Project background
We were once asked by a leading regional hospital to conduct a study of the cleaning quality in their facility.   
   
While there were many subjective opinions about the condition of the facility, there was a notable absence of any hard data.  
   
Complaints from staff, building occupants, and even patients caused administration to reach out for a solution.  
   
It soon became clear that agreement about cleaning success was determined by the level of agreement about what “clean” means.  
   
Our first step was to figure out how big a problem cleaning was and to understand how many of the complaints documented were actually related to cleaning (or housekeeping).  
   
Based on a study of complaints, it turned out that 22 percent of all complaints reviewed were caused by craft/maintenance deficiencies for painting and repair.  
   
Of the remaining complaints, the condition of private and public restrooms was the largest concern.  
   
We went on to interview building management, occupants and staff about their specific concerns about the restrooms.  
   
While we reached some worthwhile conclusions during the course of this project, we were struck by the overwhelming absence of any common criteria or condition voiced by respondents as a basis for their opinion about “cleanliness.”   
   
Yes, the complaints were real and the conditions were sometimes unacceptable, but the reasons given varied greatly and were subjective.  
   
Comments, such as “It just feels dirty,” “It’s so unkemt,” “It’s just not clean enough for me,” etc., were often heard.  
   
In short, nearly all of the information available was anecdotal.  
   
There had to be a better way of defining the conditions and attributes that was more fact-based.  
   
So, this was our challenge: Establish an objective, practical and provable definition of “clean.”

Early methodology
With this challenge in mind, we set out to conduct a study of the conditions and attributes that might be used to describe something as “clean” or “dirty.”   
   
The system of complaints was based on appearances — that is, that something “looked” clean or dirty to building occupants, rather than any bacteria count or other scientific measure.
   
We used both interview and complaint record (two years of information) reviews as a basis for collecting a database that was item- and condition-specific.  
   
In all, we identified 80 reasonably unique conditions from thousands of comments.   
   
For example, comments about dusty chairs, dusty sofas, or dusty benches were consolidated into one of the 80 conditions as “dusty furniture.”  
   
Using spreadsheets, we recorded this list in a table format on a large clipboard, with items and surfaces on one tab and conditions and attributes on the other.   
   
We also recruited 10 experienced people from the contract cleaning industry to collect our data.  
   
These cleaning supervisors/inspectors were given access to a 200,000-square-foot office-type building and asked to record the appearance problems they found on each item and surface in each room.  
   
The rule was simply that, at the specific item level, any problem identified must be visually evident and provable.
   
The result was a massive data set of every condition found on every item in the building inspected by experienced cleaners.

This included floor surfaces, desks, chairs, pictures, walls, phones and every surface, furniture, fixture, etc. found in the building.  
   
Tabulation in the early 1970s was a Herculean task.
   
Notwithstanding the task, the results were a great start toward documenting a reasonably objective definition for clean.
  
The body of work in next month’s issue attempts to suggest a research-based definition of “clean,” to be measured and managed toward continuous improvement.
   
Be sure to review the findings in the June issue.

---

Vincent F. Elliott is the founder, president, and CEO of Elliott Affiliates Ltd. of Hunt Valley, MD. He is recognized as a leading authority in the design and utilization of best practice performance-driven techniques for janitorial outsourcing and management. For more information on Elliott Affiliates, visit www.ealtd.com.