Overview of National Movement for
Quality and Productivity
Improvement: Experiences of Selected
Countries in Asia and Africa

Izumi Ohno, GRIPS Development ForumMay 2011 (@Addis Ababa)Ethiopia-Japan Industrial Policy
Dialogue (2009-2011)

Request from Prime Minister Meles: July 2009JICA-GRIPS team has responded to his requestAdvice on Ethiopia’s industrial development strategy, from East
Asian perspectives
Frank exchange of views, through regular policy dialogues
By sharing concrete, hands-on information on EA experiences andby discussing implications for Ethiopia’s industrial development
strategy

Additional question from Prime Minister: Sept. 2009


How to stimulate private sector dynamism? How to enhance thepolicy response capacity of the private sector?

 Our tentative answer
National Movement for Mindset Change !

JICA-GRIPS Industrial Policy Dialogue
with Ethiopia (2009-2011)
IPD conference
Jul.2008

Preparation

Official launch
Jun.2009

Industrial policy dialogue

Topics: development regime, kaizen, import substitution,
metal processing, policy documents, organizations,
PASDEP/GTP, etc.

May 2011

Interim
ReportFinal
ReportNote: black squares indicate policy dialogue
in Addis Ababa with (i) Prime Minister, (ii)concerned Ministers, and (iii) operational
levels.

Kaizen (30 pilot firms)

Industrial support
projects

Basic metal & engineering
industries study(With ECBP)
Institutionalizationof kaizen
Other projects

National Movement for Mindset
ChangesMany developing countries suffer from weak private sector
response: Firms are too passive, waiting for customers or official
support Workers do not learn skills; job hopping is rampant Short-term speculation is preferred over long-term
investment in manufacturing technology
If mindset does not change spontaneously, state may have toforce it from the top until it becomes part of national culture.
Forced movement is a double-edged sword. Some countries
succeed brilliantly, but others fail. It must be designed withknowledge and care.

 This presentation will focus on National Movement on
Kaizen (Quality and Productivity Movement)Outline of Presentation
1. Factors for successful Quality and Productivity Movement
Overview of experiences in Asia and Africa

2. Examples of selected countries







Japan’s quality and productivity (kaizen) movement (1950s- )Singapore’s productivity movement (1980s- ), with Japanese
assistance
Burkina Faso’s QC Circles movement (1990s- ), with
WB/Japanese assistance
Botswana’s productivity movement (1990s- ), with Singaporean
assistance3. Lessons and implications for Ethiopia’s kaizen

institutionalization

Europe(post-WW 2)

USJapan (1950s)

BurkinaFaso(1990s)Ethiopia(2009- )Singapore(1980s)Botswana(1990s)

Quality and Productivity Movement:
Experiences of Selected Countries in Asia and Africa

Factors for Successful Quality andProductivity Movement
National movement is not just a few projects; it is a comprehensive
drive with strong passion and deep commitment, involving everyone
from top to bottom and taking a decade or more to accomplish.







Strong personal commitment of top leader
Establishment of core organization(s) responsible for quality
and productivity improvement
Massive campaign (for mindset change)
Supporting institutions and mechanisms at central and local
levelsAuthorized and standardized training programs and materials
for those concerned
Developing private sector capability, esp. fostering private,productivity management consultants

Country-Specific Factors

Drivers of Quality and Productivity Movement

Degree of private sector dynamism

Political drive is absolutely necessary, but economic incentives are
crucial to sustain the movement
Examples: domestically-driven (e.g., export drive of resource-poor
countries), externally-driven (e.g., FDI demanding local companies
for high-quality production capability)
Private sector capability in initiating, scaling-up, and sustaining the
movement
Absorptive capacity of new technologies, incl. educational andtraining levels of general workforce

Level of technologies (depend on stages of development)

Basics (5S, QC Circles, etc.)
R&D, technological innovation

Overview of Quality and Productivity
Movement (1): Factors for Success
LeadershipCore organization(s)Japan

Singapore

Burkina
Faso

Botswana

○
○

○
○

△

△
△

(private)(public)△/×(public
private)Overviewof Productivity Movement (1): Factors for Success
Supporting
institutions○○△(central and local levels)○△(national
movement)(national
movement)(partial)

Training programs andmaterials○○△

Fostering private sector
capability○(productivity mgt. consultant)△(fragmented)○

Massive campaign(public)△△(not updated)

○

×

×

Overview of Quality and Productivity
Movement (2): Country-Specific Factors
Japan

Singapore

Burkina Faso

Botswana

Drivers of
productivity
movement

StrongDomesticNeed forexport drive(resourcepoor country

StrongDomestic +ExternalPerceived poor
work ethics
Need for FDI
attraction(resourcepoor country)

Moderate
Domestic +External
Need toenhancesupply-side
responseduring SAP

Moderate
DomesticPerceived
poor work ethics
Need foreconomic
diversification(resourcerich country)

Degree ofprivatesectordynamism

StrongPrivate
sector-led
national
movement

ModerateGovt.-lednational
movement

WeakGovt.initiatedmovement

WeakGovt.-initiatedmovement

External
support

US & Europe

WB/Japan

Singapore

SAP: Structural Adjustment ProgramJapanJapan: Main Points










Sense of urgency for industrial catch-up (after WW 2
devastation), by exporting manufacturing products
Private sector took initiative to create core organizations for
quality and productivity improvement
 Strong leadership of top management of privateorganizations
 Central and local-level networks for mass participation
Collaborative relationships among govt., industry, andacademia / within factories (btw. managers and workers)
Absorptive capacity of companies to adopt and develop newtechnologies (incl. managers, engineers, and workers)
Various national systems established to support quality andproductivity improvement

Japan: Core Organizations for Quality andProductivity Improvement
Japan Productivity Center (JPC)Established in 1955 as a public-interest foundation; received US
support during 1955-61
Tripartite collaboration: govt., business, and labor unions
Main role: productivity improvement (leading Productivity Movement)(supporting Singapore’s Productivity Movement under JICA project)

Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE)
Established in 1946, as an incorporated foundation
Main role: quality improvement (“Deming Prize”, QC Circles)(supporting Burkina Faso (QCC) under WB/Japan PHRD fund project)

Japan Management Association (JMA)Established in 1942, as an incorporated association
Main role: noritsu (efficiency) improvement, management innovation

Japan Productivity Center (JPC): 1955










In 1951, Mr. Goshi (who later became the first chairman of JPC)
visited Europe as a member of Keizai Doyukai mission and learned
Productivity Movement.
Mr. Goshi was convinced of the need for Productivity Movement inJapan, and invited other major business organizations to jointly
establish JPC.
Govt. also recognized the need for JPC. In 1954, the Cabinet
adopted a policy for productivity improvement.
MITI Enterprise Bureau planned to set up a productivity
organization. But, business leaders insisted that JPC be a privateorganization.
In 1955, JPC was established, funded by both public and private
sectors. Govt. will not interfere into JPC financial and personnel
matters.
Govt.-business coordination committee was established, chaired bya private sector representative and attended by vice ministers and
JPC-selected private sector members.

Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers(JUSE): 1946

Promoting the concept and techniques of quality control (QC)
and statistical quality control in Japan.








The QC movement introduced at the workshop level in the
1950s was developed into QC Circles by the 1960s.


Invited Drs. Deming and Juran (prominent American experts) for
lecturers and seminars on statistical quality control methods andquality management, in 1950 and 1954 respectively.
Established “the Deming Prize” in 1951: award ceremony
broadcasted on TV every year.
Established the Quality Control Research Group, composed ofacademic institutions, industry and govt.

QC Circle Center and grass-root activities (Regions, Chapters)

Promoted QC activities by broadcasting training programs onradio/TV and publishing journals.

Role of Private Sector Organizations in Introduction,
Development and Diffusion of Foreign Technologies
US & European
Countries

Private Sector
Organizations

Private Companies(JPC, JUSE, JMA, etc.)(Technology Transfer)(Technology Transfer)•Dispatch of study
missions to US & Europe•Invitation of foreign
advisors•Translation of foreign
literature into Japanese•Study on adaptability of
new technology (bycommittees and working
groups: industry-govt.academia joint research)•Trial application andmodification of technology (pilot projects)•Guidance and advices•Education and training•Qualification andcertification system•Award system•Enlightenment andmovement<To Learn><To Test & Modify><To Diffuse>

Source: Adapted from Tsuyoshi Kikuchi “The Roles of Private Organizations in the Introduction, Development
and Diffusion of Production Management Technology in Japan” (original paper published in the Bulletin of
the Graduate School of International Cooperation Studies No. 4, 2011, Takushoku University).

Trend of Study Missions Abroad by JPC (1955-60)
 A number of study missions were sent abroad and theirfindings were disseminated widely (organized by top management,
industry-specific, specialization, labor unions, SMEs, etc.)

Fiscalyear

Missions ParticipantsNo.
No.

o/w SMEs

Missionbriefings

Participants(Missionbriefings)

Missions Participants
No.
No.

1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

15
27
43
62
75
84

174
307
430
652
749
821

5
0
4
12
13
15

58
0
46
141
137
154

33
130
180
98
74
11

10,02033,96027,42012,177
7,894
1,740

Total

306

3,133

49

536

526

93,211

Source: History of Trade and Industry, Vol. 6, Edited by the Ministry of Trade and Industry(original data come from various reports of the Japan Productivity Center)Central and Local Level Networks of Japanese QC
Circle Activities (JUSE)
Center
QC Circle
Grand Prize

FQC
Magazine

Conference for
Chairman of
the Regions

Regional Branches and Chapters

All-Japan QC Circle
Competition
Conference

QC Circle
Center

QC Circle
Symposium

QC Circle
Mutual Visit

QC Circle
Conference

Regions
andChapters

Conference for
Secretary of
the Regions

QC Circle
Discussion
Meeting

QC Circle
ConferenceTraining Conferencefor- Leaders- Promoters- Section Heads- Chapter Secretaries

Source: Robert E. Cole (1989) Strategies for Learning

QC Circle
LectureMeeting

QC Circle
Study MeetingEstablishment of Various National
Systems
Mutually reinforcing, comprehensive approach Various national systems were established, tosupport the efforts for quality and productivity
improvement
Standards system (JIS: Japan Industrial Standards)
 Public research organizations (local-level testing andresearch centers to meet the industrial needs of local
communities)
 Export inspection system
 Shindan system (SME management consultant
system), etc.
Singapore: Main Points









Singapore is a successful example of govt.-led Productivity
Movement. It now offers consultancy to developing countries.
In the early 80s, the govt. launched Productivity Movement,
aiming at mindset change at all levels. Unlike Japan, thecore organization was established by the govt.
Productivity Movement was introduced to not only thebusiness, but also the public sector.
JICA assistance from 1983 to 1990 (JPC experts)
Key factors for success:






Strong personal commitment by Prime Minister
Massive campaign for awareness raising; later combined with companybased consultancy
Tripartite cooperation among the govt., industry, & labor unions
Producing private consultants from JICA trainees by installing proper
system and incentives

History of Productivity-related, Core Organizations
PeriodOrganization

Remarks

1964

Productivity Unit, within Economic
Development Board (EDB)

65:Charter for Industrial
Progress, Productivity
Code of Practice

1967-72

National Productivity Center

71:Tripartite Interim
Committee (to prepareNPB)- Autonomously-run division under EDB

1972-95

National Productivity Board (NPB)- Statutory body, initially affiliated with
Ministry of Labor and later with Ministryof Trade and Industry (MTI)

1996-2001 Productivity Standard Board (PSB)- Statutory body, affiliated with MTI

2002presentStandards, Productivity andInnovation Board (SPRING)- Statutory body, affiliated with MTI

73:Singapore Productivity
Association (SPA) formed
81:Productivity
Movement Launched;
National Productivity
Council (NPC) createdSingapore’s Productivity
Movement
1979: PM Lee Kuan Yew states “Workers here are notas proud of or as skilled in their jobs compared toJapanese or Germans.”
 1981: LKY studies Japanese practices; LKY met Mr.
Goshi, then Chairman of the Japan Productivity Center(JPC) and asked for cooperation.
 Productivity Movement launched

1981: National Productivity Council (NPC) established,with high-level representation from govt., employers,
unions and academia
 1981-87: November is designated as Productivity Month;
LKY delivers his annual speech on productivity for sevenconsecutive years
Framework for Productivity Movement
National Productivity
Council (NPC)(Around the 1980s)

National Productivity
Board (NPB)
EmployerGroupsUnionsInt’l BusinessCommunities

Civil Service

Productivity Movement

Educational
Institutions

Professional
Institutions• Productivity Awareness• Skills Upgrading• Harmonious Labor Management
Relations

Source: Information provided by Mr. Lo Hock Meng to the GRIPS mission on Sept. 2, 2010.

Channels of Scaling-up and InstitutionalizationPublic sector


Labor unions
Productivity campaign by the Central Productivity Committee;
also linked with civil service reform programs
Involving MINDEF and the Singapore Armed Forces
Productivity campaign by the NTUC Productivity Promotion
Council

Employer groupInvolvement of business associations

Training at educational institutions (polytechnic, etc.)
 Development of private, management consultants
 Incentives for companies

Workforce training (via Skills Development Fund)
Singapore Quality Award (for both public and private sectors)

Core Organization: National Productivity
Board (NPB) 1981-95
Serving as the secretariat of National Productivity
Council (NPC) Training and developing a cadre of management
consultants








Company visits
Model company project
Training NPB Associates
Management consultancy referral system
Industry-based consultancy assistance scheme

Promoting Work Excellence Committee and Quality
Control (QC) Circles
 Promoting productivity campaign
 Administering Skills Development Fund

Training of workforce

Cf. Skill Development Fund: an employer-based funding that provides financial incentives for staff training.
Established in 1978. All employers must pay Skills Development Levy for all workers.

Core Organization: Singapore
Productivity Association (SPA)
Established in 1973 as an affiliated body of NPB(now, SPRING)
 Promote the active involvement of organizations andindividuals in Productivity Movement and expedite
the spread of productivity and its techniques
 Organize courses and seminars, company visits,
study tours to promote knowledge/skills acquisition
 Members (institutional or individual) have access to
information, training and seminars, networking
opportunities, etc.
 International cooperation: in collaboration with MFA,
MTI, SPRING, APO, AOTS, etc.


http://www.spa.org.sg/index.php

Evolution of Productivity Movement in Singapore

Awareness stage
1981-85

Create widespreadawareness of productivity
among companies andthe workforce

Action stage
1986-88

Translate “Awareness”
into specific programs
To improve productivity
at the workplace

Ownership stage
1989-90s

Encourage ownership of
Productivity Movement
by private firms

JICA-supported Productivity Development Project(PDP: 1983-90)
Training of NPB staff
Massive campaign

 NPB staff (with JICA experts)
conduct company visits,model company project, etc.

Private management
consultants

90s-

Start international
cooperation

Awareness Stage: 1981-85
 Focus

Positive work attitude
 Teamwork
 Recognition for companies and individuals
 Measures taken

Education of the public Information dissemination and training Strengthening company loyalty
 Promotion of labor-management joint consultation
 Promotion of productivity in the public sectorSource: Information provided by Mr. Lo Hock Meng to the GRIPS mission on Sept. 2, 2010.

Key Message
Teamy Bees

 “Together We Work Better”
 Productivity campaign slogans and posters Virtuous cycle (political message)

Increased productivity
 Growth of business/economy
 More consumer demand for products
 Welfare improvement of individuals

Action Stage: 1986-88
Focus
Skills upgrading of management and workers
 Upgrading of companies’ operational efficiencyMeasures taken
Model company project – implemented jointly by NPB staff& JICA experts
 Management consultancy referral schemes, associate
consultant scheme – mobilizing private consultants trained
under JICA-supported PDP Industry-based consultancy assistance scheme Training of workforce (via. Skills Development Fund) Collaboration with other National Training Programs

Source: Information provided by Mr. Lo Hock Meng to the GRIPS mission on Sept. 2, 2010.

Ownership Stage: 1989-90s
 Focus

Self-sustaining Productivity Movement

 Measures taken

Private sector leading the annual productivity
campaign
 Singapore Quality Award (1994- ) Launch of Productivity Activists Scheme (1996- )

Cf. Productivity Activists Scheme (introduced by PSB): network to enable member companies
to benchmark their productivity against partners and improve their skills and techniques.
Resources are pooled for an effective exchange of information in support of productivity movement.

Source: Information provided by Mr. Lo Hock Meng to the GRIPS mission on Sept. 2, 2010.

Burkina Faso: Main Points


1989: Govt. introduced QC Circles on a pilot basis, at therecommendation of World Bank (Japanese TM)










To complement the Structural Adjustment Program (1991- ), byenhancing supply-side capacity

1989-2000: WB/Japan PHRD fund assistance in pilot QC
Circles (mobilizing JUSE experts)
Initially, the core organization was a unit of the ministry
 transferred to a private organization.
QC Circles were implemented in both private and public
sectors, by combining awareness and action stages.
However, challenges remain:How to sustain the core organization and build a comprehensive
system for quality and productivity management?
How to train the second generation of experts, after WB project?

Source: Sayoko Uesu, “Case Study: QC Circle Experience in Burkina Faso”, Ch.2. in Japanese Approachto Growth Support in Developing Countries: International Comparison and Case Studies,
GRIPS Development Forum, 2010

History of QC Circle-related, Core Organizations
Year

Organization

Remarks

Late 1990 QC Circle Promotion Unit established in the Ministry ofExport Promotion (MoEP)
1992

Burkinabe QC Association (ABCERQ) established as a
non-profit organization-QC Circle Promotion Unit acted as the Secretariat for
ABCERQ (Initially 9 members from private & public enterprises,-Secretariat
was headed by
Mr. Justin
Bayili, MoEP

where pilot QC Circles were implemented)

1995

ABCERQ become independent of the Ministry of Tradeand Industry (former MoEP)-Secretariat function was transferred to ABCERQ(Collecting membership fees, charging fees for specificconsultancy)

2002 present

Burkinabe Quality Management Association (ABMAQ)-ABCERQ reorganized to include such functions as
SMEs, ISO, quality management-About seven training instructors-Mr. Bayili
moved to
ABCERQE as
Secretary
General-Mr. Bayili left
ABMAQ to lead
ONAC/ MoEP
(2006)

Note: The Ministry of Economic Promotion (MoEP 1985-90) became the Ministry of Industry, Trade and Mining(1990-95), and the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Handicraft (1995-2000). Now, it is called the Ministry of Trade,
Promotion of Entrepreneurship and Handicrafts (2000- ).

Evolution of QC Circle Movement in Burkina Faso
Awareness + Action stages

Ownership?

WB/Japan PHRD project (1989-2000)<Pilot Phase: 89-91><Phase 1: 91-98>
Technology transfer tolocal companies &
institution building<Phase 2: 98-2000>
Technology transfer topublic organizations &institution building

1989-90：：
1） Seminars on QC Circle
2) Pilot implementation of QC
Circles

1991.6-98:
1) Support to QC Circle
Promotion Unit (MoI) andcreation of ABCERQ
2) Training (Japan, Burkina Faso)
3) Skill training at factory site4) Additional pilot for QC Circles
and new pilot for publicorganizations
5) Analysis of socio-cultural andorganizational aspects
6) Production of manuals
designed for introduction inother African countries
7) Seminars (incl. National QC
Conference)

1998.11-2000.6:
1) Skill training at factory site2) Implementation for publicorganizations
3) Capacity building of
ABCERQ

1990-91：：1) Creation of QC Circle
Promotion Unit (MoEP)
2) Training (Japan, Burkina Faso)
3) Skill training at factory site
(pilot companies)
4) Additional pilot of QC Circles
and new pilot for publicorganizations
5) Preparation of pilot for publicorganizations(incl. development of manuals)

Post-WB ?

2002:
ABMAQ (ABCERQ
reorganized)
Training stagnating…

Role of Japanese Experts under the WB/Japan
PHRD Project

From late 1989: J. experts visited every four months (for two
weeks), providing technical advice periodically.


From mid-1991: J. experts trained national QC experts

Asked the pilot QC Circles to resolve problems and difficulties
faced during the intervals between missions
Two from QC Circle Promotion Unit (Ministry of Trade/Industry),
two from ABCERQ through OJT method
National experts of ABCERQ started to provide technicalassistance to the pilot enterprises

Developed three training modules for ABCERQManagement
QC facilitator (middle-management level)
QC animator (foreman level)

Awareness and Action Stages (combined)Linking pilot QC Circles with National QC Conferences
National QC Conferences motivated the members of pilot
QC Circles to present the best results of their activities







Attendance of high-level govt. officials, incl. Minister of Industry
Media coverage; good publicity

1989-2000: Pilot implementation of QC Circles in privatecompanies
1991- present: National QC Conferences held annuallyFirst National QC Conference (July 1991), organized by QC
Circle Promotion Unit, MoEP; “Quality Day” designated Motivated the Minister of Civil Service and Modernization of Public
Administration to introduce QC Circles in the public sectorSecond National QC Conference (July 1992), organized by
ABCERQ
1992: Pilot implementation of QC Circles in public enterprises

Private and Public Enterprises that Introduced QC Circles and the Current Status

Challenges: Sustainability of Core Organization
ABMAQ (as of 2010)


LeadershipTechnical sustainability

In 2006, Mr. Justin Bayili (= Mr. Quality), former Secretary General,
who greatly contributed to QCC development, left ABMAQ to leadthe National Office for External Trade (ONAC), MoT.
ABMAQ staff and QC managers of companies are being replacedby second-generation of members who have not received skills
training from Japanese experts

Financial sustainability (membership fees as the main source
for covering administrative costs)
Training business for private companies has been stagnant due toeconomic difficulties
 Member companies decreasing: about 60 (90s) 16 (2011)(difficulty to involve SMEs)
 Number of workers who received training decreasing:450 (2005)  250-300 (2006) 154 (2008)
Challenges: Need for Integrated Institutional
Quality-related Organizations
Framework (as of 2010)
Source: UNIDO (2005)







Lack of coordination among quality
organizations
 ABMAQ function overlapping with otherorganizations (standards, testing, etc.)
ABMAQ facing competition from private
consulting companies
Ongoing efforts to formulatecomprehensive National Policy for Quality
Improvement (supported by AfDB) Creation of High-Level Quality Committee
proposed (under the Office of Prime
Minister or President?) Possibility for integrating ABMAQ into
other organizations?
ONAC quality & standards(Ministry of Trade)Botswana: Main Points(see Prof. Daniel’s presentation for details)







1991: Govt. started Productivity Movement and requested
Singapore for technical cooperation.
1993: President Sir Ketumile Masire announced theestablishment of Botswana National Productivity Center (BNPC)
1991-early 2000s: Singaporean assistance
BNPC created as a parastatal, reporting to the Minister for
Presidential Affairs and Public Administration








Tripartite Board comprising of representatives from govt., employers andworkers’ organizations.
Work for both public service and enterprise support programs

Major efforts on awareness raising: Tripartite and communitybased structure and networks (DPIFs); “Productivity Week” etc.
However, despite 20 years of awareness raising, limited progresson practical implementation

Source: Botswana Mission Report by Daniel Kitaw (March, 2011)

Challenges: Sustainability of Core Organization
BNPC (as of 2011)
BNPC has achieved high awareness at a national
level, but slow progress on implementation
 Limited private sector involvement in productivity
activities

SMEs cannot afford consulting fees

BNPC has difficulty to attract and retain qualified
and experienced consultants
Frequent staff changes
 Competition with private sector consultantsFinancial sustainability



BNPC is scheduled to serve as the secretariat of the
SADC Regional Productivity Organization

Implications for Ethiopia’s Kaizen
Institutionalization

Ethiopia has a committed leader and plans to establish the coreorganization (EKI), building on achievements of kaizen pilots.
To diffuse and sustain kaizen on the ground, the following issues
may worth consideration.
Mr. Sato, JICA Kaizen Institutional Framework expert, is currently
advising the Ethiopian authorities on the details.

 National Movement requires long-term efforts; be mindful of three stages

Awareness + Action stages

 Ownership stage(self-sustaining) Important role of the core organization throughout the stages

Massive campaign for mindset change Training programs and materials (by using and adapting kaizen
manuals being developed now) Mechanism for nationwide outreach, including MSEs
 Mechanism for inter-agency coordination
Implications for Ethiopia’s Kaizen
Institutionalization
 Ownership stage is critical (but difficult)








Collaborative relationship among govt., business, academiaAdapting and internalizing kaizen into the Ethiopian context
Sustainability of the core organization
Technical sustainability:- Need to constantly update knowledge (e.g., linking with FDI
strategy?)- Retain national experts and gradually foster private mgt.
consultants (e.g., qualification system?)Financial sustainability (public, or private?)
Important role of TVET and education to raise the absorptive
capacity of the future workforce
Develop comprehensive policy framework and supporting institutions
for quality and productivity improvement