Resources

• Knowledge portal
• Qualityworld
• Quality FAQs
• Information
• Journal of Quality
• Jobs
• Press
• Links

Quality professionals want recognition

In September 2000, Macmillan Davies Hodes carried out a membership survey to monitor perceptions of professional value in the quality, and health and safety fields. Respondents were invited to answer questions on salary, career history and perceived role or status in their respective professions.

Twenty-four per cent of quality professionals do not feel valued by their companies, according to the results of the survey. Statistics reveal that quality has yet to be embraced by senior management. Alison Taylor interprets the results to see how the quality profession is viewed by the professionals

It was no surprise to discover that most quality professionals are educated to a high-level and boast many years of experience in the field. More surprising is the apparent lack of status felt by respondents and the perceived lack of organisational commitment to quality issues.

Questionnaires were distributed through The Quality Professional and Safety and Health Practitioner, the IOSH magazine. IQA associate member and member grades gave a strong response, at 41 per cent and 38 per cent of the sample respectively. Nine percent of those surveyed are fellows of the IQA, and ten per cent are subscribers to Quality World.

Figure 1 Respondents' IQA membership grade

Respondents lived in a number of regions, with the South East, South West and East Anglia forming the largest group. Just under four per cent of the sample was from outside the UK.

Figure 2: Geographical spread of responses

The majority of IQA respondents work in the engineering and manufacturing industries but there were also good responses from within chemicals and allied industries and telecommunications. IOSH respondents were represented more strongly in local government, construction, education and training. Though organisations represented in the sample ranged from the very small (fewer than five employees) to the largest (more than 50,000 employees), IQA was better represented at the smaller end of the spectrum than IOSH.

Top of the class

Quality professionals are committed to the profession, demonstrating longevity in their chosen career. Over two thirds (69.4 per cent) of IQA respondents have worked in a quality role for more than a decade compared to two fifths (43.7 per cent) of IOSH respondents. Fewer than ten per cent of the IQA sample and 20 per cent of IOSH had joined their respective professions in the last four years. However, internal moves in both professions account for just a quarter of promotions, while more than fifty per cent have been recruited from other organisations.

Quality professionals have excellent academic records. Sixty-two per cent of quality professionals and 52 per cent of health and safety professionals are qualified to degree level or above. However, nearly one in five IOSH respondents are qualified to only A-level or the equivalent standard, compared to fewer than one in ten IQA respondents.

Figure 3 Respondents' highest academic qualifications

This enthusiasm for learning does not seem to transfer to the uptake of the IQA continuing professional development (CPD) programme and the equivalent IOSH safety practitioner registration. The involvement level here is poor: less than 20 per cent of IQA respondents and 30 per cent of IOSH respondents are involved in CPD. Furthermore, of the IQA respondents, only nine per cent claim to have relevant industry qualifications, in the form of the IQA diploma or advanced diploma. IOSH respondents are more likely to have an industry qualification, according to this survey, with more than four in five respondents (83.3 per cent) claiming to have some form of industry qualification.

Put a price on quality

The mean salary for the survey sample was £28,977: the range of salaries was £8,000-£100,000. At £29,604 per annum, the mean salary for IQA respondents was slightly higher than the mean salary for IOSH respondents, which stands at £28,823. This figure has not changed since QW reported on industry salaries in August 1999, where the average salary for quality managers stood at 'just over £28k'. Previously in 1997, quality managers salaries were reported to be lower than the current figure, at between £20-25k.

On the whole, increases in salary within the profession have been between three and five per cent annually These rises are on a par with the average increase in earnings for the whole UK economy between October 1999 and October 2000, which was 3.9 per cent¹. In 1998, the survey reported that the average salary increase was 4.45 per cent. Taking this average rate of increase, in the third year of growth since the last survey the average salary would be £28,994 (just slightly over the actual value).

Figure 4: Salary distribution

Mean salaries for the whole sample vary greatly across the different industry classifications. Clearly the specific industry sector continues to exert a strong influence over salaries. Professional experience and qualifications also exert a significant influence over salary level. Professionals with more than ten years of experience in a quality role are earning roughly 30 per cent more (£31768) than their colleagues with under five years of experience (£24,368). Furthermore, the survey provided proof that study does pay:

• those who are qualified to degree level or above earn on average two-fifths more than colleagues educated to A-level standard or equivalent
• members (MIQA) and fellows (FIQA) of the IQA earn significantly more on average (£31,970 and £38,189 respectively) than associate members (AMIQA) who earn £26,180 - a figure which is probably attributable to longevity in the profession

Interestingly, the inclusion of responsibility for environmental areas appears to have a positive influence on salaries, in both quality and health and safety fields. Those who consider themselves to be wholly responsible for quality earn on average £29,298 and those wholly responsible for health and safety earn an average of £29848. By adding environment to their responsibilities average salaries increase to £30,527 and £32,041 respectively.

Professional feelings of value appear to be strongly influenced by salary level. The mean salary of quality professionals who felt they were highly valued was £33,733 compared to a mean of £24,884 for those who felt that they were not valued by their organisation. Those who considered the status of practitioners in their field to be higher than five years ago had a mean salary of £30,151 compared to a mean of £27,403 for those who considered the status of practitioners to be lower for the same period.

Quality benefits?

The results of the survey show that just over 70 per cent of quality professionals receive some kind of employment benefit (bonus, commission, profit share, share options or medical cover) from their employer Medical insurance is one such benefit, of which 61.2 per cent of IQA respondents and 58.7 per cent of 1051-I respondents receive. An annual bonus is paid to 57.1 per cent of IOSH and 61.2 per cent of IQA respondents. Share options are less common, as is profit share, and fewer than one per cent of all respondents receive commission payments. Of those who receive contributions to their pension by their employer, the most common figure is between three and ten per cent of their salary as pension contributions.

The provision of company car, according to this survey, is based on seniority and salary. The mean salary for a company car driver is £32,752 compared to £26,318 for a non-company car driver. Company car drivers are likely to have been in their profession for over five years.

Quality across the board?

The results of the survey indicate that individual commitment to the integration of quality, health and safety and the environment is greater than the perceived organisational commitment. Only one fifth of professionals believe that their organisation is fully committed to integrating quality health and safety and the environment, compared to over two fifths who personally favour this integration. Organisations without a board member responsible for health and safety, or for quality are considered less likely to embrace this: only 12 per cent of organisations with top-level support are thought to be fully integrating these disciplines.

It is not surprising to discover that health and safety is better represented at board level than quality. 80 per cent of those working in a health and safety role claimed that a member of their board or governing body had responsibility for health and safety, compared to just under 60 per cent of quality professionals. In fact, more than one third (37.4 per cent) of quality professionals state that they have no senior management representation for quality at board or governing body level. Additionally just over five per cent say there is no reporting line for quality into the main board or governing body of their organisation, as compared to just two per cent in health and safety.

Both sets of respondents were asked about the main drivers of policy in their organisation. Are the main drivers simply haphazard knee-jerk reactions to events or are they strategic influences from board level? The main driving force in health and safety is senior management: 87.8 per cent are thought to be considerably involved or wholly responsible for driving policy, compared to 59.7 per cent in quality. Legislation exerts a significant influence on policy in health and safety, with 82.6 per cent reporting that it is very important or wholly responsible for driving policy (via management). External influences, such as insurance companies and trade unions, have little or no influence on driving policy The feedback from quality professionals suggests that senior managers and their desire to secure business is considered to be the main policy-driving force.

Status and commitment

Without legislation to influence procedures, as in health and safety, quality professionals are doubtful of their organisations' commitment to quality. More than one in six (16.7 per cent) believe that their organisations are less committed to quality than five years ago, although 43.4 per cent believe that organisational commitment has increased. As might be expected, the attitude reflected in the health and safety field is more positive: the surveys results suggest that organisational commitment to health and safety is continuing to grow. Nearly two-thirds of health and safety professionals believe that their organisation is more committed to health and safety than five years ago, while only five per cent believe that their organisation is less committed.

This sense of organisational commitment appears to have a direct relationship with status in each profession: safety and health professionals perceive their status to be more elevated than quality professionals, despite lower wages and fewer benefits. More than two in five (42 per cent) of IOSH respondents claimed that the status of health and safety practitioners is higher than five years ago, compared to just over one quarter (26.7 per cent) of IQA respondents. In fact, nearly 20 per cent feel that the quality profession has lost status over the last five years.

In terms of personal value, almost 80 per cent of professionals feel valued or highly valued by their organisation. However, this still leaves almost one in five health and safety professionals, and almost one in four quality professionals who do not feel valued by their organisation. This percentage could be improved. As suggested earlier, the perceived lack of personal value in the profession may be partly attributable to lower salary levels for some individuals. However, it does seem - with the implementation of a standard or procedure - that support from the top is needed. If this support is not present then it is not just the product or service which suffers - it is the quality professionals and ultimately UK business which pays the price.

Reference:
1 Office for National Statistics