Whenever carrying out the changes that affect the very foundation of a company and trigger further alterations in its basic processes, one must make sure that the newly designed framework allows for perfect coordination of all processes involved. Therefore, it is imperative to create not only an elaborate quality management system but also the approach that helps measure the change, thus, making sure that the above quality requirements are met. As the example of CSX and Company X has shown, creating the environment, which the newly adopted changes will work, is rather easy once an appropriate strategy such as Six Sigma or DMAIC is incorporated, yet the choice of the quality management tool defines the further course of actions to be taken, as well as the scope of the project.
One must admit that the effects of the approaches adopted at both organizations are rather different despite similar goals and outcomes. For instance, quality issues were clearly the primary concern of the CSX Company’s leaders (Pyzdek & Keller, 2014). At Company X, the communication strategy and the lack of a proper conflict management approach were viewed as the key source of the conflict that needed to be addressed through the improvement of the organizational behavior patterns (Adrian, 2008).
In addition, one must admit that the focus on environmentalism is much tighter at CSX, whereas Company X has been adopting a rather general approach based on sustainability. Although the latter phenomenon originates from the concept that promotes a reasonable use of natural resources (Jones, 2014), the current principles of sustainability are often related to the entrepreneurial issues rather than to the environmental ones (Pyzdek & Keller, 2014). Therefore, the shift of the emphasis from the economic concerns to the environmental ones is required to maintain credibility in the target market for Company X.
Finally, the fact that the CSX organization has a sharper focus on the course of actions to be undertaken compared to Company X should be mentioned. In contrast to the identified organization, CSX has planned every single step to be taken when implementing the project. The specified characteristics of the organization should necessarily be interpreted as an example for Company X to follow when improving its current quality management strategy.
However, the approaches adopted at Company X and CSX also share certain characteristics. For example, both are aimed at the same goal of increasing the staff’s performance efficacy and, therefore, enhancing the firm’s competitiveness in the global market. In addition, the concept of team competition raised in the article quite a few times can also be related to the phenomenon of internal competition that the members of Company X are likely to face once the newly implemented quality management program starts taking its toll on the relationships between the staff members.
The changes carried out at CSX and Company X can be viewed as the prime examples of proper change implementation in the context of a company. Although there are significant differences in the framework design created by the organizations, the general outcomes can be deemed as rather similar. By creating an elaborate model with an accurate measurement system that allowed evaluating the outcomes and complying with the newly set standards, both firms managed to survive the challenges and enter the new market successfully. Thus, both DMAIC and Six Sigma can be deemed as rather efficient methods of promoting changes in the context of a global company.
Adrian, N. (2008). It all ties together: CSX team’s project curtails fuel consumption, saves company millions. New York, NY: Quality Progress.
Jones, E. (2014). Quality management for organizations using lean Six Sigma techniques. Boca Raton, CA: CRC Press.
Pyzdek, T., & Keller, P. (2014). Analyze phase. In The Six Sigma handbook (pp. 427-520). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.