W. Edwards Deming was a quality guy. He had some really good ideas. One, which I believe is attributable to him, is the customer-supplier model. In its basic form, it looks like this:

It’s a great tool for managing processes. But when applied to internal company relationships, the problem comes in defining "customer." It used to be simple since customers were the people outside companies who bought their goods and services. But the model was turned outside in, making all employees customers of other employees. This is a good thing, right?

As a "supplier" employee, how many times have you been confronted with an argument that went something like this: "But you have to do it the way I’ve told you to do it because I’m your customer!" And what’s being demanded is physically impossible, outrageously costly, marginally reasonable, or just plain dumb?

What’s unspoken yet implied is that other terribly abused axiom: "the customer is always right."

Are they really always right?

Further, given that we’ve all been victims of severely misguided "customer service," our attitude toward the subject can tend to be combative rather than collaborative. When we approach a fellow employee, as their customer, we too can become demanding rather than collaborative: "I need this done, so you owe me good customer service! Now, or else!" Then things escalate.

The internal customer concept doesn’t get fully played out either. If only a single real paying customer is unsatisfied, heaven and earth can be marshaled to make them happy. That one external customer counts. But, if one single employee (aka internal "customer") complains — oh, well, who cares! They’re just whiners. In this case, when the customer is internal, one is meaningless.

The customer-supplier model is no longer adequate to govern internal employee-to-employee relationships. Within the heart and soul of companies, it’s time to change the language and thinking. Employees are really not customers of other employees. Rather, employees are colleagues endeavoring alongside one another.

Just look at how the American Heritage Dictionary defines these two words. Customer is "One who buys goods or services [or] An individual with whom one must deal: a tough customer." Whereas a colleague is "A fellow member of a profession, a staff, or an academic faculty; an associate."

Synonyms include partner, similar to another in rank or position, fellow, equivalent, peer, equal, coequal, united in a relationship with another, ally, associate, confederate, affiliate, copartner.

Frankly, I’d much rather partner with a peer or associate than deal with a customer! Even though I can be a card at times, I hate being dealt with myself. But I love it when someone comes alongside and allies with me in a joint effort that cooperatively seeks a successful, mutually rewarding end. It feels really good.

When the mantra of the times is "teamwork," isn’t that what we’re supposed to be doing? Working together? On the same team? Seeking to accomplish the same overall corporate goals? Collaborating?

Maybe a better model is something like this: