United States                 Region 5                     Illinois, Indiana,
 Environmental Protection        77 West Jackson Boulevard      Michigan, Minnesota,
 Agency	Chicago, Illinois 60604	Ohio, Wisconsin	
                                                                      WINTER 1994
What does Clinton think about TQM? "He's a big fan."
By Dick Bauer,
Retired Senior Quality Advisor,
Environmental Protection Agency

    In his first year as President, Bill Clinton has lead the charge to bring Total Quality
Management to the Federal government. According to an article that appeared in the March 23
issue of The Federal Times; if you never gave TQM thought before, maybe you should start
now.
    President Clinton's roots are fairly deep when it comes to experience with Total Quality.
 In Arkansas he studied the principles of TQM and was mentored by Asa Whitaker, the Quality
Manager for Eastman Kodak in Arkansas. Clinton participated in weekly meetings with Agency
heads and other management personnel to implement Quality Management and improve
Arkansas state government services and delivery to customers. Under Clinton in Arkansas, 90
percent of Arkansas' 36,000 employees were trained  in the principles of TQM. If his first year
as President are any indication, it looks like he is trying to do the same thing with the Federal
government. Vice-President Gore and Cabinet members such as Labor Secretary Reich, HHS
Secretary Shalala, HUD's Cisneros, and Commerce Secretary Brown have all come out in
support of Clinton's commitment to Quality Management. Clinton has launched a National
Performance Review of Government, opened the White House dining room to all  employees,
cut limousine service by 50 percent, and created teams to look at problems such  as health care.
Is this TQM? Curt Reimann, the administrator of the Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Award,
thinks so.
    Vice President Gore is leading the National Performance Review, the embodiment of the
Clinton/Gore approach to quality. The foundation for the NPR comes from principles espoused
by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler in their 1992 book Reinventing Government. (For more
information, see Book Review in this issue.) These principles include being mission-driven,
results-oriented and customer-driven. As part of the NPR, each Federal agency has developed
improvements to the way we do business. EPA's NPR involves approximately 450 employees
from all levels of the Agency on 20 teams. These teams have examined critical policy and
process areas in the agency for potential improvements. Recommendations were funneled to
the Administrator, Carol Browner, through the Senior  Management Council, made up of Assis-
tant Administrators, Regional Administrators, Deputy Assistant Administrators and Deputy
Regional Administrators. A consolidated report from EPA went to the White House in August,
1993. Currently, the National Performance Review Implementation  Steering Committee, co-
chaired by Bob Sussman, Deputy Administrator, and Charlotte Northern, detailed to the Quality
Advisory Group, is developing ways to implement these recommendations. Look for implemented
improvements throughout FY 1994.
    How will quality evolve at EPA? It is too soon to tell what the final  product will look like, but
it is clear that quality is here to stay under the Clinton administration.

-------
BOOK
                       Reinventing Government
                       by David Osbome and Ted
                       Gaebler
                       by John Kelley,
                       Facilitator, Region 5
                       Yes, this is another book about
                       managing better and using Total
 Quality Management (TQM) principles, but it is unique for
 a couple reasons: it applies specifically to government
 operations and Bill Clinton likes what it says. Author
 David Osbome has been an advisor to the President and
 has helped shape his ideas on how government must
 change to deliver services more in alignment with its
 customers' needs.
     We are talking about sweeping and fundamental
 changes in government policies and structures. Osborne
 and Gaebler say these reinvented governments "are
 lean,  decentralized, and innovative. They are flexible,
 adaptable, and quick to leam new ways when conditions
 change.  They use competition, customer choice.and
 other non-bureaucratic mechanisms to get things done
 as creatively and effectively as possible.* One concept
 I particularly liked was that we should think more like
 owners and ask, 'If this were my money, would I spend
 it this way?"
     Making government more entrepreneurial and
 injecting some competition has drastically improved
 service and controlled costs in several of the book's
 example cases,  in Phoenix, the cost of hauling municipal
 waste was growing and service was failing so the city
 decided to contract privately for the service.  The city was
 divided into districts and bidding for contracts was
 phased in over time.  Interestingly, the city's  waste
 hauling utility also bid. They didn't win the first several
 contracts because their costs were too high.  But as they
 continued to innovate and become more like the private
 haulers, they began winning bids. Now, the city is served
 by a combination of private and  public haulers and the
 cost to users has been reduced  while service has im-
 proved. The point here  is that the utility changed to avoid
 extinction.
    The book criticized  EPA as the "perfect example" of
 a command-and-control organization where we lay down
 rules and people are ordered to  comply,  it seems that
 people don't relish this authoritarian behavior, but prefer
that government set standards where necessary and
then provide incentives to achieve those levels.  The
authors admit that EPA's methods can be credited with
substantial achievements, but they theorize that market-
based incentives would have done the job faster and
better. An example would be to establish a system  of
"green taxes" which would tax pollution and provide the
economic incentive for Americans to clean up.
    Lots of good examples and inspiring ideas make
Reinventing Government highly recommended reading.
It is being quoted widely in magazine articles and by
leading government officials. Don't be the last one at
EPA to pick up a copy. Copies are available in the
Region 5 library.
                                                   QUALITY
                                                   COORDINATOR'S
                                                   COLUMN
                      The Joy and Agony of
                      Feedback
                      by Kathy Gunn, Region 5,
                      Quality Coordinator

                      Continuous improvement, a
                      quality principle, can be defined
as constantly looking for ways to improve how we do
business and making incremental changes. It is not
necessary to have a "big bang" with every improvement;
small steps can add up to significant organizational
change. Continuous improvement is implemented by
individuals looking to make the world within their reach a
better place.
    Developing an awareness of how you interact in the
workplace and  improving your personal effectiveness is
one key component of continuous improvement. The
following tips on giving and receiving feedback are
designed to aid you in tuning up your sensor and collect-
ing the data you need to make changes. But be
forewarned, no matter how logical getting feedback may
seem to our heads, it can be difficult for our hearts!
                                                   GIVING EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK:
                                                     O Tell the person you would like to give him/her
                                                        feedback and set up a time that is mutually
                                                        convenient. Set the context by describing the
                                                        situation, the behavior, when it occurred, and what
                                                        you saw happening.
                                                     O Be as descriptive as possible, and avoid evaluative
                                                        words like "good/bad, right/wrong." Focus on what
                                                        was effective or ineffective. This helps the receiver
                                                        feel less judged. Of course, there are instances
                                                        where the organization has determined that certain
                                                        behavior is not acceptable  or "right" and this should
                                                        be communicated.
                                                     O Describe the person's behavior, not the person
                                                        himself. For instance, say,  "You did not call on me
                                                        when I raised my hand to speak" instead of "You
                                                        are a jerk for not calling on me when you knew I
                                                        wanted to speak."
                                                     O Be as honest and direct as possible and show
                                                        respect for the person.
                                                     O Be as objective as possible.

-------
   O Try not to overload the person with too much
      data all at once. There is a limit to how much
      information a person can digest at one time. If the
      person looks dazed or is arguing, (s)he has
      probably reached his/her limit. Regardless of how
      useful your feedback may be, this  is not the time
      to pursue the conversation. Be sensitive and wait
      for another opportunity to communicate your
      perceptions.
   O Give feedback on behaviors that can be changed,
      instead of making generalities.  For instance, "I
      don't like it when you ignore my comments and
      I  want you to listen to me" is more useful than
      "Stop being so  difficult around me."
   O Provide specific examples of what could be done
      differently next  time.  Say, "You could have asked
      for our input at  x point in the meeting." This is
      more effective than simply complaining about
      certain behavior.
   O Speak for yourself, not a group. Describe the
      situation in terms of "I saw, I suggest." This adds
      credibility to your feedback and also gives the
      receiver room to see that these are your perceptions.
   O And finally, be sure to give feedback on what the
      individual does well, along with suggestions on
      how to improve. Honest feedback on our
      strengths is as valuable as data on what we may
      need to improve.
RECEIVING FEEDBACK (WHETHER IT IS GIVEN
EFFECTIVELY OR NOT!):
   O The most important item to remember when
      receiving feedback is: Whenever possible, do not
      argue, justify, apologize, or attack the giver of
      feedback. Feedback is simply feedback.  It does
      not imply that you are an awful person or that you
      have made an irreversible mistake. Feedback is
      a mirror which reflects the way others perceive
      you. This information is critical if you want to
      make improvements to the way you do business
      and interact with others.
   O Do not promise not to do "it" again. There is no
      need for this. It is okay to make mistakes and
      adjusting behavior takes time. Communicate your
      intention to change the behavior, if relevant. Do
      not set yourself up for failure by assuming or
      promising you will never do "if again. You will not
      change your behavior overnight.
   O Once you quiet the voice in your head that wishes
      to argue, justify, attack or apologize, you can
      begin to probe and learn as much as possible
      from the feedback. Clarify the information you
      receive by asking questions such as who, what,
      where, when, how, and why? These specifics
      help you to identify precisely what happened,
      when it occurred, how the other person felt and
      what you might do differently in the future.
   O Listen as fully as possible to the person before
      you respond. Giving feedback is difficult in an
      environment that does not readily support open
      and honest communication. This  person has
      taken a risk. Usually, the act of giving feedback
      means that the person cares about you enough to
      mirror how you are perceived and provide you
      with invaluable data.
   O Even if the feedback giver is not completely
      responsible in delivering the feedback, there is
      usually a grain of truth in what is communicated.
      Look for that truth in any feedback you receive.
      It can be painful to hear, but it is necessary for
      growth and change.
   O After you receive the feedback, determine what
      you did effectively and ineffectively in the given
      situation. Your perceptions are also valid and
      should be weighed with other's feedback. Do not
      assume that feedback you have been given is
      completely true or completely false. All perceptions
      are "true" or valid, even when they conflict. That
      does not mean they are the full truth for you.
      Look for the useful part of each piece of feedback
      and put together as full a picture as you can.
   O Finally, remember to say "thank you." It is
      important to let the person know you appreciate
      their perceptions and the time they have taken to
      share them with you. This opens the channel for
      future communications allowing you to benefit from
      new perspectives.

    Receiving feedback can be difficult. But if you
remove your defensiveness, it can be a valuable tool in
improving your work relationships  and productivity.
Giving feedback effectively facilitates a  learning environ-
ment in our organization. These feedback skills are
critical to implementing continuous improvement and
changing our work environment. Starting with ourselves
is the most powerful method we can choose to create
change at EPA.

-------
                         About Constancy...
                         byChristopher D. Hess, Master
                          Facilitator, Region 7
                         Try these clues: it appears
                         uninvited.  This causes some
                         people to welcome it and
 other to fear it. It often appears so rapidly it's suddenly
 "there." Its appearance is as certain as the colloquial
 "death and taxes." No, I'm not describing your mother-in-
 law, although the clues may fit!  These are descriptions
 of change — the faceless entity that unequivocally
 challenges us to ever-greater levels of success.
     During the summer of 1992,1 was fortunate enough
 to encounter some of the most brilliant minds currently
 addressing the challenges of corporate and personal
 effectiveness. These sources include Peter Senge,
 The Fifth Discipline; Stephen Covey, The Seven
 Habits of Highly Effective People; and Anthony Robbins,
 Unlimited Power and Awaken the Giant Within.
     These authors are extremely provocative thinkers
 who consistently dwell on the shores of innovation. Each
 one addresses change, as an entity, as well as the many
 faces change assumes in our economic, interpersonal,
 and individual lives.
     As I recognized the truthfulness of their respective
 works, I equally realized that many of their concepts were
 not foreign — I was, in one form or another, familiar with
 them. What I found in myself (as well as the organizations I
 have been a part of) was the realization that we often fail to
 embrace and successfully deal with change due to a lack of
 concentrated action.  In two words: no strategy.
     My informal observations suggested that while it is
 easy enough to say "that's true," it is quite another thing
 to participate with truth to create a new and better
 atmosphere for ourselves, our families, and our associ-
 ates. Over and over again, my observations suggested
 that the difference between recognizing truth and realiz-
 ing change was the missing bridge of strategy.
    As a result, I created a one-day curriculum workbook
 entitled  "Managing Change" that the Master Facilitator
 Network graciously let me try on them. Instead of
 predigested formula for ensuring successful change, the
 curriculum was designed to enable facilitators to create
 unique strategies relevant to the groups they are facilitating.
    After I bought their meals for the day, my peers con-
cluded that this curriculum  could be beneficial for
organizations throughout the Regions. (I'm kidding,
of course; not about the benefit—the food!) Since the
original pilot, I have banded together a group of eight other
facilitators who have agree to present the workshop in
 Region 7. In the past couple of months, we have revised
and refined the workbook to ensure that it achieves its
intention. We also refined the approach somewhat by
targeting "initiators" instead of "facilitators." Our rationale is
to equip anyone willing to serve as a change agent regard-
less of whether they are a formal facilitator.
    The course will be formally offered throughout
Region 7 beginning in May 1993 and will be piloted in
Region 5 beginning in FY1994. For more information,
call your respective Quality Coordinator.
      "If you are distressed by anything external, the pain
is not due to the thing itself, but to your own estimate of it;
 and this you have the power to revoke at any moment." -
                                     Marcus Aurelius
 FORUM
                   TQM Goes "Public"
                   by John Perrecone,
                   Region 5, Office of Public Affairs
                   Question: Total Quality Manage-
                   ment will never work In situations
with the public. In such situations, it is our responsi-
bility to inform the public and give EPA's official
perspective. How could we possibly use TQM
techniques?
Answer: Experience shows that public meetings can
         be one of the least effective ways of communicating
        with the public. The discussion can be
        monopolized by individuals or groups;
        communication is one-way communication with
        agencies "telling" the public what they want
        them to hear; and it doesn't lend itself to
        individuals expressing their concerns. Can TQM
        techniques alter this situation? From recent
        experience, I suggest that they can.
            Successful public meetings share certain
        key attributes: a clear objective, an appropriate
        message for your audience, and thorough
        preparation by staff and management. I
        suggest adding one additional criteria: TQM
        principles that allow the public and agencies to
        communicate on the same plane.
            It works like this: The moderator starts the
        meeting as usual by providing enough back-
        ground so everyone has a common under-
        standing, walking through the agenda, and
        acknowledging agenda items from all parties.
        (Place the agenda and meeting topics on a flip
        chart and keep that in plain view during the
        entire meeting.)
            However, before the project manager takes
        "the next logical step" and launches into the
        standard 30-45 minute presentation, the mod-
        erator asks the audience what their questions,
        concerns, and comments are relative to the
        evening's agenda.  What was that?! Ask your
        customers how the presentation will add value?!
        Yes, ask the audience what their concerns are
        for that evening's topic. Paraphrase each
        question, ensure that it is relevant for the
        meeting, verify that it is correct, and then have a
        recorder write it down verbatim. Place the
        questions on a flip chart in plain view.

-------
    This shows that you care, are listening to
the public's concerns, and want to conduct a
meeting that meets the audience's needs as
well as your own. It also shows that the
agency does not want to "control" the entire
meeting but wants to create a dialogue in
which to answer questions.
    Now, the project manager can either give
the prepared presentation with an emphasis
on the flip-chart comments and/or modify the
talk to more precisely fit the audience's needs.
(This flexibility needs to be addressed during
meeting preparation time.)  During the ques-
tion-and-answer period, answer questions and
then either the moderator or the project
manager can use other similar questions on
the flip charts as a springboard for further
discussion. As each question is addressed,
have the recorder place a check next to it. At
the end of the meeting, the moderator revisits
the list to make sure that all questions have
been addressed and to answer any that weren't.
    At two recent Superfund meetings, which
could have been contentious, I found this
technique effective at defusing early tensions
related to public feeling that EPA would be
nonresponsive to their concerns. With this
technique, the audience was engaged from the
start, listened well, and was respectful because
we listened well and treated them with respect.
The public meeting actually became a useful
communication tool and not and exercise in
futility. Many people thanked us afterwards for
our ability to listen and to respond to their
concerns. Because both meetings ended within
a reasonable time-frame, we were thanked for
maximizing their time.
    Finally, not only does this approach
respond to concerns raised during the
evening, but it also helps identify key commu-
nity trends and issues that can be better
communicated and builds trust for future
community relations activities.
      TQM methods can be successfully
used in a public forum if you prepare in
advance and are flexible. It does not mean
that disagreements over how  to  proceed with.
projects will not occur; on the  contrary, that will
happen in any project and the technical
adequacy of the work will always determine
the plan's acceptability. Rather, this approach
is a tool that creates forums that communicate
with the public in a meaningful way.  It shows
that agencies are committed to honest, open
communication with all customers and that the
value-added link between EPA and its custom-
ers can lead to more effective project outcomes.
FACILITATOR
                       Quality and You
                       by Jane DeRose-Bamman,
                       Region 5, Facilitator
                       Believe it or not, Quality
                       organizations are not defined
by the number of Quality Action Teams (QATs) or people
involved on QATs or the number of facilitators. More
realistically, Quality organizations could be defined by the
type of motivated, innovative, communicative people
willing to take risks by providing, making and receiving
feedback and suggestions to seek out improvement
opportunities. With these people, an emphasis on
Quality will occur, regardless of the number of QATs.
Quality begins with individuals.
    What can we do to improve the way we work??
Think about areas in your daily work habits, practices,
accomplishments which can and should be improved
upon.
    One way to enhance quality in your daily lives may
be to play an active role in setting your schedule. Being
able to plan your day and stick to those activities could
have a huge impact on the goals you meet each day.
I know you must get "brush-fires" which make planning
our day seemingly impossible.  In addition, management
directives may quickly push your top priorities to another
level.  With improved communication and planning there
is a way to make it easier to deal with the shifting of
priorities.

   1. Communication is important to reduce the amount
     of rework that can go into accomplishing an
     activity. You may think you are the Great
     Communicator as staff person or supervisor, but
      you may need to take some extra time up-front to
     ensure that our directions and guidance are clear
     or, visa versa, that we understand the assignment.
     The way you communicate is also important.  For
     example:  Be diplomatic, be concise, ask for
     clarification if you don't understand. Get to know
     your customer. The unasked questions cost us.  If
     we pay  attention, the questions that are asked tell
     us where we need to improve.
   2. Long term as well as short term planning can
     help us prioritize the things that need to be
     accomplished. I know, as a Region, we are trying
     to spend time on long term planning.  Do you need
     to improve your short term planning skills also? Do
     you request something before you have thought
     out what you actually want and need?  Have you
     thought about all the options before you interrupt
     someone else's train of thought?  Remember, each
     "meeting" takes time from you and another person.
     If you don't have your thoughts and game plan
     down, you may be wasting your time and someone
     else's.
   3. This brings me to something else that we all
     experience in some way or another: "meetings".

-------
Just think of how much work you would get done if
you did not have to attend a meeting. But yet, if we
broadened our view of "meeting,* we'd realize that
we would get nothing done if we eliminated them.
Each encounter we have with one or more persons
is a meeting. Each request we make is a meeting.
Telephone calls, whether pre-arranged conference
call or spontaneous citizen call, are meetings.
Meetings are used to obtain or relay information,
for discussion, or for decision-making.  Unexpected
meetings are the hardest thing to stop from
throwing your schedule way off.
    What can be done to reduce the amount of
time spent in meetings in order to maintain control
of your schedule? (Jane OeRose-Bamman take
note of these suggestions - please!!!)

If you call a meeting or make requests:
    O  Evaluate what is the most effective means
       of achieving the objective for all people
       involved.  (WPO messages may work just
       fine.)
    O  Determine the objectives of the meeting
       and prepare a plan for meeting the
       objectives (agenda) including setting time
       limits for each step as well as the length of
       the meeting.  (Conference calls need
       agendas, too.)
    O  Communicate your objectives for potential
       participants.
            Allow time to negotiate commitments so
            they work for all parties.
          O Start and end the meetings on time!  Re-
            schedule if you run out of time.

If you receive a request, make sure you are told and
understand:
          O The objectives of the request or meeting.
          O The requestor's plan for meeting the
            objectives.
          O The role you will be playing in responding to
            the request or at a meeting.
          O The value you will be adding.
          O The deadlines and estimated amount of
            your time needed.

For your information a group of Region 5 TQM
facilitators are developing information and training
on how to improve our meetings. Stay tuned to this
channel for announcements of upcoming events.

  In conclusion, there are many other areas where
individuals could have an impact on Quality. Who knows,
maybe another person will take a stab at putting thoughts
to paper on one of those areas.  Each of us has a role to
play in moving  this Region towards Quality. Our im-
provements will be greatest if each individual continues
to evaluate what is going well and what may need to be
done differently. The leaps towards Quality in the Region
will occur with the "baby" steps from individuals.

-------
The Coupon	
I                                                                                             I
   Quality Environment Information Exchange Coupon
   (Clip or Photocopy and Mail or FAX this coupon to us)
  Our Mailing Address:   Quality Environment (PI-19J)
                      U.S. EPA Region 5
                      77 West Jackson Boulevard
                      Chicago, Illinois 60604

  Our FAX Number:      Quality Environment, (312) 353-1155
  Use this Coupon to:
  (check one or more)    O  Share your TQM Experiences, OR
                      O  Ask for Information, OR
                      O  Make a Suggestion
  Write your story, ask your question, or make your suggestions here:
  (Attach additional pages if necessary)
                      O Please add my name to the mailing list to receive Quality Environment.
        Your Name:     	

        Organization:   	

        Address:       	

        City/State:      	 Zip:

        Phone:         	FAX:	


-------
   Quality Environment \s a semi-annual newsletter dealing with the implementation of Total Quality
   Management in Region 5 and the regional State environmental agencies
   Quality Environment \s published by U.S. EPA Region 5, but the views of authors do not neces-
   sarily reflect EPA policy. No permission is necessary to reproduce contents, except copyrighted
   materials.
   Comments and suggestions are welcome; the coupon on the other side of this page is provided
   for that purpose. Or, call one of the editorial board members listed below:
                   Jeff Kelley                                           Kathy Gunn
                 (312) 353-1159             Marcia Damato               (312) 353-3405
                                          (312)886-6297
Quality Environment
U.S. EPA Region 5
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, Illinois 60604
                                                                      U.S Environmental Protection Agency
                                                                             Region 5 Library
                                                                       77 W. Jackson Blvd. (PL-16J)
Printed on recycled paper.                                                        Chica9°>IL 60604-3507

-------