The Future of Quality Management Systems: Ding Dong, the database is dead!

Is this article for me?

It’s worth spending 6 minutes reading this article if any of the following apply:

• Your company is already using an eQMS or plans to in the future.
• You are looking to future-proof your quality management system
• You’re interested in Lean & Six Sigma.
• You believe continuous improvement is a culture, and want it to work in your organization
• You want to reduce the headache of managing your processes.
• Suspect that your team spends too much time on non-value-added activities.

The history of eQMS

The eQMS (Enterprise Quality Management System or Electronic Quality Management System) was developed to replace Excel spreadsheets, paper forms, and disparate tools that were created to handle quality management processes, especially after the advent of systems like ISO 9000. The ability to document processes, create standards, manage records, and implement continuous improvement moved to the computer.

These softwares haven’t changed for decades.

eQMS systems grew out of the databases like ERP that were created in the 1960s to live on clunky PCs with dot matrix printers. They were designed to capture process data, create rigid controls, analyse trends, and create reports. But they haven’t changed much since then, apart from having refreshed designs and moving to the cloud.

But the rest of the world has changed a lot.

We now have mobile phones with better computing capabilities than those PCs. We all use software all the time – from instant messaging to e-commerce, and cameras on our phones. And post-COVID, the world started learning how to work remotely and asynchronously. A lot of the software we use works like magic. But almost no one would describe their eQMS as magical.

So where do eQMS fail?

Have you ever wondered why you are not getting enough out of your eQMS or the quality module of your ERP? Have you ever felt they are just glorified databases? Have you ever been stuck in a long, tedious, or expensive implementation of one of these systems? Then you probably know all of the problems already….

1. They don’t help you get the work done – which means your quality team spends up to 4 hours a day following up in emails, meetings, and phone calls.

2. They don’t create accountability – which means you have to spend more time defining who does what next and forget about building a quality-first culture

3. They are inflexible – which means you have to create all your workflows in the beginning and it’s really hard to change them over time

4. They are opaque – which means that it’s hard to see where the actual work is getting done or how much progress is being made

5. They’re inaccessible to 90% of teams (outside quality) – which means it’s hard for you to get visibility into processes that require other teams (think CAPA)

6. They’re hard to use – which means it takes forever to implement and you have to provide additional (and painful) training for every new process

Why did it fail? Collaborative processes don’t fit in a database

The fact is that, in spite of having an eQMS, 93% of quality teams report that most of their actual work is done over email, phone calls, and in meetings. This results in enormous amounts of wasted time and errors as people transfer data between different systems and wade through an inbox from hell every morning.

Let me be clear, I’m not saying your team isn’t working, I’m saying that they are spending up to 7 hours a day working stuff like this:

• Emailing
• Following up and coordinating with other teams
• Entering data into different systems
• Sitting in meetings and trying to get approvals

That leaves around an hour to focus on the core value-added processes, including:

• Identifying defects/NCs
• Completing root cause analyses
• Implementing corrective actions
• Conducting internal audits

This isn’t your fault. This happens because quality processes are highly collaborative and it’s hard to get the right people in the right place, focusing on what matters. Quality processes are also different from other processes because:

• They require context and creativity, concepts that are inherently human.
• They can’t be automated. (You can’t automate a root cause analysis or the definition and implementation of corrective actions.)

Quality processes are what we call collaborative processes…

What’s so special about collaborative processes?

In the chart above, you can see that the relatively straightforward process on the left is, in fact, far more complicated in practice when you try to visualize the interactions between different internal and external teams.

To illustrate this point, let’s take a look at a real-world example

If you try doing a time study of the last time you closed out a non-conformance or complaint with a proper root cause and corrective action, it might look like this:

Do you see what is happening here?!

‍

1. You have 10 different teams that are constantly changing at each stage of the process, meaning you’ll face an accountability problem because it’s so hard to assign ownership to each stage of every process. Other signs you face an accountability problem are as follows:
2. Deadlines slipping
3. Constant follow-ups
4. Too many CCs
5. Email ping pong

‍

1. Even when you are using an eQMS, you still have 8 different tools to manage this process, meaning you’ll likely face a visibility problem trying to keep on top of things because everything is in so many different systems.  Other signs you face a visibility problem are as follows:
2. Too many meetings
3. Too much data transfer
4. Too many siloes
5. Not knowing who is doing what, where, when, and why

‍

1. 85% of the steps are non-value addition activities, meaning you have an efficiency problem.  Other signs you face an efficiency problem are as follows:
2. Incomplete processes
3. Wasted resources
4. Long cycle times
5. Frustrated customers

‍

So how do you solve the problem?

‍

Any potential solution must consider these basic necessities:

‍

• A conversational space for every process record or event – this will enable a team to form around each objective and eliminate the wasted time following up for data or updates. It also makes it easier for teams to complete processes without worrying about the complexity or unpredictability of the process.

1. Transparent and negotiable ownership – which will establish clear accountability for every record, event, or objective.
2. End-to-end visibility from chart to the conversation – which will make it easy for managers to spot roadblocks and dive into every conversation
3. Easy to use mobile app and access via email – which will improve access to more people and make it easier for them to collaborate when required. It will also reduce the time it takes to implement a new process or train users.
4. Familiar chat-based UI – which will make it familiar and friendly to 95% of users who are using these interfaces in their daily lives.

‍

Option 1: Integrate enterprise chat tools with eQMS

‍

Currently, you could try to integrate enterprise chat and email automation with your existing eQMS.  You might want to consider any of the following enterprise chat tools:

‍

• Slack
• Microsoft Teams
• Flock
  
  

How does this work?

‍

Every time you start or update a quality process in your eQMS, you can trigger a notification into a channel or a team on the enterprise chat tool and/or email. This will keep you and your team notified in real-time, and enable them to comment on each notification.

‍

What are the challenges?

‍

The problem is really that email and existing enterprise chat tools have not been designed to enable collaborative processes.  They are primarily useful for:

‍

• General conversations with static teams that continue indefinitely
• Small teams rapidly exchanging information and data
• Announcements

‍

By trying to integrate these systems with your existing eQMS, you will face the following problems:

‍

• You will get a lot of notifications!  The channel/team structure of conversations means that everyone gets notified about every update.
• You won’t be able to measure collaborative process cycle times because the starting/ending point is being managed in a separate system.
• You won’t be able to assign ownership and status to the conversations themselves.  You will only be able to track ownership and status in the eQMS.
• Data collection will not be collaborative.  The conversations in the enterprise chat tool will not facilitate how the data gets updated in the eQMS.
• All users will still need to manage two different systems (chat + eQMS).

‍

The future: Collaborative Process Platforms

‍

A collaborative process platform brings the best of an eQMS and an enterprise chat tool under one roof. It creates a distinct conversation for every process record or event.

‍

That means it’s easier to bring teams together around one objective at a time, assign accountability and get more people engaged.

‍

And since it has a conversational interface, it makes it easy to use and makes process implementation a breeze.

‍