXECUTIVE MAY/JUNE 2019
in ‘Mastering Boring Things’ By Sara Wildberger
level.” They specify how a fair outcome can be achieved. One example is the ISO 9000 standards for quality management, which address principles such as leadership and engagement. “When standardization started, it was
about screw threads and pipe sizes,” Vinsel says, “but now I think we realize we need tools to deal with more abstract processes.” “What matters is that you have a process
and it’s defi ned and documented,” Russell says. “It can’t be arbitrary.” These types of standards are more fl ex-
ible; they’re much like best practices but codifi ed. Service standards are becoming more common as we continue the shift to- ward a service economy. Standards are also benefi cial to companies that operate across state and national borders; they’re essential for global supply chains, for instance.
What’s the ANSI role? The primary organization for guidance in creating voluntary standards is the Amer- ican National Standards Institute (ANSI), a neutral forum. When organizations are accredited through ANSI, it’s a widely recognized stamp of approval. An essential distinction is that ANSI itself does not set standards or rule on them—its role is solely to guide the process. The ANSI label shows the organization is committing to “rules for balance of repre- sentation, rights of appeals … transparency and due process,” Russell says.
A platform for innovation Tapping ANSI as an impartial accrediting body helps overcome some hesitancy about creating standards, but there are other ob- jections—one being that standards could stifl e fl exibility and innovation.
Thought Leader Profi le
Andrew Russell, PhD Author and dean, College of Arts & Sciences, SUNY Polytechnic Institute
Lee Vinsel Author and assistant professor at Virginia Tech
Vinsel and Russell take a contrary view.
Standards make innovation possible, Vinsel says, as well as saving a lot of mental energy. “If you standardize best practices so they fade out into the background … that becomes a platform that allows you to spring ahead.”
Stakeholder input needed Big ideas are great, but success comes through “mastering boring things,” Vinsel says, such as maintenance, standards, and checklists. He himself worked in a psychiat- ric hospital for years, and says when things went wrong, it was usually because someone didn’t follow protocol. Yet, he says, there can be a risk of losing
out on such benefi ts as professional judg- ment in standardized systems—should a nurse, for instance, follow their gut or their checklist? The ideal standard works in re- spect for judgment as part of the process. “It’s important to implement these things
in a way that complements judgment,” Vinsel says. “They’re experts in their own right.”
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
