vital importance of statistical approaches and productivity of manufacturing, commerce, research, and service has gained new recognition in recent times. This was first sentence of preamble for manifesto of American Statistical Association's (ASA) new committee for Enhancement of Role of Statistics in Improving Quality and Productivity in United States. What events led establishment of this committee and, soon thereafter, creation of new ASA Section? In letter editor in May 1981 issue of The American Statistician, W. Edwards Deming pointed out that statisticians, among others, have too narrow view of quality control. Responding suggestion that statistics curriculum should have a course in control, he remarked: the fact is that control embraces all activity of statistical theory that person can bring bear on service industries and on economic manufacturing of products improve our lives. Deming and many others were suggesting that statistical profession must be involved in improvement. Moreover, Deming challenged us with question: Do you know of any statisticians that have faint understanding of what only they can contribute American industry halt decline? The challenge was clear. Discussions of how statistics profession could become more involved in improvement issues often occurred at Fall Technical Conference, co-sponsored, for many years, by ASA Section on Physical and Engineering Sciences (SPES) and Chemical and Process Industries Division of American Society for Quality Control (ASQC). (In early 1980s newly created Statistics Division of ASQC also became co-sponsor.) During 1982 Fall Technical Conference, Tom Boardman, Bill Hill, Bill Hunter, Stu Hunter, Brian Joiner, Ron Snee, and others met informally discuss what could be done. This group received encouragement from others such as Dick Anderson, George Box, Mike Free, Bob Hogg, Bill Lawton, and Fred Leone. Various attempts were subsequently made by Boardman, Hogg, Snee, as well as ASA presidents Anderson, John Neter, Richard Savage, and others establish joint course of action with ASQC, and some initial encouragement was received. (Although single effort did not materialize, an excellent working relationship has since been developed with ASQC's Statistics Division.) In his 1983 ASA presidential address, Anderson stressed topic of profession's involvement in improvement of and productivity. In addition, he asked several ASA members discuss how to get statistical control back on track in U.S. Later that year, Anderson appointed Boardman (chair), Richard Freund, Bill Golomski, Hogg, Gary McDonald, and Snee serve as an ad hoc committee draw up charge justify creation of Committee on Product Quality and Industrial Productivity. The group recommended that separate committee, reporting directly ASA Board, be formed, and outlined its charge, activities, composition, and procedures. The goal was create catalyst that would span every function of ASA help organizations improve quality. At its January 1984 meeting, ASA Board agreed formation of committee, but decided make it ad hoc at least for first year-a restriction that was soon forgotten! A leader, preferably from industry, was sought. Gerry Hahn was fortunate obtain support of his management at GE for him devote time required get Section off fast start, and became committee's first chairman. Boardman agreed serve as co-chairman. Their aim was make this committee dynamic and proactive undertaking. Hahn and Boardman built upon original study group and soon obtained commitment of about 45 leaders in field. Next, in true statistical style, they conducted survey determine key areas in which committee should be engaged. The criteria were importance of subject area, willingness of respondents contribute subcommittee on subject, and how well topic was already being handled by others. This led following proposed key activities: