Applying
Flowcharts
to Improve Service
in the Public Sector
A quality action
team in Columbus,
Georgia, used an
innovative technique
to tackle a human
resources problem,
demonstrably
improving service
quality.
48 WWW.THEPUBLICMANAGER.ORG
by Lisa D. McNary
Quality Management
I
n 1998, the U.S. Federal Quality Institute was established to ini-
tiate total quality management (TQM) throughout the U.S. gov-
ernment. Quality initiatives trickled down to the state and local
levels, and by the early 1990s, forty states had some type of qual-
ity program. However, the many successes of TQM in the private sec-
tor did not transfer to the public sector, which had mixed results for
various reasons, including bureaucratic structural issues, lack of compe-
tition, and short-term thinking of elected officials. Despite the obsta-
cles, TQM offers solutions for improving the day-to-day work of the
public sector. Government agencies at all levels—federal, state, and
local—continue to implement various aspects of quality management
with positive results.
Columbus Consolidated Government
In 1971, Muscogee County and the city of Columbus formed the
Columbus Consolidated Government (CCG), the state’s first consoli-
dated government.The organization now has twenty-two departments
and agencies with 2,700 employees serving a population of nearly
192,000 citizens.
Like many city governments, the CCG has chronic financial issues,
in part caused by a freeze on property taxes in 1983. To use resources
more effectively and efficiently, the city manager began Background
implementing various aspects of TQM in 1998. Once The turnover rate of employees in the CCG is less
employees were trained to deliver the information, than 5 percent, but because of the large number of
groups of employees started attending fifty hours of employees, the task of getting the resigning employees
training to learn several quality tools and techniques to the monies they are legally owed became increasingly
apply them to workplace issues.The training culminates cumbersome.The team studied the data for twenty-five
in a presentation of a quality project proposal by weeks and discovered that 60 percent of resignees had to
employee quality action teams. One tool that has been have two final checks issued to cover the monies owed.
especially helpful in resolving customer service issues— Financial information showed that the cost of issuing the
internal and external—is the deployment flowchart. additional checks, rather than one final check per resign-
ing employee, was about $6,200 annually.
Flowcharts
One of seven basic quality tools, the flowchart uses Process Flowchart
standard symbols to render a picture or graphic display First, the team wanted to study the process of issu-
of the steps of a process.This quality tool is essential in ing a final check to resigning employees. Figure 1 is a
documenting a process so that it can be improved and standard process flowchart that shows the process.
has several advantages over verbal or written informa-
tion—for communication, for planning, as a heuristic
device to gain an overview of the system, for role defi- Figure 1. Example of a Process
nition, etc. Flowchart for Issuing Final Checks
The deployment flowchart adds an additional com- to Resigning Employees
ponent—people—to the standard process flowchart. It
shows the steps in a process for which each person (or
a given department) is responsible, thus providing more
detail than the more popular process flowchart. Because
of its emphasis on the relationships between the people
involved in a process, even a simple deployment flow-
chart allows employees to study any process for
improvements—including streamlining, realignment, or
standardization—making it a powerful aid in solving
service problems.

“The Paymasters” Project

A cross-functional team, The Paymasters, used
deployment flowcharts to improve a service in relation
to a human resources issue.The team’s objective was to
study the procedure for issuing final checks to resigning
employees with an eye toward streamlining the process.

Lisa D. McNary, PhD, is a member of the management faculty in the

College of Business at Lamar University of the Texas State University
System and the owner of DISC Consulting, Ltd., a firm specializing in all
aspects of organizational management. She can be contacted at
lmcnary@mindspring.com. This article was based on data collected by The
Paymasters team in the CCG. Team members included Vernon Feely,
Richard Garland, Denise McWhorter, Charles Rowe, and Willie Smith.
Also, special thanks to Maria Ellis, a Lamar University senior and student
assistant in the College of Business, for her assistance with the graphics. Note: P1 is the name of the personnel action form filled out for all hires, transfers,
and resignees.

THE PUBLIC MANAGER ✦ SUMMER 2006 49

Deployment Flowchart
The process flowchart shows the tasks and decisions,
but the relationships between the six different entities
involved in the process are hidden. A deployment flow-
chart provides this additional information (Figure 2). It
readily identifies the handoffs between different people
(or departments), where glitches in a process often
occur, as was the case in The Paymasters project.
The loop between the department employee coor-
dinator, information technology, and the human
resources technician contained most of the problems, as
the team noted using a cause-and-effect diagram (a
basic quality tool that details specific issues that may
cause a given problem in several categories). In this
instance, the team discovered a second check needed to
get a resigning employee all monies owed, which also
delayed the total final payout, thereby posing legal ram-
ifications for the CCG as well. It found that the human
resources technician was serving as an inspector for the
time cards, creating a (possibly endless) loop back to the
department employee coordinator until the time card
Figure 2. The Paymasters Team
Original Deployment Flowchart for Issuing Final Checks to Resigning Employees
50 WWW.THEPUBLICMANAGER.ORG
information was complete and accurate. Rather than
have the human resources technician ensure the com-
pleteness and accuracy of time cards, which constituted
a form of downstream inspection, the team suggested
placing the responsibility farther upstream with the
department employee coordinator. Figure 3 shows the
revised deployment flowchart for issuing resigning
employees their final check.
Now the step “calculates final time card” has been
operationally defined to include both the hours worked
and vacation time used, and the potentially endless loop
that delays the process eliminated. The revised deploy-
ment flowchart became an informational tool for
everyone involved in the process.The resulting revision
improves the effectiveness and efficiency of this service.
The benefits of the revised process include the cost sav-
ings of not issuing multiple checks, more timely pay-
ment to resigning employees, and greater control of the
work for the human resources technician and the
department employee coordinator.
Implications
Flowcharts are often considered the purview of
engineers and manufacturing employees, and some
service or nonmanufacturing employees initially find
any type of flowchart daunting. However, once a set
procedure is followed—listing the steps before applying
the dozen most-used standard symbols—the flowchart
has a rich, concise language all its own.The deployment
flowchart is particularly relevant for service-sector
employees because of its emphasis on relationships
among the people completing various tasks. As The
Paymasters project shows, a process flowchart does not
identify the potential obstacles to efficient and effective
service as readily as the deployment flowchart.
Service concerns people, internal and external to
the organization, and the relationships between them.
The deployment flowchart graphically displays the con-
version of inputs to outputs by various people in a
given process. Showing the coordination among
employees, especially from multiple departments, is key.
Varied sources of data and multiple interviews with
employees involved in the process should be used to
create an accurate flowchart.
Figure 3. The Paymasters Team
Revised Deployment Flowchart for Issuing Final Checks to Resigning Employees
Quality tools are only as good as the managers
using them. In our example, the managers of the
department employee coordinator and human resources
technician could easily have pointed fingers at one
another for the check problem, leaving the service issue
unresolved. The Paymasters team used the deployment
flowchart as basic tool for improving service, and the
entire organization benefited. ✥
References
Boyne, George A., and Richard M.Walker. “Total quality manage-
ment and performance: An evaluation of the evidence and les-
sons for research on public organizations.” Public Performance &
Management Review,Vol. 26, No. 2, 2002, p. 111.
Gitlow, H., A. Oppenheim, and R. Oppenheim. Quality manage-
ment:Tools and methods for improvement (Boston: Irwin McGraw-
Hill, 1995).
Graham, Jackie, and Michael J. Cleary, eds. Practical Tools for
Continuous Improvement:Volume 2, Problem-solving and Planning
Tools (Miamisburg, OH: PQ Systems, Inc., 2000).
Mayor’s staff. Passport to Columbus: A statistical journey (Columbus,
GA: CCG, 2005).
McNary, L. D. Quality and Six Sigma from the inside out: Politics,
change, leadership in organizational America (Knoxville,TN: SPC
Press, 2005).
THE PUBLIC MANAGER ✦ SUMMER 2006 51