GENERAL

• Headquarters: Dearborn, Michigan, U.S.A.
• Year Founded: 1989
• Number of Employees: 3,200

QS-9000 SPECIFIC

• Registered Location(s): Dearborn, Michigan, U.S.A.
• Number of Employees: 3,200
• Registration Date: May 16, 1995
• Product(s): Hot Roll, Cold Roll, Electrogalvanized Steel
• Tier I, II, III Supplier: Tier I
• Major Customer(s): Ford, Worthington Steel
• Annual Sales: U.S. $1.2 Billion

INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this case study is to demonstrate how Rouge Steel Company was able to become the first fully integrated steel producer to secure QS-9000 registration. The short time we took to achieve this lofty registration is a testament to our existing quality system. This case study will provide an understanding of the process and the tools we used in the design and implementation of the quality system. While some difficult issues had to be resolved in the implementation process, careful planning – as well as the full support of the union leadership and company management – resulted in the implementation of an effective and robust quality system. While we understand that every organization is unique, the quality system in place at Rouge Steel can be adapted to fit the quality requirements of virtually any service or manufacturing process.

Because Rouge Steel had no desire to develop a large quality assurance staff, the implementation efforts were led by the company's president and chief operating officer, who was supported by the quality system implementation manager and the UAW quality representative. Together these three individuals designed a system that, when implemented, placed the responsibility for continuous improvement in the operations-not on the shoulders of some omnipotent quality department. In 1992, a second UAW quality representative was added to this core group with the intention of expanding the quality system to the maintenance functions.

The quality system philosophy is straightforward: If there is going to be meaningful process improvement, the people closest to the operation must have the authority and responsibility to make the necessary changes. For any system, doing without a proper focus of authority or responsibility, or having the authority or responsibility for its success vested in someone outside the affected operation, creates a sense of helplessness. Giving operators the opportunity to react to changes in their processes made them an integral part of the quality system, its implementation, and its success.

Management's commitment to the quality system was demonstrated early on by the high level of involvement and the hands-on approach taken by the company president. He was closely involved in the day-to-day implementation process and took great pains to become knowledgeable in every aspect of the quality system. He often acted as a "reasonability checker" on the suggestions of the implementation manager and UAW quality representative. This served to ensure a balanced approach to implementation and led to a system that is meaningful to operations personnel.

The organization's commitment to quality has not wavered with the success of the system. The determination of senior management to maintain a high level of knowledge on all quality-related issues is most visible in the frequency of the president's quality meetings. The department managers, from each of the company's five operating areas, meet with the president once a month solely for the purpose of addressing quality issues and continuous improvement plans; twice monthly the technical service representatives meet with the president and operating department managers to discuss issues in customer plants; and meetings are held twice weekly with the president, quality assurance manager, and all department managers to discuss and identify corrective actions and to address any new quality issues.

Management's commitment to quality goes far beyond the corporate quality policy posted throughout the plant. The president has publicly stated time and time again that safety is the only thing more important than quality. He has been heard on numerous occasions telling people that they have not only the complete authority but also the responsibility to stop an operation whose product is not of the required quality. Whether through the use of product inspection or process control, any signal of less-than-optimal conditions must be investigated and corrected. Management has also shown its commitment by designating key quality resource personnel to assist in quality system utilization and implementation at the departmental level. These quality system representatives (QSRs) have been instrumental in the success of the quality system. The (QSRs), hourly employees for the most part, received extensive training and have supported the quality system with their dedicated efforts. Their functions include collecting data, conducting design of experiments, maintaining records, assisting in the explanation of the quality system, and maintaining a high level of visibility and quality awareness throughout the plant.