THE MAP & COMPASS FRAMEWORK:
INTEGRATING ORGANIZATIONAL AND PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT
American Society for Quality
Annual Quality Congress
May 5, 1998
Richard E. Winder, J.D., M.B.A.
Daniel K. Judd, Ph.D.
Copyright, 1998, Richard E. Winder and Daniel K. Judd. All Rights Reserved.
Understanding physical, metaphysical, and dynamic levels of existence assists in building systems and habits that respond to underlying dynamics. This compass, map, and course framework is evident in the models of Deming, Covey, and Senge, and can creatively integrate their models in a universal model for personal and organizational development.
Aim-Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycle; Compass, Map, and Course Framework; Creativity; Five Dimensions of Quality
A legal foundation assisted a group of legal services providers (non-profit law firms which provide free legal services to the poor) in establishing an e-mail network. This network, developed in response to a survey of technology-related needs of the Legal services providers, provided a means for any legal services advocate to communicate with any other advocate in the system. The focus of this project was to facilitate sharing of information among legal services staff. For example, an attorney with a matter having a unique legal issue could e-mail other attorneys regarding the issue and receive, by return e-mail, documents and forms to assist him or her in preparation of the case.
As the project developed, it was discovered that another major, unanticipated positive impact of the e-mail system was the increased comradery developed among advocates within and between offices. As it turned out, a major benefit of the system was its ability to facilitate advocates and staff in "keeping in touch" with each other in a creative manner previously not available.
A poem by Robert Frost reads: "Two roads diverged in a yellow wood.... And I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference." One point of this poem is simple and yet profound: the choices we make in the present will have a significant impact on our future as individuals and the future destinations of our organizations. Some of these choices will affect our organizations in ways that we do not now understand.
Realizing the gravity of our decisions on the future of our organizations, sometimes we shy away from decisions, particularly those involving innovations, or deviations from our standard methods of operation. As noted by Whyte (1994), "Take any step toward our destiny through creative action and we know intuitively that we are giving up whatever lever we had, and we tend to back away from the moment." Since we do not know the future, how can we make creative decisions in the present which will make the future predictable--decisions which will secure the future of our organizations? What framework can we use to make sound decisions about the future of our systems?
The answer to these questions is really quite elementary: we simply make decisions in the context of the dynamics which underlie the conduct we see or seek.
Although the answer to these questions is simple, the application of the process of making decisions in context is quite complex because often we do not recognize or understand the dynamics of the environment in which we are operating. When we find ourselves realizing that things are not what they appear to be, then we need to ask ourselves whether the things that we observe are what we assumed they were, or whether they are manifestations of something quite different. We assume that what we observe is what it appears to be, without realizing that our perception is affected by our paradigm, and without querying whether what we see is actually a manifestation of something deeper and more complex than we see on the surface. As we learn to recognize the dynamics of the environment in which we operate, we can actually apply that insight to creatively shaping the system that will take us into the future.
Midway through the e-mail project, the technology committee which had developed and implemented the e-mail project was given the charge of reviewing and recommending a software package to track legal services attorneys' time, as required by new federal regulation. The committee resisted the temptation to recommend a stand-alone timekeeping package, realizing that to do so would be implementing a "band-aid" approach that would not fully integrate the legal services programs' information needs and would actually fragment the data management process. The committee also resisted the tendency to use a software package designed specifically for legal services because the narrow market for that software raised service and support issues.
The software which the committee recommended was a mainstream law office package that was adapted to the special data and reporting requirements of legal services. The software provided comprehensive timekeeping, case management, docket control, document generation, conflicts checking, and database replication capabilities. Within a month after the recommendation was made by the committee it was reinforced by a Law Office Computing magazine article which gave the case management software the highest rating of nine top case management packages reviewed. Yet the decision to recommend the software was criticized by some because of its cost, its operating system requirements, and because of the deviation from using the specialized legal services software.
The challenges to this decision triggered further analysis, which eventually brought the technology committee to the realization that a much deeper dynamic was involved in the decision: Since the software is a mainstream law office package, its data replication and transfer capabilities can be used to electronically transfer case information for some client matters (which the legal services program could not handle for various reasons) to private attorneys who would handle the matters on a pro bono basis (with no charge to the client).
But the dynamic extended even further: just as the e-mail system had resulted in an unforseen building of social interaction among legal services advocates, the case management software and training which would be provided by the legal services support group would permit a similar interface with attorneys in private practice. While in the past some legal services programs were somewhat isolated from the private bar and bar association activities, they could now develop an integrated interface with that bar, permitting a greater level of interaction--and an expansion of the resource of private attorneys willing to handle cases without charge.
The recognition of this dynamic solidified the case management decision. The impact of that decision will not be known for several years, but based on the e-mail experience, it is expected that those legal services programs which utilize the mainstream law office software will enjoy a much better interface with the private bar than those which retain their isolated legal services software.
Our personal and organizational activities exist on three fundamental planes, or levels of existence: a physical plane, a metaphysical plane, and a dynamic plane (see Figure 1). The physical plane is the level of existence we can experience and observe. The metaphysical plane exists beyond, or transcends, the physical plane and attempts to supply meaning to physical occurrences. The dynamic plane relates to the physical, social, intellectual, or moral forces that produce activity or change in a system. We observe this activity or change at the physical level, and we interpret it at the metaphysical level. While we are generally aware of the physical, we are often less aware of the metaphysical meaning and dynamic forces. Yet those two planes are integrally connected with the physical existence and have a very real impact on it. If these planes are not understood, then unexplained, unintended, and even unknown consequences may occur at the physical level.
For example, Deming spoke of the company which had a very strict bereavement policy which required extensive documentation for three days' bereavement leave. At one point the firm realized that the policy was drafted with very strict requirements to ensure that employees did not abuse the policy. However, they also realized that most of their employees would not attempt to abuse bereavement leave privileges. So they modified the policy to permit employees to more freely take bereavement leave upon approval of their supervisor. The incidence of bereavement leave (the number of times bereavement leave was taken) increased dramatically. However, the number of days actually taken decreased by 47%.
Under both policies there were dynamic forces which had an impact on the behavior of the system. These forces affected or contributed to the actions of the employees and management under the system. As the firm recognized the existence of these forces, identified what they were, and modified its bereavement "system" to more effectively align the policy with the trusted nature of its employees, it found that the additional benefits it provided for employees had a serendipitous positive impact on the firm as a whole. The change in the system seemed contrary to the result one would expect--one would expect an increase in total time off work upon a loosening of the policy. Yet the action of the system was sound in the metaphysical context: it was explained in terms of the trustworthiness of the employees and the trust which the firm placed in its employees.
THE MAP & COMPASS FRAMEWORK
The focus of this paper is provide a framework to assist individuals and organizational leaders to 1) recognize the existence of dynamic forces and metaphysical meaning underlying their personal lives and organizational systems; and to 2) more effectively utilize these underlying forces in their personal lives and in the structure and operation of their systems. The approach proposed here goes beyond simply focusing on the paradigm or the principles relating to the paradigm. For example, at one level, we could say that we should build a trusting environment in our organizations and personal relationships, recognizing that principles of trust are important in an organization. The Map & Compass approach goes deeper, to the dynamics underlying that environment so that we understand, for example, why the trusting environment is productive. As we move to a deeper level of understanding than the physical level of existence provides, we find that the mapping functions help us observe the metaphysics and principles of the environment in which we travel. In addition, the compass functions help us discern direction ascertained from invisible dynamic forces.
The Map & Compass framework is the metaphysical and dynamic elements of the Orienteering Model--the integrated use of a compass and map to travel a course, checking in at control points (Winder and Judd, 1996). The focus of the Map & Compass framework is not on the physical level (the "Course," or what we can see and observe). Quality literature is replete with the elements of the course--experience, measurement, systems, and continuous improvement within the system. Rather, the focus of this model is on what underlies the physical level--the paradigms and dynamics which go into making the physical level what it is. It is this level that gives us the opportunity for quantum leap improvement, as we uncover dynamics that permit us to change the very nature of systems (as opposed to simply improving the existing system) and to build systems responsive to those dynamics. This is the level that Senge (1990), Barker (1992), and Covey (1993) address.
The Map and Compass Framework moves us from an analysis mode to an application mode (see Figure 2). It helps us not only evaluate existing conditions, but permits us (with an understanding of those conditions) to develop innovative prospective applications that incorporate our learning.
In the analysis mode we move from what we see and observe (the physical level) to our interpretation (the metaphysical level) of the reason for the behavior (the dynamic level) of what we observe. In the Map & Compass framework, we invert the process. We first view the dynamics, and let them shape our interpretation, without pre-conceived notions of what the dynamics mean. This permits us to think "out of the box," so that we are not just tinkering with existing systems, but are instead reengineering the system from whatever level is needed to incorporate the dynamics. We then build or restructure systems, processes, and habits that are responsive to those dynamics. For this reason, the Map & Compass framework engenders creativity and innovation in personal and organizational development. Innovation is the process of perceiving and understanding dynamics (at the Compass level) and the designing systems that respond to those dynamics (at the Map level), eventually implementing these systems in the organization (at the Course Level).
In order to understand and apply the Map & Compass framework, it is essential to understand the nature of dynamics and metaphysics, and their influence on the physical level of existence that we experience and observe.
The Compass: The Dynamic Level of Existence
Dynamics are at the heart of organizational existence. If understood, they can provide a perception of the environment which is essential to organizational health. Just as a compass responds to invisible forces to point direction, Compass principles help assess the invisible forces of the dynamics that are all around us and provide direction to us and our organizations. In the movie Volcano, it was the geologist's perception of the unseen dynamics of the lava flow through the subway tunnel that provided the basis for the Office of Emergency Management to take action to dig a channel and topple a building in order to avert an even greater disaster.
In the modern world, organizations are in business to serve customers, members, and other constituents. The needs of customers are the organization's reason for being. The way in which organizational leadership views the dynamics of customer needs will affect the structure of the systems the organization puts in place to serve the customers. In fact, it is at the dynamic level that vision is born, because vision is the linking of the needs of the customer with the resources of the organization (Winder and Judd, 1996). At the personal level, it is the desire to make a contribution to a common endeavor that provides purpose (vision) for the individual. Dynamics have a significant impact on the relationships that are built with the constituents of the organization.
Dynamics provide overriding purposes, or unifying benefits which can guide personal and organizational development. Intuitive response to needs-fulfillment and effective response to relational dynamics can build a much more solid foundation for "sustaining membership" of customers and employees than reaction to these dynamics. For example, Jim Graley, who owned a typical auto body repair shop which was unfriendly to women (see Figure 3), responded to the dynamic that women are the key decision makers in 70% of new car purchases by modifying his systems and processes to attract the business of women (see Figure 4), tripling his sales in one year (from $525,000 to $1.6 million). (Conlin, 1992).
Since vision is based on linking needs with resources, and since needs and resources are in a constant state of change, vision itself is always changing. Consequently, it is important to always monitor the dynamics to ensure that systems and processes are still in alignment with and support the unifying purposes of the organization. Moreover, the organization must ensure that its systems and processes nurture relationships with key constituents, including customers, employees, and owners. If those constituents are part of the vision process, and are included in the unifying purposes used by the organization, then it is likely that the systems and processes which are developed will incorporate their needs.
Dynamics themselves follow the Five Dimension pattern (see Chart 5) developed by Winder, Robison, and Judd (Winder, 1993). At the first dimension experience level they may seem like random forces or influences which have no bearing on the success of an organization. A closer study at the second dimension level may reveal patterns which are consistent in repeat occurrences (see Wheatley, 1992). As patterns emerge, they may form into broader trends at the third dimension relationship level. At this point, public awareness of the dynamic patterns is increased, and markets are developed. Jim Graley's insight into the focus on women as key decision makers came at a time when a pattern had been established through research by General Motors of their customer purchase data, but perhaps prior to development of clear trends. In fact, it is people like Jim Graley, who recognize and creatively respond to dynamic patterns, that move the dynamics to a trend by implementing systems based on those patterns and thereby increase public awareness of the patterns. Moreover, firms which recognize dynamics and patterns prior to the time they become trends are considered innovators, and they have a distinct advantage in market development and in capturing and holding market share.
At the fourth dimension interconnectivity level, dynamics form themselves into archetypes described by Senge (1990). At this level, the focus is on "patterns of patterns," or common types of recurring patterns that can be observed in a wide range of situations. At the fifth dimension value sharing level, dynamics form structures, or complete systems of dynamics that are all inter-related. Since we operate within these structures, it is difficult for us to even recognize that they exist; yet they have a real impact on the organization and the environment in which it exists. An example of a structure is the relational pattern described in the case management software implementation noted above. While the focus of the software was to assist legal services advocates, its data replication capabilities provide a powerful tool for improving legal services advocates' relationships with the private bar, creating an impact equally as great as the quest for efficiency.
We see a similar pattern in organizational development and in the stages of business growth (Churchill and Lewis, 1983). At the experience level, the focus of the organization is on existence. Then it turns to survival, as the organization sees purchasing patterns that will support the organization and uses these to build the business. As the organization is able to implement systems to ensure consistency in service to its constituents, it reaches a success stage. Then growth ensues as it sees its place in a broader community and begins to partner with others, including its constituents. Finally, the pinnacle is a level of maturity, where the organization becomes a significant contributor to the broader community and has reached a level of existence that is almost self-perpetuating.
The Map: The Metaphysical Level of Existence
Dynamics are very powerful forces that can be utilized in personal and organizational growth and development. However, dynamics are worthless--even dangerous--if they are not recognized and understood. It is metaphysics that gives us the ability to see the dynamics and then build systems that are responsive to the dynamics. Metaphysics--referred to by Winder (1993) as Fourth Dimension Interconnectivity or Paradigm Logic--are the eyeglasses through which we can observe the dynamic forces underlying our organizational systems. Our paradigms are the maps, or mental models (Senge, 1990) through which we interpret our environment and travel in it. Because our perception is influenced by our paradigm, it is very difficult in our measurement of our systems to think beyond the limitations of the system. Consequently, like Jim Graley (prior to his insight), we may ignore important dynamics that are very important to our customers. Our measurements, for the most part, are designed to measure what is internal to our system to ensure that the system is working, rather than external forces that might have an impact on the system.
Through metaphysics we turn our focus to the broader environment in which we exist. Metaphysics literally means "beyond the physical"--thinking beyond what can be scientifically observed. Consequently, metaphysical thinking may not seem logical in the context of the existing perception of the environment, but when understood in the context of the dynamic forces at play can lead to innovative, enlightened decisions that move the firm forward in ways not otherwise possible. For example, John McCormack's decision to raise prices and engage in an extensive advertising campaign for his hairdressing salons at the beginning of a recession seemed rather inappropriate to others until they saw his Visible Changes sales and revenues increase. It was his experience as a stockbroker that helped him "think out of the box" and prepare for the recession by recognizing indicators of a recession through observation of such factors as oil industry activities and sales of mens clothing. (Posner and Burlingham 1988).
The Course: The Physical Level of Existence
Because we spend our time in the physical level of existence, we are most familiar with it. The physical plane contains the tangible systems that provide our interface with our constituents. These include the actions, measurements, and systems and processes through which we serve our customers and other constituents. Ideally our experience is captured in our system through a process of continuous improvement. However, this improvement process alone is insufficient to permit us to maintain our market edge if we are not always in tune with customer needs and if we are not constantly incorporating those needs into the system.
The physical plane is the course we choose to pursue in our relationships with our constituents. It is our external "surface structure" or delivery system. It reflects the Do-Study-Act phase of Deming's Aim-Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycle. It may or may not follow an underlying plan or purpose. It may, in fact be a serendipitous discovery or a copy of a system or plan developed or used by others (such as a standard industry application or a franchise outlet).
THE ORIENTEERING MODEL
The Orienteering Model (Winder and Judd, 1996) presupposes a flow to the interaction of dynamics, metaphysics, and physical activities (see Figure 5). This flow follows Deming's Aim-Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycle (Deming, 1993, did not specifically add "aim" to the Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycle, but indicated that every system must have an aim; the addition of "aim" to this cycle brings it into complete alignment with the Five Dimensions of Quality and the Orienteering Model). The flow model is comprehensive in design, but may be incomplete in application. For example, an organization may design a system and put it into place without piloting it or testing it to ensure their assumptions about the dynamics were correct (this is the Plan-Act cycle). Or, an organization may simply discover that what it has done (without any planning) actually works, and then implement it (the Do-Study-Act cycle).
The critical underlying assumption of the Map & Compass framework of the Orienteering model is that organizations which use the complete model and utilize the compass and map functions to plan based on underlying dynamics will have a more secure future than those who do not. James M. Higgins noted that a good innovation system cuts across all four areas of creativity--product, process, management, and marketing (Martin and Voehl, 1998). Product and process are physical level functions, but innovations in this area are incomplete if they do not also integrate management paradigms (metaphysical level functions) and market-driven customer-focused vision, which links the resources of the organization with the needs of the customer (dynamic level functions).
The other side of this coin is that organizations which in the past have tended to back away from innovative decisions can now have some certainty in their decision making. This certainty is based on an understanding of where the dynamics will take them. In other words, they do not need to rely on proven results before taking action. They can postulate the end result based on the dynamics they observe in the present. This permits them to move ahead with innovation and creativity, rather than simply relying on the "wait and see" attitude that keeps them from "capturing the moment." This concept is essential to understanding and effectively using concepts of prediction outlined by Deming (1993) in the Knowledge component of his Theory of Profound Knowledge. This concept can assist organizations in capturing markets and customers rather than losing them to competitors.
The case management project noted above is brimming with the innovative use of prediction based on underlying dynamics related to interaction of legal services staff with the private bar. The full impact will not be known for several years. But initial assessment of dynamics through surveys of the members of the State Bar of Michigan (see Roberts, 1997) and input from experts provides a foundation for moving ahead with a pilot project to test these assumptions. The value of the pilot is that it permits focused testing of dynamic assumptions prior to full-scale implementation. If the pilot is successful, the statewide project will proceed. If not, the experience gained will provide greater insight as to the actual dynamics, which can then be used in evaluating and developing future projects. As the pilot project is being implemented and unforseen obstacles have arisen, it is becoming clearer that the easiest course would have been to adopt a case management package specifically designed for legal services offices. But what keeps driving the project is not only the efficiencies it is creating, notwithstanding the obstacles, but also the vision of linking with the entire resource of the private bar.
Iterative Application of the Orienteering Model
As near as the authors can tell, the Orienteering model and its Map & Compass framework is a universal model that provides a comprehensive tool for creative personal and organizational development. Its power comes from the fact that it is based on fields of meaning related to the Five Dimensions of Quality and the Compass, Map, and Course flow structure of those dimensions. As a consequence, the model can be used repetitively in multiple iterations, simply by supplying other words or concepts within the field of meaning.
For example, the medical process of evaluation-diagnosis-treatment-response utilizes both the analysis and the application functions of the Map and Compass Framework (see Figure 6). Evaluation, a physical level function, actually involves the three dimensions of quality that are a part of the physical level of existence: observation (experience), evaluation (measurement), and pattern recognition (relationships). Diagnosis relies on the doctor's expertise (experience gained through training or practice) to understand how the items observed in the evaluation relate to the dynamics of a particular illness or injury. The accuracy of the diagnosis will have an impact on the value of the treatment, which also relies on the medical expertise of the doctor to "Map" a treatment that (based on the doctor's understanding of the dynamics) is geared toward assisting in the healing process, at least for curable diseases or injuries. Finally, it takes actual implementation of the treatment plan (traveling the Course) to determine the response of the patient and to assess whether the doctor's assessment of the injury/illness and the treatment were effective.
Organizational Model. The universal nature of the Orienteering Model permits its use in the personal as well as the organizational context. Figure 7 shows the application of the Orienteering Model in the organizational context. Vision which links needs of customers with organizational resources is at the heart of organizational existence and provides the unifying purposes which unite customers with organizations. With this vision in mind, the organization develops a mission in order to map the strategies it will use to fulfill needs in the markets it chooses to pursue. This is then put into place in a delivery system, in which the firm develops experience, measures its progress against landmarks or control points, and puts into place systems to ensure its interactions with customers are consistent and effective.
Personal Model. Figure 8 shows the application of the Orienteering Model in the personal context. At the core of the personal model is the individual's purpose, which arises from the person's ability to contribute to one or more functions or enterprises. The mapping stage at the individual level involves preparation--gaining needed education or experience to expand the person's frame of reference to recognize patterns or dynamics and to formulate ways to contribute. The course then becomes one of action (doing as planned), assessment (evaluating progress), and application (developing habits or programs to support the desired behavior on a long-term basis).
INTEGRATING DEMING, COVEY, AND SENGE
The models developed by Deming, Covey, and Senge are complete models which represent some of the best thinking of the Twentieth Century related to organizational development. Their models can be used effectively in an organization, and in fact they are used pervasively in many organizations. Application of any one of the models can produce desirable results.
If the Orienteering Model is a universal model, then not only can it be applied in both the personal and organizational context, it can also be applied repetitively to the models developed by Deming, Covey, and Senge to provide a framework for understanding how their models relate with one another. This iterative process can also identify where their models fit in a universal framework.
As noted in Chart 1, Deming, Covey, and Senge each fulfill a distinct part of the Orienteering Model. Deming's focus was on the physical level--the course. His interest was in the delivery system and how understanding systems and variation can assist in knowing the capacity of the system. Covey's focus is on the metaphysical--the map--including the principles of human relationships, and how the improvement of those relationships can improve the organization. Senge's focus is on the compass--the unseen but very powerful dynamics underlying systems. A focus on these dynamics and the structures that cause activity within a system can assist in the strategic planning process in determining what markets should be pursued and what skills should be developed. It is our consciousness of the dynamic context of our environment that permits us to shape the conduct of our systems.
Not only did Dr. Deming emphasize the use of the Aim-Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle, he built his Theory of Profound Knowledge (Deming, 1993) around a similar structure. The four parts of his Theory of Profound Knowledge correspond with the first four of the Five Dimensions of Quality in the Orienteering Model. (See Chart 2). Variation is an experience level function which exists in any system. Knowledge is a measurement function. It is said that we can learn from experience, but the truth is that our learning is not based on experience itself, but our reflection on experience. Moreover, it is knowledge of the dynamics underlying systems that gives us the ability to predict the future with some certainty. Systems are a relationships and systems thinking function. They permit standardizing the course so that it can be repeated on a consistent basis. Psychology is a paradigm function. It is a shift in paradigms which will permit an organization to see the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic rewards, and the residual effects of each type of reward system.
In a number of ways, Covey's teachings have four components, corresponding to the first four of the Five Dimensions of Quality in the Orienteering Model (see Chart 3). (Covey, 1993). The four basic human needs directly correspond with these dimensions. The need to live is an experience level function. The need to learn is a measurement or knowledge function. The need to love is a relationship function. The need to leave a legacy is a paradigm function. These all integrate with building and sustaining relationships. Covey's personal, interpersonal, management, and organization concepts requiring trustworthiness, trust, empowerment, and alignment provide a human relations dimension of action (experience), interaction (measurement, "what can I contribute" and "what can I use"), connection (systems and relationships, involving individual's contribution to the team such that the power of team is greater than that of the individuals separately), interconnection (permitting us to see things through "different eyes," and expand our paradigm or frame of reference), and community (greater vision and heightened sensitivity to our surroundings and greater awareness of the dynamics involved). (Winder, Judd, and Robison, 1995).
Senge's (1990) five disciplines correspond with the Five Dimensions of Quality in the Orienteering Model (see Chart 4). Personal Mastery is an experience level function which takes place at the personal level. Shared Vision is a measurement function in which we measure our own goals and desires against others in the community. Team learning is a relationships and systems function, with each member contributing unique resources to a common endeavor. Mental Models are the eyes through which we see the world, and they relate directly to paradigms. By becoming learning organizations, we can begin to see the world through different eyes and take advantage of structures and dynamics that are inherent in systems, rather than being controlled by them. Dynamic Systems Thinking is a fifth dimension holistic function which helps us realize dynamics and principles that are inherent within systems and which affect the behavior of the system.
The Map and Compass framework of the Orienteering Model provides insight into the dynamic and metaphysical planes of a personal or organizational existence. Providing a comprehensive integration of the teachings of Deming, Covey, and Senge, the Model's ability to be used at the organizational level as well as the personal level provides efficiency in personal and organizational development.
Frank Voehl has contributed immensely to help refine the thinking involved in the Map and Compass Framework relating to innovation and creativity. Lindon J. Robison's research in relational economics has provided a foundation for developing the Five Dimension Concepts and the Compass, Map and Course Framework. The significance of Dr. Robison's contribution was expressed in a letter from Dr. W. Edwards Deming to one of the authors, "The work of Dr. Robison teaches me much."
Barker, Joel A., Future Edge, New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1992.
Churchill, Neil C. and Lewis, Virginia L. 1983. The Five Stages of Small Business Growth. Harvard Business Review (May-June): 30 et seq.
Conlin, Elizabeth 1992. Collision Course. Inc. (December): 132-142.
Covey, Stephen R. 1993. Principle-Centered Leadership, New York: Summit Books.
Deming, W. Edwards. 1993. The New Economics. Cambridge, Mass.: Massachusetts Institute for Technology, Center for Advanced Engineering Study.
Martin, Stein and Voehl, Frank, 1998. Macrologistics Management: A Catalyst for Organizational Change. St. Lucie Press and APICS.
Posner, Bruce G. and Burlingham, Bo 1988. The Hottest Entrepreneur in America. Inc. (January): 44-58.
Roberts, Victoria A., 1997. The Pro Bono Passport. Michigan Bar Journal (August): 778-782.
Senge, Peter M. 1990. The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday/Currency.
Wheatley, Margaret J. 1992. Leadership and the New Science. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Whyte, David, 1994. The Heart Aroused. New York: Doubleday/Currency.
Winder, Richard E. 1993. Fulfilling Quality's Five Dimensions. In 47th Annual Quality Congress Transactions. Milwaukee: American Society For Quality Control.
Winder, Richard E. and Judd, Daniel K. 1996. Organizational Orienteering: Linking Deming, Covey, and Senge in an Integrated Five Dimension Quality Model. In ASQC Seventh National Quality Management Conference Transactions. American Society for Quality Control.
Winder, Richard E., Judd, Daniel K., and Robison, Lindon J. "Linking Covey with Quality: The Five Dimension Denominator," 1995 ASQC Quality Management Conference Transactions, February 8-10, 1995.
Dimensions of Quality
by Richard E. Winder, Lindon J. Robison, and Daniel K. Judd
Stage of Growth
|5th||Value Sharing ("Delight the Customer")
Fulfillment or Maturity Stage
("I found myself completing his sentences.")
|Charity; Justice and Mercy (Caring)||Integrative Psychology; Agape
(Sharing of Vision, Resources [Human, Information, and Capital Resources], and Value)
|Dedication; Mutual Participants for common good ("Lose self: gain all")||Free Will
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
|Value Sharing ("Delight the Customer")|
|Inner Drive, Intrinsic Reward, Commitment of the Heart; Ethics;
|Conscience or Intuition; Paradigm Shift (Empowerment)
|Wisdom; Distributive Justice
("Do the right thing")
(Conscience, Instinct, Intuition)
|Principle-Centered Leadership (Mission Development and Resource Utilization)||Mutual Promises
"Partners" by agreement; Associates ("Win-Win")
"At the end of the rainbow we'll find our pot of gold."
|Partnership ("Help each other grow")|
|3rd||Relationship (Systems Thinking)
|Duty; Obligation; Association;
Goal Orientation; Extrinsic Reward
|Consensus; Understanding; Commitment
|Passion, Feelings, Sensitivity; Commutative Justice
("Care about it")
|Management (Structured Management & Management by Objective)||Quid Pro Quo; "Parties" to legally binding contract ("Fair trade")||Contractual
"Go for the gold."
|Achievement ("Get ahead")|
|Incentive or Compensation; Control
|Communication; Discussion (Two-way: "Tell and
|Knowledge; Retributive Justice--Reward
("Do it right")
|Challengers; "Objects" which help achieve goals ("Win-Lose")||Competitive
"He or she who has the gold rules."
|Competition ("Get ahead of them")|
|Power; Greed; Fear; Apathy
|Conveyance ("Tell and Sell")
Chaos; Random Forces
|Actions; Retributive Justice--Punishment
|Tyranny or Auto-cracy (One Dimen-sion)||Collusion; Blame; "Victims" of the other party, who blocks achievement of goals; ("Lose-Lose")||Enforcement
"Bury it!" ("If I can't have it, he or she can't either.")
|Punishment ("Get back" or "Get even") or Apathy ("Why bother?")|
|Chart 5. The Five Dimensions of Quality.||Copyright 1992, 1993, 1997, Richard E. Winder, Lindon J. Robison, and Daniel K. Judd||Rev. Jan. 2, 1998|