sustainability issue of the total quality management (tqm …
TRANSCRIPT
SUSTAINABILITY ISSUE OF THE TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT (TQM) SYSTEM
IN THE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY
by
Jesus A. Guillergan
_______________________
Dissertation
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Business Administration
______________________
Liberty University, School of Business
December 2021
ii
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to understand the sustainability issue of total quality management
(TQM) and its effects in the manufacturing industry. Having exploratory and descriptive
objectives, this research used a flexible design single case study on a water treatment company in
the southeastern United States to facilitate the examination of the phenomenon using real‐life,
present‐day context, and multiple perspectives from participants. The single bounded case study
collected and integrated many forms of qualitative data ranging from interviews, observations,
and quality‐related archived documents to answer the research questions. The results revealed
that failure in sustaining the quality system in place resulted in high product defects, leading to
excessive reject costs and loss in productivity. The analysis of the data showed that the firmness
of TQM methodology, orientation of the organization culture, type of leadership style, and
highly competitive strategies and operational targets affected the sustainment of TQM in the site.
The single case study is limited to the understanding of TQM sustainability challenges in the
manufacturing industry and the findings will not be generalizable to other business groups or
sectors in the same context. The future study could focus on a broader field of prevailing
conflicts between opposing objectives, logics, interests, and missions within one multinational
organization or within its line companies. This research aims to contribute to the understanding
of establishing alignment and coherence of TQM practices to the organizational strategic goals
and objectives to improve overall performance with significant value for customer focus and
continuous improvement.
Key words: sustainability, Total Quality Management, system, manufacturing
iii
SUSTAINABILITY ISSUE OF THE TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT (TQM) SYSTEM
IN THE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY
by
Jesus A. Guillergan
Dissertation
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Business Administration
Liberty University, School of Business
December 2021
Approvals
_________________________________________ ___________________
Jesus A. Guillergan, Doctoral Candidate Date
_________________________________________ ___________________
Goodson K. Mensah, Ph.D., Dissertation Chair Date
_________________________________________ ___________________
David Duby, Ph.D., Committee Member Date
_________________________________________ ___________________
Edward M. Moore, Ph.D., Director of Doctoral Programs Date
iv
Dedication
This research is dedicated to my family, friends, and co‐workers. I hope to walk beside
you as an exemplary example.
v
Acknowledgments
I would like to acknowledge the support given by my advisory and analysis committee,
Dr. Goodson K. Mensah, Dr. David Duby, and Dr. Nicoles Lowes for their valuable support and
time. I am particularly grateful for the assistance provided by my Dissertation Chair, Dr.
Goodson K. Mensah, for his guidance and recommendations in refining my research. My time
with Liberty University during my dissertation was very fruitful and productive.
I would like to express my deepest appreciation to all of the company’s site managers,
support personnel, and participants of my research. All your input, perspectives, and knowledge I
gained during the study were unconventional, ground‐breaking, and priceless. I take all these
lessons learned from all of you to provide focus in helping make our processes more reflexive
and dynamic while serving our strategic goals and objectives.
My heartfelt gratitude to my family who traveled with me throughout this DBA journey.
To my beautiful daughters, Jermaine, Jianne, and Jamie: I promise I will find more time to cook
good soup for all of you—especially for Jermaine, who has been cursed to proofread my papers
since my MBA years. To my lovely wife Jewel: you are always my inspiration and my rock. For
37 years, you kept reminding me that what lies ahead of me is nothing compared to what is
inside me; you are that key component inside me. It has always been you, all this time, that kept
me going.
vi
Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... ii
Approvals ....................................................................................................................................... iii
Dedication ...................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgments............................................................................................................................v
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xi
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xii
Section 1, Foundation of the Study ..................................................................................................1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 2
Problem Statement .............................................................................................................. 4
Purpose Statement ............................................................................................................... 4
Research Questions ............................................................................................................. 5
Nature of the Study ............................................................................................................. 8
Discussion of Research Paradigms ......................................................................... 9
Discussion of Design ............................................................................................ 10
Discussion of Method ........................................................................................... 12
Discussion of Triangulation .................................................................................. 15
Summary of the Nature of the Study. ................................................................... 17
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 18
Framework Diagram ............................................................................................. 19
Concepts ................................................................................................................ 21
Theories................................................................................................................. 23
Actors .................................................................................................................... 24
vii
Constructs ............................................................................................................. 25
Relationships between Concepts, Theories, Actors, and Constructs .................... 27
Summary of the Research Framework .................................................................. 29
Definition of Terms........................................................................................................... 31
Assumptions, Limitations, Delimitations ......................................................................... 34
Assumptions .......................................................................................................... 35
Limitations ............................................................................................................ 36
Delimitations ......................................................................................................... 37
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................. 37
Reduction of Gaps in the Literature ...................................................................... 38
Implications for Biblical Integration ..................................................................... 39
Benefit to Business Practice and Relationship to Cognate ................................... 41
Summary of the Significance of the Study ........................................................... 42
A Review of the Professional and Academic Literature ................................................... 43
Business Practices ................................................................................................. 44
The Problem .......................................................................................................... 48
Concepts ................................................................................................................ 53
Theories................................................................................................................. 57
Constructs ............................................................................................................. 59
Related Studies...................................................................................................... 63
Anticipated and Discovered Themes .................................................................... 72
Summary of the Literature Review ....................................................................... 83
Summary of Section 1 and Transition .............................................................................. 84
viii
Section 2: The Project ....................................................................................................................87
Purpose Statement ............................................................................................................. 90
Role of the Researcher ...................................................................................................... 91
Actions the Researcher Will Take to Conduct the Study ..................................... 92
Discussion of Bracketing to Avoid Personal Bias ................................................ 94
Summary of the Role of Researcher ..................................................................... 95
Research Methodology ..................................................................................................... 96
Discussion of Flexible Design .............................................................................. 97
Discussion of Chosen Method for the Study ........................................................ 98
Discussion of Methods for Triangulation ............................................................. 99
Summary of Research Methodology .................................................................. 101
Participants ...................................................................................................................... 102
Population and Sampling ................................................................................................ 104
Discussion of Population .................................................................................... 105
Discussion of Sampling ...................................................................................... 107
Summary of Population and Sampling ............................................................... 114
Data Collection & Organization ..................................................................................... 116
Data Collection Plan ........................................................................................... 117
Instruments .......................................................................................................... 120
Data Organization Plan ....................................................................................... 126
Summary of Data Collection & Organization .................................................... 128
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................. 130
Emergent Ideas.................................................................................................... 131
ix
Coding Themes ................................................................................................... 132
Interpretations ..................................................................................................... 134
Data Representation ............................................................................................ 135
Analysis for Triangulation .................................................................................. 136
Use of Leading Qualitative Analysis Software ................................................... 138
Summary of Data Analysis ................................................................................. 139
Reliability and Validity ................................................................................................... 141
Reliability ............................................................................................................ 143
Validity ............................................................................................................... 145
Bracketing ........................................................................................................... 147
Summary of Reliability and Validity .................................................................. 148
Summary of Section 2 and Transition ............................................................................ 150
Conclusion of the Research Proposal ..........................................................................................152
Section 3: Application to Professional Practice and Implications for Change ............................154
Overview of the Study .................................................................................................... 155
Presentation of the Findings............................................................................................ 158
Themes and Resulting Constructs Discovered ................................................... 160
Interpretation of the Themes and Resulting Constructs ...................................... 176
Representation and Visualization of the Data ..................................................... 184
Relationship of the Findings ............................................................................... 197
Summary of the findings. .................................................................................... 224
Application to Professional Practice ............................................................................... 229
Improving General Business Practice ................................................................. 230
x
Potential Application Strategies .......................................................................... 233
Summary of Application to Professional Practice .............................................. 236
Recommendations for Further Study .............................................................................. 239
Reflections ...................................................................................................................... 240
Personal & Professional Growth ......................................................................... 241
Biblical Perspective ............................................................................................ 242
Summary of Reflections ..................................................................................... 244
Summary of Section 3 ..................................................................................................... 246
Summary and Study Conclusions ................................................................................................249
References ....................................................................................................................................253
Appendix A: Interview Guide for Participants with Leading Roles ............................................298
Appendix B: Interview Guide for Participants with Practicing Roles .........................................300
Appendix C: Interview Guide for Participants with Supporting Roles .......................................302
Appendix D: Interview Guide for Participants with Receiving Roles .........................................304
Appendix E: Observation Protocol ..............................................................................................306
Appendix F: Pearson Correlation Coefficient ..............................................................................307
xi
List of Tables
Table 1. Related TQM Models ......................................................................................................69
Table 2. Anticipated and Discovered Themes ...............................................................................79
Table 3. Participants in the Study ................................................................................................113
Table 4. Quality‐Related Archived Documents of the Compnay ................................................124
Table 5. Research Population Codes ...........................................................................................159
xii
List of Figures
Figure 1. Research Framework Diagram.......................................................................................19
Figure 2. Relationship between Concepts, Theories, Actors, and Constructs Diagram ................28
Figure 3. Word Cloud – TQM Sustainability Issue .....................................................................185
Figure 4. Items Clustered by Word Similarity ............................................................................186
Figure 5. Contributors to TQM Sustainment Issue and its Effects..............................................187
Figure 6. ‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Rigid TQM Methodology’ Comparison Diagram...188
Figure 7. ‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Market‐Oriented Organizational Culture’ Comparison
Diagram........................................................................................................................................189
Figure 8. ‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Pacesetting Leadership Style’ Comparison Diagram
......................................................................................................................................................190
Figure 9. ‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Highly Competitive Strategies’ Comparison Diagram
......................................................................................................................................................191
Figure 10. ‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘High Cost of Quality and Warranty’ Comparison
Diagram........................................................................................................................................192
Figure 11. ‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Impassive Employee Behavior’ Comparison
Diagram........................................................................................................................................193
Figure 12. ‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Inconsistent Productivity and Performance’
Comparison Diagram ...................................................................................................................194
Figure 13. ‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Unpredictable Operational Constraints’ Comparison
Diagram........................................................................................................................................195
Figure 14. ‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and Overwhelmed Process Enablers’ Comparison
Diagram........................................................................................................................................196
1
Section 1, Foundation of the Study
The manufacturing industry has utilized the total quality management (TQM) approach
on their processes for decades to address process variations responsible for poor product quality
and low performance (Parvadavardini et al., 2016; Vouzas & Katsogianni, 2018). While the
methodology has been effective in providing substantial improvements in the organization’s
operational excellence and productivity, its sustainment in the field involves many challenges
(Bouranta et al., 2017; Carmona‐Marquez et al., 2016). Manufacturing companies run into
challenges in translating and aligning TQM concepts into the existing organizational structure
and not realizing the full benefits of the approach (Muruganantham et al., 2018; Wei et al.,
2019). The objective of the study was to understand the sustainability issue of the TQM system
in a water‐treatment company in the southeastern United States, which had resulted in high costs
of quality and low performance. The sustainment of TQM influenced the operational
productivity of organizations and positively affected other dimensions of performance such as
financial effectiveness and customer satisfaction (Nasim, 2018; Psomas & Jaca, 2016). The
qualitative design study aimed to discover, explore, and identify the challenges of sustaining the
TQM system in manufacturing processes to provide a complete picture of the phenomenon of the
issue in its natural setting. The single case study considered various perspectives that were
specific to the stakeholders and practitioners of the TQM system to understand how and why a
TQM sustainability issue existed in a water‐treatment plant operation.
Sustainment of the TQM system requires a company‐wide commitment to quality
improvement, and the difficulty of achieving this obligation is real (Muruganantham et al.,
2018). The case study assumptions enabled an in‐depth, multilayered exploration of the problem
based on the research framework. The study authenticated the contributing and resulting
2
constructs to the TQM sustainability issue by studying their level of influence and impact on the
site. The limitations and delimitations of the single bounded case was constrained to the scope of
the TQM sustainability issue of the chosen company and may not provide generalization or
transferability of results to other situations. The research integrated a biblical perspective and
followed four phases of gradual progression of revelation representing creation, fall, redemption,
and restoration. The objective of the study was to reach out to the development of the case with
compassion and empathy to bring together pertinent evidence that would help transform the
participants to serve their true goals. The significance of the study contributed to the
understanding of the TQM sustainability issue in the manufacturing industry, and reinforced
concepts and theories held true by literatures in TQM. The results of the study presented
evidence on how the organization could transform and establish coherence of strategic objectives
to TQM practices that would enhance quality and performance of its business. Understanding the
relationship between TQM and the company’s strategic development would explain how and to
what degree investing in TQM methodology contributes to achieving sustainable business
objectives (Andrade Arteaga et al., 2020).
Background of the Problem
A water‐treatment company in the southeastern United States was experiencing high
costs of quality, warranty, and performance issues despite a successful implementation of the
TQM system. Its monthly operating metrics report on quality and warranty tracking had been
trending unfavorably due to high field failure rates, product repair, and replacement costs. The
facility had conflicts sustaining its adaptation of the TQM system due to challenges in its
integration into the site’s business strategies and process management practices. There was
confusion about TQM’s incompatibilities with its production targets and goals.
3
Although many studies found that TQM could improve organizational performance, not
all cases of TQM application had produced satisfactory results in the organizations that executed
it (Hilman et al., 2019; Kumar et al., 2020; Nizamidou & Vouzas, 2020; Panuwatwanich &
Nguyen, 2017). According to Oliveira et al. (2019), serious problems arise when companies act
more concerned with TQM practice implementation than with its suitability to its operational
needs and quality results. There needs to be an all‐inclusive approach to quality management and
dedicated support for quality initiatives through proper alignment and integration of its various
constituents to gain maximum adaptability (Sila, 2018a).
Specific to the water treatment company, the role of its organizational culture had a major
influence in driving the sustainability of the TQM system on its business performance and
product quality. Significant gaps in the relationship between organizational strategies and quality
management practices existed that created obstacles in achieving the intended purpose. This
condition revealed dimensions pertinent to the research questions specific to the TQM
sustainability issue as the subject of investigation. According to Sinha et al. (2016),
understanding of core organizational cultural values that are conducive for planning and
execution of TQM interventions was a major factor in the effective sustainment of TQM in any
organization. Company leadership played a major role in influencing the organizational culture
because they were principal drivers of quality culture development in their ability to empower
roles and responsibilities, influence resource allocation, build partnerships, and develop labor
and process management (Bendermacher et al., 2017). Coherence and alignment of purpose to
organizational requirements supported the maintenance of excellence and sustainment of
management systems to achieve quality and performance outcomes (Kennedy, 2019). The
company was a good choice for this research because it had diverse and extensive manufacturing
4
processes that were greatly dependent on the proper application and sustainment of TQM to
produce high quality products and improve performance.
Problem Statement
The general problem to be addressed was the sustainability issue of the TQM system in
the manufacturing industry, which resulted in high external warranties, internal quality costs, and
low productivity. Muruganantham et al. (2018) indicated that organizations face multiple
difficulties in translating TQM concepts into practice and many of them have not fully realized
the financial outputs and non‐financial benefits of implementing and sustaining TQM practices.
A high number of senior managers lacked the understanding of the competitive mechanism of
TQM that enabled their manufacturing plant to achieve operational excellence and TQM
sustainability (Sahoo, 2018). Haffar et al. (2019) determined that organizational culture
characterized by high bureaucracy, lack of customer orientation, and continuous improvement
had a negative impact on TQM implementation and sustainability. All quality activities begin
with the management level, and therefore, senior leadership play an important role in providing
resources, setting core values, and creating policies to show employees the importance of TQM
implementation and sustainability (Wei et al., 2019). The specific problem to be addressed was
the sustainability issue of the TQM system in a water treatment company in the southeastern
United States, resulting in high product warranty costs, field failure rates, and cost of quality.
Purpose Statement
The purpose of this flexible design single case study was to understand the sustainability
issue of the TQM system in the manufacturing industry, which had resulted in high cost of
quality and low performance. The study aimed to discover, explore, and recognize the challenges
of sustaining the TQM system in manufacturing processes to provide a complete picture of the
5
phenomenon in its natural setting. The investigation considered various perspectives that were
specific to the stakeholders and practitioners of the TQM system in a water‐treatment company
in the southeastern United States. Sustainment of the TQM system required a company‐wide
commitment to quality improvement, and the difficulty of achieving this obligation was real
(Muruganantham et al., 2018). The qualitative methodology considered the actual workplace
conditions, observation, and communication with participants to understand what TQM aspects
were incompatible to them and how they perceived the application of the TQM system to the
process. The application of a single case study design enabled an in‐depth, multi‐faceted
exploration of TQM sustainability issues in real‐life settings and authenticated the contributing
factors by studying its suitability, acceptability, and neutrality in the site. The research integrated
a biblical perspective and followed four phases of gradual progression of revelation representing
creation, fall, redemption, and restoration. The purpose of the study was to reach out to the
development of the case with compassion and empathy to bring together pertinent evidence that
would help transform the participants to serve their true goals.
Research Questions
The research questions focused on the sustainability issue of TQM in the manufacturing
industry that was specific to a water treatment company in the southeastern United States. The
research questions aimed to explore, describe, and understand how factors such as organizational
structure, culture, mission, and strategic goals affected the sustainability of TQM activities. Sabet
et al. (2016) maintained that alignment of organizational structures, systems, and processes are
essential in the successful sustainment of TQM activities. The research questions intended to
create a rich dialogue with the evidence and consider possibilities to gain deeper familiarity with
the contributing causes of the TQM sustainability issue.
6
RQ1: How does the TQM sustainability issue affect the company’s cost and productivity?
RQ1a: How does the TQM sustainability issue influence external warranties, internal
costs, and performance?
RQ1b: How does the TQM sustainability issue affect product warranty cost, field failure
rates, and cost of quality?
RQ1 sought to understand how the TQM sustainability issue affected cost and
productivity. RQ1a aimed to understand how the TQM sustainment issue affected external
warranties, internal costs, and performance. RQ1b sought to discern how the issue impacts field
failure rates and cost of quality. Improper maintenance and sustainment of TQM practices could
lead to high operating costs and product failures, resulting in customer dissatisfaction (Alvarez
Santos et al., 2018).
RQ2: Why is there a potential TQM sustainability issue in the water‐treatment plant
operations?
RQ2a: How does TQM sustainment affects the company’s operational targets?
RQ2b: How does sustaining TQM practices align with the company’s operational
strategies?
RQ2 was an open‐ended question that aimed to confirm the presence of the issue and
allowed the understanding of factors behind why employees find it hard to sustain TQM
practices. RQ2a sought to outline the effects of TQM on the operational targets. RQ2b sought to
understand how sustaining TQM aligned with operational strategies in real‐time. Sabet et al.
(2016) indicated that lack of strategic coherence on the purpose of TQM could lead to
sustainability issues and its ultimate failure.
7
RQ3: How does the organizational culture of the company affect sustainability of the
TQM system?
RQ3a: How does leadership perceive the importance of TQM sustainment in operations?
RQ3b: How does TQM sustainment affect the behavior of employees in their current
role?
RQ3 sought to extract information from participants on how organizational culture was
affecting TQM sustainment. RQ3a sought to explore leadership’s expectations of TQM
sustainment and its impact on the company’s operation efficiency versus the current practice.
RQ3b aimed to understand how individual employees experienced the effects of sustaining TQM
on their workload, productivity, and performance. For a successful sustainment of TQM, an
extensive culture transformation needed to happen (Alvarez Santos et al., 2018).
RQ4: What TQM activities affect performance in each value stream that make its
sustainability an issue?
RQ4a: What process enablers are affected by TQM sustainment activities?
RQ4b: What operational constraints are created when sustaining TQM practices?
RQ4 aimed to identify specific TQM practices that were not sustainable to understand the
relationship between sustainability of TQM practices and efficient manufacturing practices.
RQ4a sought to know what specific process enabler’s performance was affected by TQM
sustainability to understand the overall impact on these processes. RQ4b aimed to outline all the
constraints generated by sustaining TQM to understand its real‐time applicability in the
production lines. A TQM model, which is a one‐size‐fits‐all for all industries, may not produce
optimal results (Alvarez Santos et al., 2018).
8
The research questions facilitated collection of specific case study evidence of the TQM
sustainability issue in the water treatment company. The questions sought to understand the
presence of the issue and its resulting impact on quality and performance. The inquiries aimed to
discover how organizational leadership, culture, and its strategic goals aligned, influenced, or
contributed to the sustainment of TQM. The research questions supported the analytic strategy of
interpreting the data and searching for auspicious patterns, insights, or concepts to define the
current situation of the case.
Nature of the Study
The research aimed to capture specific lived‐in experiences of TQM practitioners in the
water‐treatment company in the southeastern United States to understand the system’s
sustainability issue. The qualitative methodology provided a clear interpretation of the structure
and patterns found among the company’s participants to generate data in the actual work
environment. This methodology built a complex general picture, examined words, reported
detailed views of participants, and conducted research in the natural setting (Creswell & Poth,
2018). The flexible approach was open to unexpected events and adjusted to emerging evidence
as it aimed to recognize how the participants derived meaning from their work, and how their
interpretations and perceptions influenced their behavior towards TQM sustainability. The
qualitative study covered what data to gather and ignore, from whom to gather it according to its
sampling design, how to gather based on collection methods, and how to analyze the information
based on its analysis method (Tobi & Kampen, 2018). The researcher used heterogeneous
approaches to knowledge development, recognizing participants’ strengths and weaknesses to
form a better understanding of the case. This post‐positive approach required multiple
perspectives to be more expansive in addressing questions about the phenomenon of TQM
9
sustainability issues. The approach of this flexible design integrated a single case study design
and analysis to create a richer picture of the case. The design of the study confirmed validity and
reliability in the results so that these could address the research objectives accurately.
Discussion of Research Paradigms
The research paradigm was post‐positivism. The paradigm reflected an evolutionary
process of understanding the world with research that resulted only in an approximation of truth
rather than the absolute truth (Kelly et al., 2018). The paradigm held an acceptance of theories,
hypotheses, contextual knowledge, and values but had an epistemological skepticism that
knowledge was hypothetical rather than absolute. The researcher of the TQM sustainability issue
project believed in the dynamics of growth and continuous improvement and therefore
anticipated refinement of the associated actions and principles over time. In this single case
study, the relativity of truth, solutions, actions, and fundamental policies were subjected to
whatever the socially responsible organization deemed necessary for their ‘win‐right’ survival
and well‐being that served their mission, purpose, and community. Any catalyst for change
created evaluations and investigations that continually challenged existing theories and principles
for advancement. The paradigm supported the focus of research, which was to confirm claims,
reform, refine, or abandon these in favor of other strongly warranted claims (Tobi & Kampen,
2018). The researcher believed in theories and values influencing the outcome of real‐world
investigations and that these aspects could change in light of new evidence to retain objective
truth.
Post‐positivism assumed that understandings of truth from the context of that reality
would potentially be imperfect and acknowledged the existence of unobservable entities, as well
as the capacity to explain observable phenomena (Tanlaka et al., 2019). Accordingly, the
10
researcher reflected the use of qualitative and quantitative sources of data in search for truths to
obtain an approximation of the reality, emphasizing empirical testing and controlled methods in
the achievement of this goal. Kelly et al. (2018) claimed that post‐positivism is intuitive, holistic,
inductive, and exploratory where the predominant view not only aligned to quantitative methods
of collecting and analyzing data, but also strongly supported the use of some qualitative methods.
The researcher’s paradigm provided the guidance on how to collect, analyze, and validate
the data around the TQM sustainability issue. The researcher understood how values and beliefs
influenced research and how to choose definitions and measures while preserving the value of its
objectivity and research integrity (Azadi et al., 2017). The paradigm did not dwell on anticipated
consequences of the TQM sustainability issue alone, but also looked into actions of known
historical conditions that have produced results compatible to the recognized value system. The
researcher’s theoretical view did not seek middle ground between logical intransigence and
ambiguity, or by favoring moderate versions of rational contrasts based on how the approach
worked in resolving problems.
Discussion of Design
The research design chosen for the study had the capability to capture and understand the
live experiences of the TQM practitioners in the chosen company in its natural setting. Guided
by the specific research problem, purpose, and research questions concerning the TQM
sustainability issue, the researcher was free to adjust the investigation as needed to adapt to
unexpected and emergent needs of the study. There was a need for the selected research design
to be flexible to adapt to changes as the study evolved with the presentation of multiple complex
realities. The fixed design, which was suitable for research that required transcending individual
differences and identifying patterns to link to social structures, was not applicable in this study.
11
The reason was that the fixed design was concerned with aggregates and general tendencies
rather than individuals’ experiences, leading to a design weakness in its inability to capture the
subtleness and intricacies of individual human behavior (Robson & McCartan, 2016). The fixed
design was too rigid for the dynamic nature of the TQM sustainability study.
The mixed‐method, which was suited for studies that incorporated the elements of
quantitative and qualitative data collection, presented timing issues and complications in
integrating findings that could produce incoherent and ambiguous research (Robson &
McCartan, 2016). While this design offered an authentication of qualitative and quantitative
approaches to enhance validity, there were challenges in linking the data analytically, which
would present an application problem in this study. The flexible design, which was suitable for
studies that sought to understand the phenomenon as it existed in the real world, was more
applicable for the TQM sustainability research. This evolving design used multiple presentations
of realities, integrated the researcher as an instrument of data collection, and applied a
concentrated emphasis on participants’ perspectives.
This study was conducted with a flexible research design using a qualitative method;
specifically, a single case study design was used. According to Zapf et al. (2020), flexible
research designs allowed interim analyses where modifications of the study design based on
accumulating data or any other information available in real‐time were possible without
undermining the research’s integrity and validity. To be systematic in investigating the TQM
sustainability issue, this research design captured and described the lived reality of the event in
progress and produced higher probability in discovering comprehensive information of the case.
By describing the complexity of the TQM sustainability issue in the actual operational processes
12
through this flexible design, the themes became more relevant and accurate, making the
approach a best fit for the TQM sustainability problem.
Discussion of Method
The qualitative research method provided the need for an informative and descriptive
approach to determine how the TQM sustainability issue resulted in high external warranties,
costs, and performance in the company’s current setting. The qualitative method was context‐
dependent and allowed the researcher to understand how unique circumstances in which these
happened form events, actions, and meanings (Mohajan, 2018). The study focused on the actual
work environment and validated the points of view of the TQM practitioners on how they
perceived the sustainment of TQM on their roles. The qualitative researcher empowered
individuals to tell their narrative, listened to their input, and reduced the power relationship that
often occurs between the researcher and participants of a study (Setia, 2017). The study required
an evolving approach as it gathered complex, detailed understanding of the TQM sustainability
issue. The qualitative research process was emergent wherein the initial plan of research could
not be firmly set, and all phases of the process may change after the researcher entered the
workplace and collected data (Keikelame & Swartz, 2019). The investigation of how the TQM
sustainability issue affected product warranty cost, field failure rates, and cost of quality required
a development of an evolving complex picture of the causes and their resulting outcomes. The
qualitative methodology involved noting multiple viewpoints, recognizing the many elements
involved in a situation, and generally outlining a greater representation that occurs (Kelly, 2017).
One of the five common qualitative approaches to inquiry was the narrative research,
which aimed to understand participants’ diverse social constructions of reality and the cultures in
which their life stories resided (Abkhezr et al., 2020). The method captured the diverse nature of
13
participants’ expressions, which reflected a varied collection of their stories and the multiple
ways through which they could create and re‐create themselves in different settings and
relationships (Manankil‐Rankin, 2016). The research required concentrating the study on an
individual or a limited number of individuals while gathering data through their stories, distinct
experiences, and chronologically organizing the importance of those experiences (Creswell &
Poth, 2018). The limitation on the number of participants and the constant reformulation of the
inquiry through consistent reflections made the narrative research approach impractical for the
TQM study. The phenomenological research design examined how related phenomenon was
experienced and tried to define what the participants experienced about the phenomenon (Bastug
et al., 2017). The approach aimed to gather descriptions of experience, and not intellectual
interpretations or opinions to discover the meaning of an occurrence of multiple individuals who
experienced the phenomenon (Thomas, 2020). This approach was not suited for a bounded
system, such as a process or a program, and its specificity in the methodology could distort the
interpretation and clarity in its application to the TQM study.
The grounded theory research design developed a theoretical explanation of a
phenomenon from a specific set of data based on a large number of participants’ socially derived
explanations of a situation (Zamani & Babaei, 2021). Grounded theory aligns on the strategy of
inductive reasoning and may not need clearly specified goals, research questions, or assumptions
prior to the start of the research project (Flynn & Korcuska, 2018). This inductive process could
open up a possibility that researchers may evade an initial literature review, conduct interviews,
and consequently analyze data patterns that could be meaningful to the study’s findings. This
method was suited for a homogenous sample and not for the case that focused on the TQM
study. Ethnography applied to various disciplines with the goal of learning about social
14
structures in groups and cultures by utilizing realistic observations in natural settings (Muskat et
al., 2018). The approach studied people through active engagement in native populations using
in‐depth observations of their social interactions and becoming familiar with the effects of
cultural and historical contexts. The researchers could discern the fullness of the human
experience and the significance people give to objects and cultural practices that recognize a
different worldview (Wood & Mattson, 2019). The ethnographic process traditionally studied
members of a culture‐sharing group and was not suited for the TQM study on a bounded system.
This study intended to develop an understanding of the TQM sustainability issue and its
effects on a water‐treatment company in the southeastern United States as a single bounded case.
The single case study research design involved the study of a single bounded case within a real‐
life, present‐day context or setting, and used multiple perspectives to facilitate the examination
of the specific phenomenon (Yin, 2018). A qualitative case study illustrated a unique case and
needed to be detailed and descriptive. The case study researcher could collect and integrate many
forms of qualitative data ranging from observations, interviews, and documents to answer the
research questions (Paddock et al., 2019). This research design identified what TQM activities
affected performance in each value stream that made its sustainability an issue and recognized
how TQM activities affected process enablers.
According to Ridder (2017), benefits of a single case study showed the comprehensive
description and analysis to gain a better understanding of “how” and “why” events occurred.
This approach allowed the investigation of research questions on how the TQM sustainability
issue negatively affected the company’s cost and productivity, and why there was a TQM
sustainability issue in the company’s operations. The single case study methodology provided
the opportunity to uncover any subculture or behavior that arose by investigating deeper causes
15
of the TQM sustainment issues. This approach delivered case data that led to the identification of
patterns and relationships, and validation and confirmation of a theory (El‐Akruti et al., 2018).
This single case study design enabled consumers to play a role in the development,
implementation, analysis, and synthesis of research. The case study design also supported the
conduct of genuine consultation with stakeholders, including respectful processes, ethical
behaviors, and practices to ensure the quality and validity of data gained (Yin, 2018).
Discussion of Triangulation
Used as model in the field of navigation that utilizes multiple points of observation to
pinpoint a location, triangulation in research framework employs multiple sources of evidence to
provide various measures of the same phenomenon (Natow, 2020). Triangulation helped to
reinforce the construct validity of the study by using multiple methodological resources or
practices to develop convergent evidence (Al‐Moghrabi et al., 2020). The TQM sustainability
study used more than one type of qualitative data collection procedure, such as gathering data by
means of interviews, observations, and documents. The researcher established multiple data
sources by gathering data from different periods, locations, or perspectives through the interview
of TQM participants who possessed different viewpoints or held varying levels of authority. This
process included interviewing senior leadership and production employees within the company
from within different product value streams. The researcher also performed shop floor
observations of the TQM sustainability issue in multiple departments and performed
documentary examination of the occurrence on file. The researcher checked the results of the
interview against the shop floor observations and findings in the TQM‐related documents. Using
multiple methodological resources such as diverse techniques, various data sources, and different
16
data analysis procedures served as a check on objectivity and incorrectness that any data source,
method, or analysis procedure had generated (Rooshenas et al., 2019).
Interviews. This qualitative method consisted of interviewing diverse groups of TQM
participants in the company, covering at least 50 subjects across five value streams and four
functional groups. The value streams included injection molding, filters, pumps, valves, and heat
pumps product departments. The functional groups included operations, operations support,
product engineering, and field warranty administration. The actors who were distributed across
the value streams and functional groups included the executive leadership team, manufacturing
line members, operations support members, suppliers, business partners, and warranty business
members. The interview covered TQM participants working in three shifts to establish data at
different points in time. Interviewing participants in a variety of different operational positions at
different settings in time and location built up strong evidence of the phenomenon because the
approach covered the diversity of organization (Natow, 2020).
Observations. Research observations took place at different times and process locations.
The researcher observed how actors performed tasks related to TQM practices at the start and
end of the shift, before and after breaks and lunches, and during normal operation. The
observations covered various locations that included activities in shipping and receiving, start
and end of process line stations, in‐line testing stations, and non‐conforming locations in the
company. This process captured reactions while participants were involved in individual, or
group work related to TQM practices. A semi‐structured checklist that outlined specific TQM
practices and captured objective notes about how and what participants were doing documented
the researcher’s observation findings. Constructing descriptive accounts was an important aspect
of the methodical process. This activity also included which TQM concepts the participants were
17
performing well and which ones they struggled practicing. The observation process established
strong evidence that included select groups of participants for extended periods, diverse activities
at different locations, and work with different concepts (Moon, 2019). The semi‐structured
checklist that captured the observation findings produced a matrix to show patterns between
value stream groups and functional roles.
Documents. The researcher examined documents related to the TQM practice in the
company. These documents included process audits, standard work reviews, critical‐to‐quality
forms, product non‐conformity reports, scrap summaries, productivity statements, quality audits,
root‐cause‐counter measure files, and quality manuals. The document analysis also covered
existing TQM operational control documents such as failure mode analyses, process flow
diagrams, control plans, escalation processes, and change management policies created to
safeguard operations. In addition, the researcher reviewed the pre‐production approval process
that started from the product development team, suppliers, and operations to link interview and
observation findings to the TQM sustainability challenges that the participants shared. The intent
was to understand and confirm the presence of the TQM sustainment issue on how the
documents captured internal defect occurrences, corrective actions, process changes, design
changes, supplier changes, productivity misses, and field or external failures. One of the most
common practices of utilizing multiple qualitative methodologies is to combine interviews and
observations with documentary analysis (Natow, 2020).
Summary of the Nature of the Study
The research was conducted with a flexible design using a qualitative method and a
single case study designed to serve the objectives of the investigation. This method provided an
informative and descriptive approach to determine how the TQM sustainability issue resulted in
18
high cost of quality and low performance in the company’s current setting. Through this flexible
design, the themes became more relevant and accurate, making the approach a best fit for the
TQM sustainability problem. The research paradigm was post‐positivism, which held an
acceptance of theories, contextual knowledge, and values, but had an epistemological skepticism
that knowledge was hypothetical rather than absolute. The paradigm supported the focus of the
research to confirm TQM sustainability findings and reformed, refined, or abandoned these in
favor of other strongly justified claims. The TQM sustainability study used more than one type
of qualitative data collection process, which included gathering data by means of interviews,
observations, and document analysis. These data sources came from different periods, locations,
and TQM participants who held varying levels of authority. The goal of triangulation was to
cross‐validate and capture diverse dimensions of the TQM sustainability issue in the company.
From the researcher’s post‐positivist perspective, this triangulation enhanced the accuracy and
validity of a study.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework provided the rationale, background, and structure that
supported the investigation of the relationship between research elements to understand the
occurrence of the problem (Fisher & Hamer, 2020). The research framework showed how rigid
TQM methodology, theories, concepts, leadership style, organization culture, and strategic goals
influence the way the research actors sustain TQM practices in the water‐treatment company.
Proper execution of TQM resulted in high quality and performance; however, its rigid
methodology had practices that could best describe and provide details on why the approach was
harder to sustain (Hilman et al., 2019; Jung & Lee, 2016; Kumar et al., 2020). The framework
also showed the effects of TQM sustainability failure on the cost of quality and external
19
warranties, productivity and performance, employees’ behavior, and its consequence on
operational constraints and process enablers. The structure identified key input constructs such as
rigid TQM methodology, pacesetting leadership style, and market‐oriented organization culture
as contributors to the way TQM practitioners sustained the approach in the manufacturing
process. The dynamic pacesetting leadership style set the excellence bar high and made teams
work efficiently; and while the style was effective in driving results, it could overload team
members (Campion, 2018). The market‐oriented organizational culture had an excessive focus
on satisfying the needs of its customers and could influence the market‐oriented behaviors of
their employees in terms of harmonizing values and norms (Byrne et al., 2019). This type of
organizational culture was result‐oriented with a strong emphasis on competitiveness and
achievement. The framework showed how the TQM sustainability issue resulted in elevated cost
of quality, inconsistent performance, impassive employee behavior, unpredictable operational
constraints, and overwhelmed process enablers. The structure highlighted the major participants
in the study and their role in contributing to the research problem and its outcomes.
Framework Diagram
The framework diagram below showed the relationship between all the research elements
included in the study. The diagram showed the interaction, flow of information, and action
between each element.
Figure 1
Research Framework Diagram
20
The input constructs consisted of rigid TQM methodology, theories, concepts,
pacesetting leadership style, market‐oriented organizational culture, competitive company
strategies, and operational targets. These constructs influenced the actors or participants of the
TQM practices. Rigidity in process and quality management did not bring variety in the
workplace that could have positively influenced performance and creation of value for the
customer (Banuro et al., 2017). The effect of the input constructs on the actors guided the
manner by which each of them applied the sustainment of TQM practices. The actors could
manipulate and empower the sustainment of TQM principles in their own space and time given a
certain level of authority (Banuro et al., 2017). The actors consisted of the executive leaders,
manufacturing line members, operations support members, suppliers and business partners, and
warranty administration managers. Leadership’s commitment towards quality management
included giving an inspiring vision, motivating quality values, and quality direction to employees
Input Constructs
•Rigid TQM Methodology
•Pacesetting Leadership style
•Market-Oriented Organizational Culture
•Competitive Strategies and Operational Targets
Actors
•Executive Leaders
•Manufacturing Line Members
•Operations Support Members
•Suppliers and Business Partners
Problem
•TQM Sustainability Issue
Output Constructs
•High Cost of Quality and External Warranties
•Inconsistent Productivity and Performance
•Impassive Employee Behavior
•Unpredictable Operational Constraints
•Overwhelmed Process Enablers
21
in ways that were clear and understood by all; without these elements, the process failed (Dilawo
& Salimi, 2019). In the current state, the impact of the input constructs on the actors contributed
to the sustainability issue of TQM in the company. The TQM sustainability problem, in turn,
affected the output constructs, which were elevated cost of quality, high external warranties,
inconsistent productivity, low performance, impassive employee behavior, unpredictable
operational constraints, and overwhelmed process enablers. Failure in maintaining the TQM
methodology resulted in increase in costs, compromised products, unmotivated employees, and
unsatisfied customers (Banuro et al., 2017). The organization could be truly effective in
sustaining TQM when each constituent works together in coherence, recognizing that every
participant and every action affects, and is in turn, affected by, every member in the team (Chen
et al., 2016).
Concepts
Proper operation of the TQM system improved the quality of products and performance
while lowering costs of warranties and field failure rates. Inadequate use of TQM in the
company’s processes could lead to issues that would negatively affect cost and customer
contentment. Shafiq et al. (2019) affirmed that productivity increased with improvement of
quality and failure to maintain TQM could result in low quality, which translates to high cost and
loss of competitive position. TQM could be a major source of sustainable competitive advantage
and excellence for business organizations while its failure could have contrasting effects. The
sustainment of TQM influenced the operational productivity of organizations, which eventually
affected other dimensions of performance such as financial effectiveness, customer satisfaction,
and other stakeholders’ efficiency (Nasim, 2018; San Miguel et al., 2016).
22
Sound TQM sustainability required rigid adherence to procedures from all practitioners
to have a strong causal effect on organizational performance and cost of quality. Defined as an
effective management tool, TQM could reinforce existing business strategies and goals when
performed rigorously. TQM is a strenuous management philosophy that requires full
commitment to improve product quality and processes, otherwise, a halfhearted execution would
lead to failure that translates to high costs and low performance (Amin et al., 2017; Jung & Lee,
2016). TQM’s structured approach required full engagement from employees and management
to improve process effectiveness, flexibility, and competitiveness of a business. TQM
sustainment was successful when there was active participation from all members at all levels to
meet and exceed quality and performance goals. Issues would arise when team involvement was
fragmented and not aligned with the correct application of TQM practices (Amin et al., 2017;
Bugdol, 2020; Hwang et al., 2020; Shafiq et al., 2019).
TQM and the organizational culture are interrelated. TQM, when sustained successfully,
influences the content of the organizational culture. Subsequently, the content of the
organizational culture influences the TQM system and its functionality, but it demands a
complex cultural shift from the traditional approach to management focusing on the way to a
total quality mindset (Jung & Lee, 2016; Nasim, 2018). This cultural shift impacts basic beliefs
and deep‐rooted values that employees hold about work and could contribute to change
resistance. TQM required a radical cultural change from traditional management to the
continuous improvement management style in an organization (Haffar et al., 2019). Sustainment
of the TQM concept was not an easy undertaking because it necessitated a total change in
organizational culture, shifting of responsibility to management, and incessant participation of
members in the quality improvement process (Nasim, 2018; Panuwatwanich & Nguyen, 2017).
23
TQM sustainment required changes to the shared assumptions, frames of reference, and
understandings that most organizations have developed through interactions with their
environment and altering these established perspectives could create a challenge to TQM
sustainability.
Theories
Deming’s theory of TQM rests upon 14 points of management that include the system of
profound knowledge and the Shewart Cycle of plan‐do‐check‐act (Agrawal, 2019b; Chiarini &
Vagnoni, 2017). The theory equated quality as the result of collaborative work efforts over the
total costs and stressed the importance of top management support to sustain the TQM system. If
the company solely focused on cost as opposed to the proper sustainment of TQM, cost would
rise while quality deteriorated. Deming’s system of profound knowledge consisted of the
understanding of human nature to solicit active engagement and commitment to the TQM
process (Agrawal, 2019b; Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017). Without this understanding, TQM
sustainability would be an issue affecting the outcome related to poor quality and the added cost
of warranties. Total participation was a key factor in the sustainment of TQM because it inspired
employees to innovate and help the company to maintain its long‐term vision and planning
(Amin et al., 2017; Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017; Dahlgaard et al., 2019). Companies that did not
demonstrate the importance of teamwork and generated interdepartmental cooperation by
recognizing and empowering their employees to participate in decision‐making would only
discourage total participation. This would not help build a TQM culture needed for positive
business performance.
Crosby’s theory of TQM relied on multiple absolutes of quality management and a list of
fourteen elements to quality improvement (Agrawal, 2019a). The theory emphasized the strict
24
adherence to requirements, prevention, quality measured by the price of nonconformity, and zero
defects. The focus on stringent requirements of TQM required firm compliance to its procedures,
which was dependent on resources for continuous training, monitoring, and audits that some
management leadership had difficulties in providing. Application of the TQM methods, tools,
and techniques requires dedicated and committed resources, and most companies do not have a
strategic roadmap complemented with suitable methods and techniques to ensure successful
operations (Dahlgaard‐Park et al., 2018). In an attempt for companies to optimize cost, TQM
practitioners multitask to cover other aspects of the TQM process, leading to workload and
sustainability issues. Managers need to have an in‐depth understanding of the importance of
building a suitable organizational culture with a focus on TQM basic principles (Álvarez‐García
et al., 2016). A lack of understanding could lead to the disintegration of management control that
might result in a lack of universal application of TQM on the company’s processes.
Actors
Executive leaders play an important role in the sponsorship of TQM within a company
and set the values essential for it to flourish. According to Álvarez‐García et al. (2016), without
the right leadership to inspire and influence compliance, sustainment of TQM could not fully
succeed in the long‐term. Leadership must provide unity of purpose and direction for the
organization to sustain TQM and achieve its goals and objectives. In this research study,
executive leaders included the operations director, value stream managers, facilitators, and
operations engineers. Manufacturing line members’ involvement in TQM sustainability
improved quality and increased performance when they had the full support and empowerment
from management. The effectiveness of TQM depended on the extent to which employees
performed their roles and moved towards the common goals and objectives (Álvarez‐García et
25
al., 2016). TQM sustainability, cost of quality, and efficiency improved when frontline personnel
aligned and correlated with the manufacturing processes. In this study, manufacturing line
members included molding operators, assembly workers, and fabrication associates.
Operations support members provided a shared responsibility for equipment, hands‐on
training, and played an important role in increasing uptime, reducing lead‐time, and eliminating
defects. The effectiveness of this function directly related to TQM sustainability. The operation
support group emphasized proactive and preventative maintenance to maximize the operational
efficiency of equipment and training of personnel (Dahlgaard et al., 2019). In this study, the
operations group included process technicians, quality inspectors, quality technicians, metrology,
tooling, and the maintenance crew. Suppliers and business partners had an important role in
TQM sustainability. Suppliers and business partners were responsible for providing the quality
that satisfied the requirements of the company to process products that meet customers’ needs
(Bevilacqua et al., 2017). Lack of involvement and poor communication with suppliers and
business partners could create obstacles in the sustainment of TQM. Warranty administration
members were the personnel at the receiving end of the finished goods. The groups spread across
continental America and Asia‐Pacific regions interacted with the distribution centers, product
dealers, contractors, and customers. They provided customer feedback and validity of the
effectiveness of TQM sustainability in the company’s manufacturing processes.
Constructs
The selected research constructs covered the characteristics of the participants and the
elements of the TQM sustainability issue. The rigidity of the TQM methodology required strict
adherence to policies and procedures. Each deviation from the TQM approach affected the level
of quality and performance (Gözükara et al., 2019). The pacesetting leadership style was an
26
established attribute of the management approach that affected the sustainability of TQM in the
manufacturing process. The influence of leadership style on employees’ involvement and
participation in quality assurance activities had significant impact (Kumar & Sharma, 2017; Sila,
2018a). The market‐oriented organizational culture was a preexisting attribute of the company
that could affect TQM sustainability. The relationship between cultural orientation and the
sustainment of TQM practices was substantial (Gözükara et al., 2019). TQM practices could
affect the preset company’s strategies and operational targets. Quality management was a
customer‐focused process that aimed for continual support of a company’s strategic goal and
objectives (Albuhisi & Abdallah, 2018; Bevilacqua et al., 2017). The TQM sustainability issue
could overwhelm process enablers, which were the preset resources and capabilities allocated by
the company to accomplish desired targets. Proper sustainment of TQM improved the
effectiveness of production resources and their capabilities to support the process and specific
tasks (Georgiev & Ohtaki, 2019; Hilman et al., 2019).
TQM sustainment issues resulted in high cost of quality and external warranties that were
outcomes of failed prevention and correction initiatives. TQM practices had direct positive
relationships with cost related to quality (Kumar & Sharma, 2017; Sila, 2018a). TQM practice
and sustainability issues resulted in inconsistent productivity and performance variables, which
were measures of efficiency and function to accomplish targets. TQM practices had direct
positive relationships with productivity and performance (Sila, 2018a). The impassive employee
behavior captured employee reaction to the TQM sustainment issue while fulfilling operational
targets. Employees behaved sensibly to gain respect and recognition while adhering to
regulations at the workplace (Andrade et al., 2017; Kumar & Sharma, 2017). Issues in sustaining
TQM created unpredictable operational constraints and overwhelmed process enablers that
27
limited the optimization of any part of the manufacturing system or infrastructure to fulfill
operational targets. TQM programs that failed limited the performance parameters of the
business (Kumar et al., 2020; Wei et al., 2019).
Relationships between Concepts, Theories, Actors, and Constructs
The fundamental principle and purpose of TQM was its well‐founded methodology of
constant improvement and development in operational processes for realizing growth in
manufacturing and sales with the optimal level of satisfaction of customers and stakeholders
(Tasleem et al., 2019). The concepts and theories related to TQM methodology confirmed the
firmness of the approach and its requirement for strict adherence to procedures. The rigidity in
TQM practice created tougher knowledge conversion and concept understanding that resulted in
a circle of confusing directions and interpretations of the method (Binci et al., 2019). These
misinterpretations and confusion created incompatibilities with the way leadership executed their
planned strategies and operational targets, most especially when the TQM application slowed
down production line rates and impacted on‐time delivery. The consequential ambiguity of
meaning and understanding produced by employees’ interactions led to different methodology
approach implementations and outcomes (Binci, 2019). This situation related to the research
question on how sustainment of TQM affects the company’s cost and productivity. The effects of
these complexities eroded the commitment from line leaders and team members in performing
TQM procedures while working their best efforts to achieve production targets. This condition
brought up the research question on why there was a TQM sustainability issue in the company
and how this practice aligned with the company’s operational strategies.
The company’s market‐oriented organizational culture where group collaboration
maintained a high level of firm performance by effectively executing competitive strategies and
28
operational targets to gain customer value, employed a pacesetting leadership style that strongly
supported its goals. The company’s high‐paced manufacturing setting created difficulty in
sustaining TQM practices due to challenges in linking the demands of the company’s strategies
and the effect on productivity and workload of line members. The TQM methodology had more
emphasis on operational effectiveness and as much focus on strategic positioning, so it lacked
the incorporation of local operational programs and strategies (Bernardino et al., 2016). This
circumstance led to the research question on how organizational culture affected the TQM
sustainment in the site and how leadership perceived the role of TQM methodology and its
importance in their manufacturing processes.
In the company’s high volume fast‐paced environment, products transferred from one
process to another, rapidly and continuously managed by multi‐skilled resources handling
multiple responsibilities at the same time. The demand for immediate response and results to
address challenges in the workflow was great. There were disagreements between TQM
sustainment and its long‐term results because of its highly involved training requirements, high
deployment time, and excessive focus on standardization, which generated anxiety for immediate
results and perceptions of slow improvement outcomes (Bernardino et al., 2016). This case led to
the research question regarding what TQM activities created operational constraints, and affected
process enablers and overall performance in each department.
Figure 2
Relationships between Concepts, Theories, Actors, and Constructs Diagram
29
The sustainment of TQM methodology and recognition of its concepts and theories had a
significant effect on the actors that practiced the approach while achieving the targeted goals of
their operations. While TQM sustainment could improve quality and performance, some
practices, tools, and methodologies of TQM might not be prevalent and compatible in some
organizational cultures (Bernardino et al., 2016). The resulting TQM sustainability issue not only
created quality and performance problems, but also caused impassive employee behavior
affected by putting more time and work on activities to recover lost productivity, rework quality,
and retrain. The consequent actions between the rigid TQM methodology, organizational culture,
leadership style, and the company’s competitive strategies led to the research problem
concerning the TQM sustainability issue and its effects of poor quality and low productivity.
Summary of the Research Framework
The research framework consisted of the TQM methodology, theories, concepts,
leadership style, organization culture, and strategic goals that influenced the way the research
actors sustained TQM practices in the water‐treatment company. The framework also depicted
TQM Concepts
TQM Theories
Rigid TQM Methodology
Pacesetting Leadership Style
Market-Oriented Organizational Culture
Competitive Strategies and Operational Targets
Executive
Leaders
Manufacturing Line Members
Operations Support Members
Suppliers and Business Partners
TQM Sustainability Issue
High Cost of Quality and External Warranties
Inconsistent Productivity and Performance
Impassive Employee Behavior
Unpredictable Operational Constraints
Overwhelmed Process Enablers
30
the impact of TQM sustainability failure on the cost of quality and external warranties,
productivity and performance, employees’ behavior, and its effects on operational constraints
and process enablers. The structure identified key input constructs such as rigid TQM
methodology, pacesetting leadership style, and market‐oriented organization culture as
contributors to the manner that TQM practitioners sustained the practice in the manufacturing
process. The framework diagram showed the relationship between all the research elements
included in the study. The actors consisted of the executive leaders, manufacturing line members,
operations support members, suppliers and business partners, and warranty administration
managers.
TQM concepts, including proper operation of the TQM system, improved the quality of
products and performance while lowering costs of warranties and field failure rates. Sound TQM
sustainability required rigid adherence to procedures from all practitioners to have a strong
causal effect on organizational performance and cost of quality. TQM and the organizational
culture were interrelated, and when sustained successfully, could influence the content of the
organizational culture. TQM theories include Deming’s model that TQM rested upon 14 points
of management that included the system of profound knowledge and the Shewart Cycle of plan‐
do‐check‐act (Agrawal, 2019b). Crosby’s theory of TQM relied on multiple absolutes of quality
management and a list of fourteen elements to quality improvement (Agrawal, 2019a). The
theories equated quality as the result of collaborative work efforts over the total costs and
stressed the importance of top management support to sustain the TQM system. The theories also
emphasized strict adherence to requirements and focus on stringent requirements for compliance
to its procedures.
31
The concepts and theories related to the TQM methodology confirmed the inflexibility of
the approach and its requirement for strict adherence to procedures. This created complicated
knowledge conversion and concept understanding that resulted in confusion leading to
incompatibilities with the way leadership executed their strategies. This condition brought up the
research question on why there was a TQM sustainability issue in the company and how this
practice aligned with the company’s operational strategies. The company’s high‐paced
manufacturing setting created difficulty in sustaining TQM practices due to challenges in linking
the demands of the company’s strategies. This circumstance led to the research question on how
organizational culture affected the TQM sustainment in the site, and how leadership perceived
the role of TQM methodology and its importance in the manufacturing processes. The
consequent actions between the TQM methodology, organizational culture, leadership style, and
the company’s competitive strategies led to the research problem concerning the TQM
sustainability issue and its effects on quality and performance.
Definition of Terms
The definition of terms in this section aligned with how their particular meaning applied
in the study. This was to ensure that there was correct understanding and interpretation of all
technical terms regarding their use in the context of the study. The definitions of each pertinent
term clarified how its distinctiveness contributed to the focus of the study. The following list
included the terms expressed in this study.
Continuous improvement (CI). A structured and ongoing effort by all members of an
organization in improving products, services, and processes through incremental and
breakthrough improvements to enhance overall performance for the customer (Sunder & Prashar,
2020).
32
Dynamic capability (DC). A firm's ability to identify cost‐effective configurations of
internal competencies and assets so that these could be built and integrated to address or manage
changes in the business operating environment (Schoemaker et al., 2018).
Hard TQM. Hard TQM includes quantifiable techniques such as statistical measurements,
just‐in‐time production, total quality control, and task‐based teams such as quality circles
(Nasim, 2018).
Human resource management (HRM). A management function concerned with hiring,
training, developing, motivating, and efficiently managing people to achieve organizational goals
and objectives (Steffensen et al., 2019).
Impassive behavior. Insensitive and unresponsive response to something that would
generally stimulate interest or emotion. A condition of affectless, emotional detachment, or
absence of any external sign of reaction in action or facial expression that does not attend to the
reality of another person’s thoughts, desire, or substance (Betancourt, 2020).
Knowledge management (KM). A multidisciplinary approach of generating, acquiring,
sharing, managing, and applying the knowledge and information of an organization to achieve its
objectives and gain higher innovation performance for the competitive advantage (Razzaq et al.,
2019).
Lean management (LM). A multi‐dimensional approach that includes a variety of
management practices to managing and organizing initiatives that aim to improve a company's
performance (Abdallah et al., 2019).
Market‐oriented culture. An organizational culture defined by its distinct orientation in
market intelligence, strategic decision‐making, customer‐competitor conceptualization, and inter‐
33
functional coordination aimed at maintaining a high level of firm performance by effectively
executing actions required in gaining customer value (Olabode et al., 2018).
Operational constraints. The weakest link of the manufacturing structure, this constraint
is a medium to long‐term interruption that prevents the organization’s operations system from
achieving its maximum output (Sims & Wan, 2017).
Organizational culture. A complex set of shared values, norms, beliefs, assumptions,
symbols, and expectations that reflect the behaviors and thinking of an organization (Carvalho et
al., 2019).
Pacesetting leadership style. A leadership style that sets the pace for the team, demands a
high level in performance, and expects excellence at all times with minimal supervision
(Campion, 2018).
Plan‐do‐check‐act (PDCA). A dynamic and iterative process consisting of a four‐stage
approach in driving continual improvement on systems, processes, products, and services, and
for resolving problems of operational activities in an enterprise (Prashar, 2017).
Process enablers. Self‐contained functional roles, resources, and core capabilities that
support and sustain the operational needs of the organization’s processes and systems (Malek &
Desai, 2019).
Six Sigma. A method that provides businesses tools to improve the capability of their
business processes by focusing on the critical characteristics of products that are essential for
customers (Chugani et al., 2017).
Soft TQM. TQM’s soft factors include top leadership and human resources, employee
participation, and resources’ process management that have a significant effect on the business
consequences (Ershadi et al., 2019).
34
Sustainability. The ability to maintain processes at a certain level and rate by adopting a
balanced and systemic integration of dynamic changes and improvements to preserve and
enhance overall performance at the same time (Geissdoerfer et al., 2017).
Total quality management (TQM). A management approach employing all members of
the organization to participate in long‐term improvements of product, processes, and services to
satisfy customer expectations (Carmona‐Marquez et al., 2016).
Assumptions, Limitations, Delimitations
The assumptions, limitations, and delimitations in the study relate to the research method,
design, and framework planned for the study. Qualitative researchers had assumptions about the
nature of the realities that existed in the study, the significance of values in research, how
knowledge assertions were vindicated, and the development of research (Creswell & Poth,
2018). The value‐laden nature of qualitative research was plainly recognized. The assumptions
included the existence of multiple realities in the TQM sustainability study and multiple
perspectives from the participants. The limitation was related to the open‐ended nature of
questions used in the qualitative methodology where participants had more control over the
substance or content of the data collected (Robson & McCartan, 2016). Verifying the results
objectively, required seeking alternative explanations to the research results to strengthen the
validity of the findings. The flexible research design for the single bounded case was limited in
scope to the TQM sustainability issue of a specific manufacturing company in the southeastern
United States. The single case study design would not be able to provide a meaningful basis for
generalization of results to the broader population and the outcomes drawn from this bounded
case might not be transferable to other situations (Yin, 2018).
35
Assumptions
The research process strictly followed Covid‐19 protocol and CDC (Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention) guidelines during the interview process of the study. The participants in
the study were full‐time employees of the company that had practiced and experienced TQM
methodologies and its impact on all of its operational processes. The relevance of using the core
organizational teams that practice TQM was understanding how values formed that were
conducive for the approach’s sustainment (Sinha et al., 2016). The researcher assumed
availability of these participants to gain sufficient samples needed in the study and had arranged
accessibility to the TQM practitioners from various departments through their respective value
stream managers. All the participants were free from the Covid‐19 virus and were available for
interview. The researcher assumed that all participants would truthfully answer the research‐
related questions and share their insight and perspective on the impact of TQM sustainment on
their roles. The researcher asked for consent and maintained participants’ privacy and
confidentiality with all their responses to gain their respect and honest responses. One of the
important characteristics of qualitative methods was that they provided a participatory function
to the researcher and required that he or she talked to participants and observed them up close,
capturing their behaviors and lived experiences accurately (Cypress, 2017).
All archived quality and operations’ documents were accessible and available for review
and for data collection. The researcher had access to the documents or had connections to
company resources that could share the documents. The researcher assumed the quality and
accuracy of the archival data and had used different data sets to understand their contents.
Document analysis was combined with other research methods as a means of triangulation to
supplement and corroborate outcomes across different data sets and minimized the impact of the
36
possible biases in a study (Mackieson et al., 2019). The researcher assumed accuracy of the data
collection instruments. A triangulation method using interviews and observations were used to
help understand results. Sufficient time was set aside for interviews and observations across three
shifts and across multiple roles. Observing participants in their natural setting revealed insights
not accessible from other data collection methods, such as structures and behaviors the
participants might not have been aware of themselves while in action (Morgan et al., 2017).
Limitations
This case study was limited to the understanding of TQM sustainability challenges in the
manufacturing industry and will not be generalizable to other business groups in the same
context. A lack of generalization to a larger scale or wider context was a limitation for the use of
qualitative research (Du et al., 2020). The size of sampling was limited to the number of
participants made available from each department in the company and dependent on the response
rate from each subgroup. Adding more participants to the study would mitigate the issue and
would require more time for the interviews to be completed. Considering multiple departments
and use of all three shifts, the number of participants was enough to get the level of data
saturation to draw meaningful conclusions required in qualitative research (Mackieson et al.,
2019).
There might be unknown factors or conditions in the company departments where
participants responses could produce bias in their responses to the study. The participant and
researcher bias were notable limitations in the qualitative study and applying a rigorous approach
to establish validity and reliability was key in overcoming this concern (Paul, 2017). Participants
who had the knowledge and experience of practicing TQM and had the understanding of the
focus of the research area were chosen in order to minimize this limitation (Sinha et al., 2016).
37
Du et al., (2020) suggested taking a systematic approach in data analysis, data triangulation, data
saturation, member checking, electronic recording of interviews, and sustained engagement in
the workplace to promote quality and credibility in the study.
Delimitations
The researcher in this case study explored the single phenomenon bounded by the TQM
sustainment activity in the chosen water‐treatment company and gathered comprehensive
evidence through a variety of data sources specific or unique to its environmental conditions.
The case study design limited the generalizability of the findings and confined the scope of the
research in terms of its research questions (Yin, 2018). This research design delivered the single
case data that led to the identification of relationships, patterns, validation, and confirmation of
theories applied in the study (El‐Akruti et al., 2018). The research framework also delimited the
study since it only captured the relationship between all the research elements included in the
investigation, as well as their interactions, flow of information, and actions between each of
them. The business could be effective in sustaining TQM when each element worked
consistently together, understanding that every participant and their action affects, and is affected
by, everyone in the team (Chen et al., 2016). The chosen concepts with their definitions and
reference to relevant peer‐reviewed literature and existing theories were specific to the study’s
framework (Lock & Seele, 2018). The chosen theories and concepts were only relevant to the
topic of the study and might or might not relate to the broader areas of knowledge considered.
Significance of the Study
The reason for conducting the study was to understand the sustainability issue of the
TQM system in the manufacturing industry, which had resulted in high cost of quality and low
performance. Initiatives to achieve high‐quality performance in the manufacturing industry takes
38
a different approach to sustain it, and the proficiencies in sustaining total quality is reliant on the
level of uncertainty and competitive intensity within the organization (Su & Linderman, 2016).
The organization aimed to understand why it is experiencing conflicts in sustaining its adaptation
of the TQM system and its integration into the site’s business strategies and process management
practices. The study generated research questions to collect evidence of the problem and seek to
understand and discover how organizational leadership, culture, and its strategic goals influence
or contribute to the sustainment issue of TQM. Some businesses still did not understand the use
of TQM methodology, which resulted in confusion over its effectiveness on improving quality
and performance (Sfakianaki, 2019). This condition led to low product quality and productivity,
causing process disruptions, high financial loss, costly lawsuits, and long‐term damage to the
brand reputation and corporate image (Boikanyo & Heyns, 2019). Understanding the relationship
between TQM and the company’s strategic development would explain how and to what degree
investing in TQM methodology contributes to achieving sustainable business objectives
(Andrade Arteaga et al., 2020). Successful sustainment of the TQM should consider the needs
and expectations of stakeholders and customers, the business’ competitive constraint, and CI
requirements (Benzaquen & Charles, 2020).
Reduction of Gaps in the Literature
The study added to the understanding of how the TQM sustainability issue happened in a
particular organization setting that prioritized the pace of production goals to achieve high
financial output. The findings of the study validated and confirmed that the TQM sustainability
issue in the manufacturing industry related to challenges in transforming its quality management
concepts into practices that are not compatible with the current organizational structure noted by
Muruganantham et al. (2018). The study also proved that the adoption and sustainment of TQM
39
required the organizational culture to change, which was a challenge to its rigid methodology
that required firm adherence to its policy (Haffar et al., 2019). The investigation confirmed that
there was a mediating impact of the organizational culture and its related dimensions, such as top
management commitment, leadership knowledge, and employee engagement to the sustainment
of TQM practices. The conclusion of the study supported the claims by Chiarini and Vagnoni
(2017) that quality starts with management leadership who play an important role in providing
resources, setting core values, and creating policies to show employees the importance of TQM
sustainability.
The research contributed to reinforcing the concepts held true by Shafiq et al. (2019) that
quality and productivity become efficient with the proper sustainment of TQM practices, and this
approach provided the basis for continual improvement of the organization (Honarpour et al.,
2017). Regarding practical implications noted in some TQM literatures, the research proved that
there was a significant need for establishing alignment and coherence of TQM practices to the
organizational strategic goals and objectives. The outcome of the analysis confirmed Psomas and
Jaca’s (2016) assertions that successful and effective TQM sustainment had a positive
relationship with the business’ strategic initiatives, tactical drivers, and process enablers used to
improve overall performance. The study extended the work that proves that the sustainment of
TQM had a positive association to quality and financial performance with significant value for
customer focus and continuous improvement (Aquilani et al., 2016; Bouranta et al., 2017).
Implications for Biblical Integration
The significance of integrating the biblical perspective in the study was in its influence on
enhancing the process of collecting, investigating, analyzing, and validating the participants’
experiences in their working environment. The biblical perspective showed that the Bible was
40
not only a religious instruction for the salvation of man, but also a message of redemption (Hah,
2019). The research approach followed four phases of gradual progression of revelation
representing creation, fall, redemption, and restoration. This study reached out to develop the
case with compassion and empathy to bring together pertinent evidence of the issue and
collective strengths that would help transform the participants to serve their true goals to God.
God’s direction was central in this research. Emphasis on the value and worth of the participants
and their actual experiences and involvement were very important in this investigation. The
religious worldview of human nature is rich and complex and the reductionist understanding of
human nature would not be beneficial to the research methodology (Malek, 2019).
Deming’s system of profound knowledge consisted of the understanding of human nature
to solicit active engagement and commitment to the TQM process (Agrawal, 2019b; Chiarini &
Vagnoni, 2017). This theory aligned with the social interactions that TQM participants
maintained, which required care, diplomacy, and sensitivity, in fully understanding the causes of
what drives their behaviors and the outcomes toward the practice. Harmonizing participants with
TQM sustainment practices enhanced values of work life with an increased level of commitment,
job involvement, empowerment, satisfaction, and improved productivity (Patyal et al., 2019). All
these initiatives had the desired results with God’s blessing because His direction never canceled
the human responsibility (Sarkissian & Phelan, 2019). The biblical perspective called for the
organization to act as a steward of God’s creation and provided resources to make the processes
successful. This stewardship implied responsibility to preserve process integrity, personnel
engagement, respect, understanding, compassion, and obligation to care and maintain unbiased
decisions (Malek, 2019).
41
Benefit to Business Practice and Relationship to Cognate
The results of this study presented evidence on how organizational culture influenced the
sustainability of TQM practices that affected the level of quality and the overall performance of
the business. There were multiple reasons that affected top management commitment, and this
investigation showed that coherence of the TQM practices to the organization goals and
objectives were of significant consideration. TQM initiatives focused predominantly on customer
satisfaction and culture change and not on bottom line improvements; top management, at some
point, needed to see tangible improvements in cost savings or increased business, or they would
lose commitment (Anthony et al., 2017). Complementary to this assessment, some companies’
strategic plans focused more on business results and less on business processes, which affected
the TQM initiative’s execution, resource infrastructure, and work prioritization for frontline
practitioners (Sachdev & Agrawal, 2017). The results of the study showed that the organization
could use the information to enhance its operational structure to align strategic goals with TQM
practices in achieving high quality products and excellent performance at the same time.
The findings of the study validated the importance of employee engagement and
involvement in the sustainment of TQM. Management did not consider TQM practitioners as
sustainability experts, but it was exactly their experience in their role and function within the
operational processes that gave rise to knowledge that was indispensable for transforming the
approach towards sustainability (Süßbauer et al., 2019). Full employee participation was vital in
TQM sustainment since it fostered team members’ ownership in handling quality, and reinforced
information sharing and cooperation in solving quality issues (Mendes & Jesus, 2018).
Employees needed to be empowered by appropriate structures to enable transfer of practical
42
experience to assist and stimulate sustainability transformations in various operational processes
(Süßbauer et al., 2019).
Project management is a multifaceted field that includes quality management. The study
concerning the sustainability issues of TQM related to the cognate because it examined quality
systems that affected the end results of projects related to manufacturing processes. Quality
management is an integral part of project management from project inception up to customer
delivery (Jaeger & Adair, 2016). Project managers needed to manage quality by adapting the
policies and procedures to ensure a quality product and service. The balance of the cost and
benefits of quality assurance outweighs the cost associated with low quality in any project.
Inclusion of quality management in project management saves time and money and leads to a
more advanced and efficient project organization (Jaeger & Adair, 2016).
Summary of the Significance of the Study
The significance of the study was to understand the sustainability issue of the TQM
system in a water‐treatment company, which had resulted in high cost of quality and low
performance. Understanding the relationship between TQM and the company’s strategic
development explained how and to what degree investing in TQM methodology contributes to
achieving sustainable business objectives (Andrade Arteaga et al., 2020). Successful sustainment
of TQM should consider all the needs and expectations of stakeholders and customers, as well as
CI requirements (Benzaquen & Charles, 2020). The study added to the understanding of how the
TQM sustainability issue happened in a particular organizational setting that prioritized the pace
of production goals to achieve high financial output. The findings of the study validated and
confirmed that the TQM sustainability issue in the manufacturing industry related to challenges
in transforming its concepts into practices that were not compatible with the current
43
organizational structure as noted by Muruganantham et al. (2018). Harmonizing participants with
TQM sustainment practices enhanced values of work life with an increased level of commitment,
job involvement, empowerment, and satisfaction (Patyal et al., 2019). All these initiatives would
have the desired results with God’s blessing because His direction never cancels the human
responsibility (Sarkissian & Phelan, 2019). Quality management is an integral part of project
management from project inception up to customer delivery (Jaeger & Adair, 2016). The results
of this study presented evidence on how organizational culture influenced the sustainability of
TQM practices that affected quality and performance of the business.
A Review of the Professional and Academic Literature
The academic and professional literatures had shown extensive studies on the
implementation and sustainment of the TQM approach in the manufacturing industry and its
many‐sided outcomes (Nasim, 2018). Generally, the TQM philosophy highlighted the
commitment of the organizational leadership, quality control through use of statistical
techniques, and the continuous improvement in the quality of work processes through employee
training, knowledge sharing, and education (Bugdol, 2020). Narrative literature reviews revealed
multiple elements that contributed to the comprehensive effects of the quality system on process
and business performance of organizations (Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017). The academic and
professional literature analysis concerning TQM fit and compatibility in the manufacturing
industry enabled the researcher to identify multiple thematic themes that contributed to the
sustainability issue of the methodology.
Understanding the relationship between TQM and strategic sustainable development
would explain how and to what degree investing in TQM practices contributed to achieving
strategic sustainable business objectives (Andrade Arteaga et al., 2020). Knowing how to sustain
44
TQM practices and understanding quality goals could provide a basis for planning how to sustain
other business dimensions of performance (Su & Linderman, 2016). This literature review
presented the impact of TQM in business practices, potential causes of its sustainability issue,
concepts, theories, and related studies in its applications in the manufacturing industry. This
section also examined anticipated and discovered themes that were related and potentially
applicable to the study of the TQM sustainability issue as presented in peer‐reviewed
publications.
Business Practices
TQM employed as part of a business management strategy aimed to enhance
organizational performance and improve customer satisfaction by providing a methodology that
promotes high‐quality products and services (Hwang et al., 2020; Kumar & Sharma, 2017;
Nasim, 2018; Qasrawi et al., 2017). The manufacturing industry has long utilized the TQM
approach in processes to address process variations and capability issues, which are responsible
for poor product quality (Metaxas & Koulouriotis, 2019; Parvadavardini et al., 2016; Vouzas &
Katsogianni, 2018). The TQM system involves teamwork, full participation and collaboration of
all stakeholders, customer‐driven quality initiatives, continuous improvement of processes, and
application of quality management tools and techniques (Albuhisi & Abdallah, 2018; McLean et
al., 2017; Nizamidou & Vouzas, 2020; Villanueva, 2018). The authors further added that an
effective implementation and sustainment of TQM relates to quality and performance success for
as long as practitioners adhere properly to its methodology and guiding principles. While TQM
has been effective in enhancing quality and improving performance, its sustainment in the
manufacturing field has involved many challenges (Bouranta et al., 2017; Carmona‐Marquez et
al., 2016; Nizamidou & Vouzas, 2020; Ratty et al., 2018).
45
Efforts to achieve high‐quality performance in manufacturing businesses is different from
what it takes to sustain it, and the capabilities of sustaining quality depend on the level of
environmental uncertainty and competitive intensity (Su & Linderman, 2016). TQM is an
innovative management philosophy that involves pervasive and radical transformation within the
company, and the methodology does not take into consideration how employees will fit and
function in the system (Jalilvand et al., 2018). Studies show that there is a high TQM failure rate
due to lack of resources, insufficient infrastructure, poor mechanism for measuring performance,
lack of teamwork, poor communication, lack of leadership commitment, and minimal employee
engagement (Al‐Ali et al., 2019; Hwang et al., 2020; Jaeger & Adair, 2016; Kaur et al., 2020).
Adoption of TQM practices alone does not automatically lead to substantial improvements in
manufacturers’ productivity, and operational performance improvement methodologies that are
meticulously practiced or technically‐oriented are less likely to produce better results (Tortorell
et al., 2019).
Most firms often encounter difficulties and challenges in making sure there is smooth and
seamless transfer of strategy deployment plans into daily management activities (Sachdev &
Agrawal, 2017). There are discrepancies between theory and practice that create frustration for
TQM practitioners when they recognize the disconnection between the TQM theory and the
quality doctrines introduced by leaders in the organizational environment (Bernardino et al.,
2016). Some organizations still misunderstand and misrepresent TQM, which results in
skepticism of its effectiveness on improving operational results and the success of its
implementation and long‐term sustainment (Sfakianaki, 2019). This situation leads to poor
quality products and services, causing operational disruptions, major financial loss, expensive
46
lawsuits, and long‐term damage to the brand reputation and corporate image (Boikanyo &
Heyns, 2019).
Lean manufacturing methodologies such as TQM were appropriate only to larger
businesses because of their extreme cost and time‐consuming implementation processes
(Georgiev & Ohtaki, 2019; Sila & Walczak, 2017; Toke & Kalpande, 2019). This also applies to
organizations that are short‐term oriented and believe that the sustainment of TQM practices is
costly and not practical in a short‐term strategy despite its long‐term potential to achieve
competitive advantage (Haffar et al., 2019; Sila & Walczak, 2017). The authors also noted that
smaller companies have limited financial and physical resources that restrict the application of
hard TQM elements such as quality circles and Kaizen‐oriented processes. Small manufacturing
companies have a flat and rigid organizational structure, which forces them to spend more time
on repairs and maintenance work rather than continuous improvement related to productivity and
TQM activities (Aquilani et al., 2017; Baidoun et al., 2018). Small business companies have an
informal quality management system, making the required systematic benchmarking and
monitoring system of their existing processes impractical and very challenging (Aamer et al.,
2017). In addition, there is little knowledge about the traceability related to internal and external
cost of poor quality in small businesses compared to large organizations who have more
resources to do the job (Van Schoten et al., 2016).
The problem of fear in TQM implementation and sustainment is that it affects the
allocation of the appropriate project resources that are important in the early stages of quality
team forming processes (Bugdol, 2020). Quality management should not focus on control and
sanctions of employees but should put more emphasis on management of processes (Moccia,
2016). The implementation of the TQM concept and anxiety for immediate results causes
47
unwanted apprehension for employees in operations, which can be distressing if the scope and
impact of changes is significant enough to affect everyone in the organization (Bernardino et al.,
2016; Bugdol, 2020). Previous studies claim that driving out fear in quality management
improves participation, but these investigations failed to define fear in the specific aspects of
TQM such as leadership, commitment, empowerment, engagement, and teamwork (Bernardino
et al., 2016).
TQM requires too much commitment from the team and unrestrained pressure to show
obligation to methodology (Albuhisi & Abdallah, 2018). The condition creates strained
commitment to proceed without adequate preparation and training necessary for the activity.
TQM creates a perceived pressure to achieve high quality and reduce process failure, affecting
the approach and role of participants in maintaining engagement and trust (Vouzas &
Katsogianni, 2018). This requires strong leadership and higher competencies of members in
balancing quality and work (Boikanyo & Heyns, 2019; Psomas & Jaca, 2016; Sila, 2020). There
is lack of knowledge in proper application of TQM and confusion with the different
understanding of empowerment between team leaders and members sustaining the practice
(Carmona‐Marquez et al., 2016; Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017). This creates ambiguity related to
the distribution of power and a low level of competence trust (Qasrawi et al., 2017). The authors
further noted that team members want to have autonomy without fear of losing support, while
leaders do not want to lose their authoritarian powers and demand increased efforts and
responsibility.
Studies showed that many improvement projects using the TQM system do not follow
similar routes because the methodology does not have a precise roadmap or pattern (Chiarini &
Vagnoni, 2017). There are no agreements on one specific set of the most essential TQM practice,
48
even when developments related to TQM are identified or categorized based on different
contexts, methods, and perspectives (Jaeger & Adair, 2016). There is no exclusive explanation
that clarifies the entire picture of TQM (Zwain et al., 2017). There is no formal methodology
associated with TQM that integrates various tools, and no overall strategy to tackle common
problems, which can significantly limit the progress for each project (Anthony et al., 2017).
There is a weak relationship between organizational performance and TQM practices
because it takes time for the methodology to produce benefits and influence organizational
performance (Aladwan & Forrester, 2016; Qasrawi et al., 2017). Lack of involvement of key
strategic partners in quality improvement programs is one of the main barriers that contributes to
the TQM sustainability issue (Kaur et al., 2020; Moccia, 2016). TQM is a holistic concept and
necessitates the motivation of all team members to strive for customer satisfaction, but
organizations offer relatively little consideration to personal relations and human resources
management (HRM) (Baidoun et al., 2018; Moccia, 2016).
The Problem
The general problem to be addressed is the sustainability issue of the TQM system in the
manufacturing industry resulting in high external warranties, internal quality costs, and low
productivity. Manufacturing companies encounter numerous challenges in translating TQM
concepts into application and many of them have not fully realized the financial outputs and non‐
financial benefits of sustaining TQM practices (Muruganantham et al., 2018; Wei et al., 2019).
Challenges in sustaining TQM practices include ambiguous data on process output, inappropriate
measure of performance tracking, and wrong emphasis on solving the problem instead of
recurrence prevention (Sachdev & Agrawal, 2017). The process metrics and measurements are
often not clear and emphasized, making TQM more of a cultural initiative rather than a process
49
improvement initiative, consequently making the projects hard to validate and track effectiveness
(Antony et al., 2017).
The complexity of TQM practices exacerbates other challenges to its sustainment, such
as lack of operative control of manufacturing processes, lack of monitoring of process
improvement, lack of information about quality cost, and no benchmarking of existing processes
(Aamer et al., 2017; Aladwan and Forrester, 2016; Maistry et al., 2017). A performance
measurement system that captures financial and non‐financial indicators to measure performance
comprehensively may not recognize the full impact of TQM benefits in operations (Al‐Ali et al.,
2019; Kaur et al., 2020; Wei et al., 2019). Complex and time‐consuming process measurement
management consists of statistical techniques to reduce the process variation in production
processes and use preventive maintenance to improve quality and machine uptime (Wei et al.,
2019). Practitioners place more concentration on quality inspection and control instead of
prevention, and they struggle to move from a detection‐based system to a prevention‐based
system (Li et al., 2018). An internal quality examination structure must be meticulously set‐up at
every control point of each critical station in the process to ensure conformance to product or
service specifications (Aquilani et al., 2017; Baidoun et al., 2018; Dubey et al., 2018).
Employees believe that the suitability of change on their roles in the business has a significant
influence on the overall change implementation, and the role of appropriateness of TQM
practices and its sustainability depend on other contextual factors (Haffar et al., 2019; Kaur et al.,
2020; Qasrawi et al., 2017).
The company’s strategy formulation focuses more on business results and less on
business processes, which affects the initiative’s execution, resource infrastructure, and work
prioritization for TQM frontline practitioners (Sachdev & Agrawal, 2017). Ranking of
50
operational priorities play a significant role in successful sustainment of TQM practices because
it allows top leadership to easily prepare a workable plan that can optimize the limited available
resources (Aquilani et al., 2017; Baidoun et al., 2018; McAdam et al., 2019). TQM projects
focus primarily on customer satisfaction and culture change and not on bottom line
improvements; management, at some point, needs to see tangible improvements in cost savings
or increased business, or they will lose commitment (Anthony et al., 2017). There should be a
strong relationship existing among strategic factors and performance; without these tactical
drivers and enablers, successful and effective TQM sustainment is impossible (Carmona‐
Marquez et al., 2016; Psomas & Jaca, 2016). Reconfiguring strategic and tactical factors to fit
the organization’s needs and CI expectations will have a positive effect on long‐term TQM
sustainability (Andrade Arteaga et al., 2020; Haffar et al., 2019; Kaur et al., 2020). TQM
sustainment lacks supporting infrastructure, such as inclusion in operation budgets, formal
project selection systems, dedicated internal resources, and formal reporting systems (Anthony et
al., 2017). The organizational structure does not have the proper configuration to allocate the
needed financial and physical resources to support TQM sustainment activities in the long‐term
(Jaeger & Adair, 2016; Maistry et al., 2017).
Organizational culture characterized by high bureaucracy, lack of customer orientation,
and CI has a negative impact on TQM implementation and sustainability (Al‐Ali et al., 2019;
Haffar et al., 2019; Nasim, 2018). TQM promotes changes in the organizational structure (Haffar
et al., 2019; Jiménez‐Jiménez et al., 2019; Sila & Walczak, 2017). However, previous findings
indicate that changes of hierarchies in organizational structures create confusion and mistrust in
the integration of new business management approaches such as TQM and different working
teams (Qasrawi et al., 2017; Talapatra & Uddin, 2019). Many studies highlighted the need to
51
align the managerial culture with the requirements of quality systems to support sustainment of
the approach in the increasing complexity of manufacturing processes (Sinha & Dhall, 2018,
2020). When changes do start to take place in the organization, the sustainment of TQM
programs becomes a challenge because leaders expect overnight changes from a transformation
that usually takes a long‐term journey (Li et al., 2018). Organizations dominated by market and
hierarchal cultures do not support a favorable environment for the successful sustainment of
TQM compared to cultures dominated by adhocracy or the clan system (Panuwatwanich &
Nguyen, 2017). There is lack of understanding and identification of the essential components of
the organizational culture that can either support or restrict the cultural change required by TQM
before implementing the methodology (Sinha & Dhall, 2018, 2020; Talapatra & Uddin, 2019).
All quality activities begin with the leadership level and therefore management leadership
plays an important role in providing resources, setting core values, and creating policies to show
employees the importance of TQM implementation and sustainability (Chiarini & Vagnoni,
2017; Hwang et al., 2020; Wei et al., 2019). Studies have shown that one of the major barriers to
TQM sustainment is management’s lack of commitment to quality, who consider quality
management an extra cost (Bouranta et al., 2017; Vouzas & Katsogianni, 2018). Maintenance of
TQM programs fail because of the lack of commitment from top leadership who fear changes
and loss of power (Bugdol, 2020; Georgiev & Ohtaki, 2019; Qasrawi et al., 2017; Talib et al.,
2019). Top management commitment concerning quality management influences the successful
sustainment of TQM programs on business processes and services (Aquilani et al., 2017; Maistry
et al., 2017; Tsironis, 2018). The authors further noted that failure of the organization to integrate
quality in their strategic objectives plan would hinder the long‐term sustainment of TQM
practices in the business. This type of management estrangement obstructs communication
52
processes and immobilizes decision‐makers to take up any improvement actions (Bugdol, 2020).
The complexity of TQM causes top management to question the suitability of the methodology
in their organization after the implementation, and this complication causes corporate leadership
to lose involvement and commitment (Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017). This condition cascades into
less integrated leaders that are not effective and fully motivated in leading TQM initiatives
(Kumar & Sharma, 2017). This situation, in turn, affects teamwork and employee engagement,
which is essential in the sustainment of TQM practices and its success rate, and often loses its
essence due to numerous turnovers of top management leadership (Aamer et al., 2017; Aquilani
et al., 2017).
Top management should have realistic expectations where they could be able to pursue
immediate gains in the short‐term while understanding that the greater benefits of TQM are
achieved long‐term (Li et al., 2018). A high number of senior managers lack the understanding
of the competitive mechanism of TQM that enables their manufacturing plant to achieve
operational excellence and TQM sustainability (Sahoo, 2018). Training and education are the
major motivating factors for implementing TQM, and their critical role for an effective
sustainment in both service and manufacturing industries is recognized (Mendes & Jesus, 2018).
Integration of knowledge management (KM) that involves acquisition, dissemination, and
application of quality data and information contributes to the long‐term sustainment of TQM
practices in the organization (Honarpour et al., 2017; Marchiori & Mendes, 2020; Yurs et al.,
2017).
An incompatibility in cognitive styles of leaders and participants with TQM focus will
disrupt the effective operations of the organization (Kumar & Sharma, 2017). Although
leadership has a high impact on KM acquisition and application, the role has lower impacts on
53
knowledge sharing of TQM practices and its benefits because of job and power insecurities
(Qasrawi et al., 2017). Knowledge sharing and management are key concerns in evolving a good
quality culture and a functioning quality management system that helps organizations keep up
with dynamic changes (Iqbal & Asrar‐ul‐Haq, 2017; Marchiori & Mendes, 2020). The specific
problem to be addressed is the potential sustainability issue of the TQM system in a water‐
treatment company in the southeastern United States, resulting in high product warranty cost,
field failure rates, and cost of quality.
Concepts
TQM is a customer‐focused business management philosophy that gives emphasis to the
continual enhancement of the processes and management of business systems by means of policy
positioning, resource management strategies, and statistical control (Mendes & Jesus, 2018;
Ratny et al., 2018). Customer focus, CI, management commitment, employee quality
management, teamwork, and customer satisfaction are some of the principles that establish the
foundation of TQM (Fredriksson & Isaksson, 2018; Pantouvakis & Psomas, 2016). Proper
operation of the TQM system improves the quality of products and performance while lowering
costs of warranties and field failure rates; the guidelines provide the basis for continual
advancement of the organization (Honarpour et al., 2017). Experimental investigations made on
the relationship of organizational performance and TQM practices showed that TQM has a
significant influence on organizational performance (Al‐ Saffar et al., 2020; Pham, 2020; Saleh
et al., 2018).
Productivity becomes efficient with the improvement of quality, and failure to maintain
TQM can result in poor quality, which translates to high costs and loss of the competitive
position (Addis, 2019; Boikanyo & Heyns, 2019; Shafiq et al., 2019). TQM has a positive
54
correlation to quality and financial performance with significant value for customer focus, top
management commitment, CI, process control, and supplier management (Ali et al., 2020a;
Aquilani et al., 2016; Bouranta et al., 2017; Patyal & Koilakuntla, 2017). Proper maintenance of
TQM can be a main source of competitive advantage and process excellence for business
organizations while its failure can have opposing effects (Sila & Walczak, 2017). The
sustainment of TQM influences the operational productivity of organizations, which eventually
affects other dimensions of performance such as financial effectiveness, customer satisfaction,
and other stakeholders’ efficiency (Nasim, 2018; Psomas & Jaca, 2016; San Miguel et al., 2016).
Sustainment of TQM practices calls for firm observance of policy and procedures from all
practitioners to have a meaningful contributing effect on operational performance and cost of
quality (Bouranta et al., 2017; Jalilvand et al., 2018; Toke & Kalpande, 2020). The philosophy is
a set of guiding principles for managing a business and involves a mutual collaboration of
everyone in the organization and business partners to satisfy customers’ needs and expectations
(Honarpour et al., 2017; Mendes & Jesus, 2018). TQM is an effective business management tool
that can strengthen existing business strategies and goals when performed correctly and
meticulously (Toke & Kalpande, 2020).
TQM is a strenuous management philosophy that requires full commitment to improve
product quality and processes; otherwise, a halfhearted execution will lead to failure that
translates to high costs and low performance (Al‐Ali et al., 2019; Amin et al., 2017; Jung & Lee,
2016; Psomas & Jaca, 2016). It is a structured approach that necessitates full engagement from
all participants to improve operational effectiveness, quality, and competitiveness of the
company (Mendes & Jesus, 2018). TQM sustainment is successful when there is active
participation from all members at all levels of the organization to meet and exceed quality and
55
performance goals and objectives (Amin et al., 2017; Bugdol, 2020; Hwang et al., 2020; Shafiq
et al., 2019). Teamwork is vital in TQM sustainment since it fosters team members’
responsibility in handling quality initiatives, and reinforces information sharing and
collaboration in solving quality issues that arise (Mendes & Jesus, 2018). Good leadership is
important in providing motivation and encouragement for employees to engage in teamwork and
be successful in their undertakings (Aladwan & Forrester, 2016; Jaeger & Adair, 2016; McAdam
et al., 2019).
TQM and the organizational culture are interrelated, and the latter has an influence on
behaviors and attitudes toward successful quality management and implementation (Durana et
al., 2019; Patyal et al., 2019). The fundamental support of the organizational culture is the
principal requirement for the sustainment of TQM practices in business processes (Sinha &
Dhall, 2018, 2020). Organizational culture has a critical role in giving recognition and enabling
TQM initiatives and it is one of the most essential variables in the success or failure of TQM
sustainability (Ali et al., 2020b). Organizational culture creates the climate that influences
quality management practices and affects TQM implementation in goal setting, team integration,
customer value creation, performance, innovation, cross‐functional collaboration, member
participation, and recognition (Toke & Kalpande, 2019). Harmonizing organization culture and
TQM practices enhances values of employee work life with an increased level of commitment,
motivation, job involvement, empowerment, satisfaction, and improved productivity (Patyal et
al., 2019). Proper management and understanding of the interconnectedness of organizational
culture and the TQM system helps enhance organizational effectiveness (Duran et al., 2019;
Toke & Kalpande, 2019).
56
Successful sustainment of TQM influences the organizational culture’s direction, and
teams adjust accordingly as they are trained in their new roles (Nasim, 2018). This relationship
develops a collective responsibility, which incorporates shared values and commitment to quality
(Bendermacher et al., 2017). Subsequently, the content of the organizational culture influences
the TQM system and its functionality, but it demands a complex cultural shift from the
traditional approach to management focusing on the way to a total quality mindset (Jung & Lee,
2016; Nasim, 2018). TQM requires a radical cultural change from traditional management to CI
management style in an organization (Haffar et al., 2019). Sustainment of the TQM concept is
not an easy undertaking because it necessitates a total change in organizational culture, shifting
of responsibility to management, and constant participation of members in the quality
improvement process (Nasim, 2018; Panuwatwanich & Nguyen, 2017). TQM sustainment
requires changes to the shared assumptions, frames of reference, and understandings that most
organizations have developed through interactions with their environment and altering these
established perspectives can create a challenge to TQM sustainability (Andrade Arteaga et al.,
2020).
TQM and KM are synergistically related, and their interaction has a positive effect on
their standard principle in both directions where development in one construct leads to
development in the other (Green et al., 2019; Honarpour et al., 2017; Marchiori & Mendes, 2020;
Zwain et al., 2017). The interconnectedness of the two processes supports an effective means to
enhance idea generation, problem‐solving skills, and effectiveness in taking corrective and
preventive measures to increase process or service quality and efficiency (Marchiori & Mendes,
2020; Yusr et al., 2017). TQM application positively relates to the improvement of learning
organizations and supports creation of an environment that empowers team members to
57
efficiently recognize and solve problems (Tortorella et al., 2019). The authors further added that
KM and TQM complement each other when properly planned and implemented in a process.
Theories
Deming’s theory of TQM rested upon 14 points of management that include the system
of profound knowledge and the Shewart Cycle of plan‐do‐check‐act (PDCA) (Agrawal, 2019b;
Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017; Sila & Walczak, 2017). In this 14‐point program, utilization of
teamwork and employee participation in decision‐making achieves business systems’
optimization (Polese et al., 2019). It is a network of mutually dependent components that
function together to achieve the objective of the system proficiently and productively
(Fredriksson & Isaksson, 2018). The entire organization performs this set of systematic activities
to accomplish its objectives efficiently and effectively in delivering products and services with a
level of quality that satisfies customers at the right time and price (Sachdev & Agrawal, 2017;
Toke & Kalpande, 2019). The theory outlines the significance of top management support to
sustain the TQM system and links quality as the product of collaborative work efforts of the
organization over the total costs (Dilawo & Salimi, 2019; Mendes & Jesus, 2018). This expanded
view relies on CI for assessing the satisfaction–expectation gap, and at the same time, evaluates
employee and customer participation in the process (Benzaquen & Charles, 2020; Polese et al.,
2019).
Top management commitment significantly affects job satisfaction and is extremely
important for TQM sustainment in the organization’s processes (Arunachalam & Palanichamy,
2017; Mehralian et al., 2016; Ratny et al., 2018; Tsironis, 2018). Deming’s system of profound
knowledge consists of the understanding of human nature to solicit active engagement and
commitment to the TQM process (Agrawal, 2019b; Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017; Sila & Walczak,
58
2017; Villanueva, 2018). Employee involvement provides high performance work structures and
incorporates CI efforts with typical business operations (Arunachalam & Palanichamy, 2017;
Iqbal & Asrar‐ul‐Haq, 2018). Total participation is a key factor in the sustainment of TQM
because it inspires employees to innovate and help the company to maintain its long‐term vision
and planning (Amin et al., 2017; Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017; Dahlgaard et al., 2019; Psomas &
Jaca, 2016). The involvement requires employees’ full commitment and a shared mission as
motives for attaining efficient endeavors for CI (Boikanyo & Heyns, 2019; Phan et al., 2019;
Polese et al., 2019). TQM requires that all employees are engaged and involved in helping
restructure the organizational culture that supports the practice of sharing the responsibility and
accountability for providing quality products and services to customers (Alshourah, 2020, 2021;
Boikanyo & Heyns, 2019).
Crosby’s theory of TQM relies on multiple absolutes of quality management culminating
in a list of 14 elements to quality improvement (Agrawal, 2019a; Polese et al., 2019). Prevention
of defects and conformance to expectation or specification defines quality; result measurement
concentrates on the financial cost of quality (Benzaquen & Charles, 2020). Crosby’s 14‐quality‐
steps framework is centered on the importance of top management’s role in organizing
operations, nurturing employee education and training, and supporting the real‐time
implementation of actions (Polese et al., 2019). Quality management, in this perspective, is a
dynamic and continuous monitoring process of CI (Kaur et al., 2020; McLean et al., 2017; Phan
et al., 2019). The theory highlights the quality requirements for prevention and the result reflects
the cost of processing nonconformity, and zero defects (Jalilvand et al., 2018). Conformance to
product or service requirements defines quality and must be examined and measured based on
59
product specifications and tangible targets or metrics rather than based on opinions, beliefs, or
experience (Sunder, 2016).
Application of the TQM methods, tools, and techniques requires dedicated and
committed resources, and most companies do not have a strategic roadmap complemented with
suitable methods and techniques to ensure success with their operations (Chiarini & Vagnoni,
2017; Dahlgaard‐Park et al., 2018). Managers need to have an in‐depth understanding of the
importance of building a suitable organizational culture with a focus on the TQM basic
principles (Álvarez‐García et al., 2016; Haffar et al., 2019; Nasim, 2018). Leadership has a key
role in HRM to enrich job motivation and subsequently enhance performance effectiveness
(Polese et al., 2019). A lack of understanding of how the process elements fit together can lead to
the disintegration of management control that may result in a lack of universal application of
TQM on the company’s processes. The manufacturing process integrates quality management
with pure focus on the customers and productivity (Arunachalam & Palanichamy, 2017). The
central purpose of TQM is to meet customer requirements regardless of whether they are external
or internal customers (Ratny et al., 2018). Customer satisfaction is the primary objective of the
quality management system, with heavy emphasis on reduction of defects and improving
products and services (Aquilani et al., 2017; Khurshid et al., 2018).
Constructs
The selected research constructs included the characteristics of the participants and the
elements of the TQM sustainability issue. The rigidity of the TQM methodology requires strict
adherence to policies and procedures. Any deviation from the TQM approach affects the level of
quality and performance (Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017; Gözükara et al., 2019). TQM has developed
into a philosophy that integrates both the hard and soft aspects of quality management for
60
effective execution of the methodology (Arunachalam & Palanichamy, 2017; Jusoh et al., 2018;
Ratny et al., 2018). The connection between hard and soft features in TQM methodology is
business process management, since the TQM needs a base framework in which social factors
can develop, operate, and be successful (Al‐Ali et al., 2019; Jiménez‐Jiménez et al., 2019;
Nasim, 2018). Soft TQM constructs such as commitment, top management leadership, strategic
quality management, employee involvement, and empowerment are critical to the success of
TQM sustainability in the organization (Albuhisi & Abdallah, 2018; Georgiev & Ohtaki, 2019;
Hwang et al., 2020; Jiménez‐Jiménez et al., 2019).
The pacesetting leadership style is an established attribute of the management approach
that can affect the sustainability of TQM in the manufacturing process. The influence of
leadership style on employees’ involvement and participation in quality assurance activities has
significant impact (Kumar & Sharma, 2017; Moccia, 2016; Psomas & Jaca, 2016; Sila, 2018b).
TQM leaders motivate, and their behavior and leadership style are the means in which business
management systems such as TQM are carried out successfully (Bendermacher et al., 2017;
Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017; Kumar & Sharma, 2017). Effective leaders encourage proactive
behaviors in their employees that support and enhance CI, which is one of the fundamental
philosophies of TQM (Moccia, 2016; Nizamidou & Vouzas, 2020). These leaders are key drivers
of quality culture expansion through their aptitude to influence appropriate resource distribution,
simplify roles, assign responsibilities, and align the workforce with business process
management objectives (Ali et al., 2020a; Bendermacher et al., 2017). The significance of the
leadership role in sustaining TQM is by giving employees confidence in their job functions and
by shifting the traditional role of managing from authoritarian supervision to leading, guiding,
and training of team members (Al‐ Saffar et al., 2020).
61
The market‐oriented organizational culture is a preexisting attribute of the company that
can affect TQM sustainability. Market‐orientation allows businesses to develop better products
and services by producing greater customer value and customer satisfaction. Market‐oriented
companies create potential maintainable competitive advantage through information sharing and
forming coordination among all the functional departments within the business (Ali et al.,
2020a). The relationship between business cultural orientation and the sustainment of TQM
practices is substantial in influencing quality and performance in the organization (Gözükara et
al., 2019; Haffar et al., 2019).
TQM practices can affect the preset company’s strategies and operational target
variables. Quality management is a customer‐focused process and aims for continual support of a
company’s strategic goal and objectives with its practices (Albuhisi & Abdallah, 2018;
Bevilacqua et al., 2017). Proper sustainment of TQM improves the effectiveness of production
resources and their capabilities to support the process and specific tasks tied to reject reduction
and higher productivity (Boikanyo & Heyns, 2019; Georgiev & Ohtaki, 2019; Hilman et al.,
2019). TQM sustainment issues result in high cost of quality and external warranties that are
outcomes of failed prevention and correction initiatives. TQM practices have direct positive
relationships with cost related to quality (Albuhisi & Abdallah, 2018; Sila, 2018a). Continuous
quality improvement requires a rigid benchmarking of existing business processes to improve
overall performance (Aamer et al., 2017; Cho & Linderman, 2019). This allows cost of quality to
be controlled, reduced, and managed for a successful sustainment of TQM (Jaeger & Adair,
2016).
TQM practice and sustainability issues result in inconsistent productivity and
performance issues, which in turn affect the overall business targets set by the organization.
62
TQM practices have direct positive relationships with productivity and organizational
performance (Kumar & Sharma, 2017; Sila, 2018a). TQM provides legacy tools and methods
that work mainly to reduce errors, waste, and inefficient procedures to improve process
performance and productivity (Alkhaldi & Abdallah, 2019, 2020). Giving a full commitment to a
TQM setting, leaders should organize and synergize employees’ actions to achieve consistent
productivity and performance targets while adhering to agreed quality standards and work
procedures (Pham, 2020).
The impassive employee behavior captures employee reaction to the TQM sustainment
issue while fulfilling operational targets. Employee behavior is the attitude or actions of an
employee in an organization and is affected by factors related to job satisfaction, commitment,
and job stress that characterize the main reasons of employees’ affective attitude construct
(Gaiardelli et al., 2019). Employees behave sensibly to gain respect and recognition while
adhering to strict company regulations and policies at the workplace (Andrade, 2017; Kumar &
Sharma, 2017). Employees’ core virtues represent the essential enabling elements to overcome
the resistance to change that can successfully implement and sustain the TQM programs properly
and effectively (Aquilani et al., 2019; Maistry et al., 2017; McAdam et al., 2019; Moccia, 2016).
TQM promotes and supports full involvement of employees and creates participatory strategies
that enhance the cooperative performance of employees and their behavior towards initiatives
and decision‐making processes to achieve business targets and objectives (Al‐ Saffar et al., 2020;
Baidoun et al., 2018).
Issues in sustaining TQM will create unpredictable operational constraints and
overwhelm process enablers that limit the optimization of any part of the manufacturing system
or infrastructure to fulfill operational targets (Jaeger & Adair, 2016). TQM programs that fail
63
restrict the performance parameters of the business from reaching their planned goals (Kumar et
al., 2020a; Wei et al., 2019). The operational performance of the business includes high‐level
quality and process leanness in terms of equipment capability, speed of delivery, flexibility,
adaptability to change, product or service dependability, and overall costs (Gaiardelli et al.,
2019). The effectiveness of these capabilities on product processes and service depends on the
successful sustainment of TQM practices.
Related Studies
Six Sigma Quality and Lean Management (LM) are quality models of different
alternative TQM roadmaps since all of these methodologies apply to both manufacturing and
services to improve safety, quality, and process performance by reducing costs and increasing
revenue (Fredriksson & Isaksson, 2018). LM and Six Sigma are leading TQM tools for
performance improvement in organizations with the appropriate infrastructure built on change
culture and leadership (Shokri et al., 2016). Even though there are differences in definitions of
TQM, Six Sigma, and Lean, their goals and objectives seem to be common in application to both
manufacturing and services in any industry (Sreedharan et al., 2018). These related
methodologies whose main focus is on process control and improvements have their own
challenges and sustainability issues.
Six Sigma principle, which integrates with TQM practices with a set of infrastructure and
quality management methodology, rests on decreasing errors by reducing variation on process
parameters that are critical to quality (Patyal & Koilakuntla, 2017). Six Sigma aims to reduce
variations in a process and its primary objective in projects is to decrease variations to the range
of 3.4 defects per million (Asif, 2019). From the project management perspective, Six Sigma is a
methodical technique and a tool‐kit for reducing or eliminating non‐conformances in production
64
processes (Sreedharan et al., 2018). All TQM philosophies except for the commitment
requirement are similar in the Six Sigma approach (Fredriksson & Isaksson, 2018). Comparable
to TQM, proper application of Six Sigma initiatives improves process performance, promotes
customer satisfaction, and enhances innovation capability (Antony et al., 2017; He et al., 2017).
Studies showed that over 60% of Six Sigma projects fail to provide the desired results
because they were unsuccessful in demonstrating a longer‐term impact and organizations were
pulling back from initiatives due to mounting costs (Antony & Sony, 2019, 2020). Similar to
TQM, Six Sigma sustainment issues are associated with a substantially high cost of
implementation at the initial phase and the reluctance of businesses to support continuing
spending due to limited funds (Čaušević & Avdagić‐Golub, 2019; Kumar et al., 2016; Ullah et
al., 2017; Vendrame Takao et al., 2017). Improper implementation and sustainment of Six Sigma
negatively affects employees’ morale, engagement, and customer satisfaction, indicating that
there are softer variables in the methodology that affect its delivery (Antony et al., 2018; Shamsi
& Alam, 2018; Shokri et al., 2016). The appropriateness of the Six Sigma application centers on
the approach’s capability to reduce variation in processes and understanding the trade‐off
between the degree of variability reduction and the potential accruing benefits is important for its
sustainment (Antony & Sony, 2019, 2020). The authors further noted that variation reduction is
not the only foundational concept in organizational inefficiency and should not be the sole focus
for productivity and performance.
Implementation of Six Sigma requires high investment in training of both top leadership
and employees mainly influenced by lack of accepted standards in knowledge sharing or transfer
of lessons learned (Čaušević & Avdagić‐Golub, 2019; Hussain et al., 2019). Failure of the Six
Sigma approach materializes when there is no alignment and joint‐optimization of existing core
65
practices and behavioral values in the organization (Antony et al., 2018; Asif, 2019). Research
found that lack of management support, insufficient quality maturity of the business, lack of
physical resources, and deficient change management practices contributed to the sustainability
issue in Six Sigma project long‐term capability (Albliwi et al., 2017; Hudnurkar et al., 2019).
Involvement from top leadership needs to happen to ensure the success of the methodology by
endorsing it as a way of making things happen as opposed to treating it as a process
improvement tool (Albliwi et al., 2017; Čaušević & Avdagić‐Golub, 2019). Top leadership can
reflect this awareness in the organizational norms, values, and culture that management stands
for and supports.
Six Sigma teams do not have the knowledge to optimize the resources available by not
using existing infrastructure to its full capability and this may create non‐value‐added costs to the
initiatives (Hussain et al., 2019). Lack of knowledge and awareness of the approach’s philosophy
hampers the effectiveness of the initiatives and its intended outcomes; this can also lead to poor
time management of the project and unproductive use of resources (Albliwi et al., 2017; Kumar
et al., 2016; Nguyen et al., 2017). The implementation of Six Sigma concepts and practices
requires well‐organized knowledge coordination and team management at several levels of the
organization. Lack of communication and synchronization among multifunctional team members
and departments hamper application of the approach (Antony et al., 2018; García‐Alcaraz et al.,
2019, 2020). Poor or indistinct Six Sigma strategic plans, lack of communication, physical
resources, and disregard of the role of employee involvement and engagement in the
implementation and sustainment process contributes to intangibility of project outcomes (Antony
et al., 2018).
66
There are quality‐based Six Sigma projects that require advanced equipment, modern
facilities, and innovative technology to fulfill business goals and customer needs, and smaller
organizations cannot provide most of these requirements (Hussain et al., 2019). There is no
sufficient mechanism to identify and trace activities for proper implementation of Six Sigma, and
there is confusion about the impact of the project’s benefits because of the many different ways
of how its performance is measured (Cherrafi et al., 2017; Nguyen et al., 2017; Sunder, 2016).
There is lack of understanding about the impact of hard and soft skills in the methodology and
insufficient integration of change management that contributes to teams’ resistance to change, an
unsupportive organizational culture, and unsustainable results (Antony et al., 2018). The leading
misconstruction of Six Sigma, which also leads to its limitation, is the consideration of the
methodology as a statistical toolkit as opposed to a philosophy of continual improvement
(Sunder, 2016).
LM refers to the application of Lean practices and principles to optimize business
processes, improve quality, reduce waste, enhance innovation capability, increase productivity,
and add more value for the customer (Abolhassani et al., 2016; Hallam & Contreras, 2016; Resta
et al., 2017). Fredriksson and Isaksson (2018) found that five out of six TQM principles are
comparable in LM methodology. Similar to TQM, although a number of studies found that Lean
has significantly contributed to the success of large organizations, the majority of smaller
enterprises found several barriers such as a lack of tangible benefits and issues with sustainment
(Abu et al., 2019). LM strives for process perfection and it employs a systematic process for
achieving zero defects and control of inventory by constantly upgrading continuous process flow
and optimizing customers’ satisfaction and experience (Modranský et al., 2020). Lean teams are
always seeking ways to improve services and manufacturing processes by concentrating on
67
business components that add more value for the client and remove non‐value‐added activities
that create unnecessary labor and cost to the business (Abolhassani et al., 2016). LM encourages
incremental improvements of activities in existing organizational settings to remove variation,
waste, and over‐burden (known as Muri, Muda, and Mura, respectively) to provide more value to
the consumers (Sreedharan et al., 2018).
LM application is constrained exclusively to improve processes in manufacturing cells
and has very limited effect on developing the processes of the product (Marodin et al., 2016).
Companies practicing LM lack the practical training, technical knowledge of the methodology,
and the understanding of the long‐term benefits of the practice, which also contributes to change
resistance by its employees (Abolhassani et al., 2016; Bajjou & Chafi, 2018; Coetzee et al.,
2019; Pearce et al., 2018). Barriers to LM were due to lack of knowledge about lean practices
specific to the industry, inadequate financial support, lack of a long‐term philosophy, absence of
a lean culture in the organization, and an inexperienced workforce (Al‐Aomar & Hussain, 2018;
Bajjou & Chafi, 2018; Pearce et al., 2018). Failure and confusion to recognize, demonstrate, and
verify the effects of the long‐term sustainability of LM added to the challenges in the adoption of
the methodology (Henao et al., 2019). There is a lack of management commitment,
understanding, competence, and support in adopting LS sustainability practices because of
inadequate knowledge or familiarity to verify results (Al‐Aomar & Hussain, 2018; Chaple et al.,
2018; Khaba & Bhar, 2018).
Insufficient quality management practices along with process management issues related
to logistics and material workflow contribute to the sustainment issue of LM (Kurilova‐
Palisaitiene et al., 2018). Limited employee engagement and involvement are driven by failure of
leadership to recognize and harness frontline recommendations for process improvement
68
initiatives (Khaba & Bhar, 2018; Ufua et al., 2018). Lack of clarity on LM projects do not give
the project members the overall view of what and how their role contributes to the overall picture
of the project, so subtasks cannot be optimized for maximum effect (Modranský et al., 2020;
Sunder, 2016). Some businesses use LM as a quick fix for underlying issues and there is a lack
of system‐thinking philosophies across various segments in the organization that can reduce the
optimization of the approach in improving specific process performance (Anthony et al., 2018;
Sunder, 2016).
LM lacks a definitive theory to support its methodology and practices, and more field
data needs to be collected to improve theory‐driven Lean management methods and knowledge‐
transfer from iterative processes that continually adjust for improvement (Miao et al., 2019;
Sunder, 2016). There are significant restrictions in allocating full‐time dedication to project
teams who are also part of other teams in addition to their regular jobs. It is hard to commit all
the LM work time just to one project (Modranský et al., 2020). The rigid nature of the
organizational structures can impede creativity, exploration, risk‐taking, and experimentation.
Executing out‐of‐the box types of LM thinking may not be acceptable in this environment, since
all must follow predefined guidelines and practices (Edison et al., 2018). LM’s nature of
producing small incremental improvements instead of one meaningful breakthrough for
excellence does not work well with the necessity of creating much‐needed improvements at
many organizations. Similar to Six Sigma, if LM were to be considered as a toolkit instead of a
mindset or philosophy for consistent improvement, the methodology will lead to failure in its
application and sustainability (Sunder, 2016). Challenges in initiative sustainability is a strategic
issue addressed only by transitioning from the formal implementation approach to a full
69
integration of the practice into the day‐to‐day business way of life; the infrastructure and
accountabilities should be in place (Anthony et al., 2017).
Table 1
Related TQM Models
Method Description of Sustainability Challenges
Six Sigma • Poor long‐term impact, mounting cost, and incompatibilities in
application (Antony & Sony, 2019, 2020)
• High cost of initial implementation and reluctance of businesses
to support continuing spending (Vendrame Takao et al., 2017)
• Improper implementation and sustainment of the methodology
affects soft variables (Shamsi & Alam, 2018)
• Conflict in the appropriateness of the application in business
processes (Antony & Sony, 2019, 2020)
• No coherence to the organization’s existing core practices and
behavioral values (Asif, 2019)
• Lack of accepted standards in knowledge sharing or transfer of
lessons learned (Čaušević & Avdagić‐Golub, 2019)
• No alignment and joint‐optimization of existing core practices
and behavioral values in the organization (Antony et al., 2018;
Asif, 2019)
• Lack of management support, insufficient quality maturity of the
business, lack of physical resources, and deficient change
70
management practices (Hudnurkar et al., 2019)
• Lack of knowledge in optimizing resources and not using current
infrastructure to full capability (Hussain et al., 2019)
• Lack of knowledge and awareness of the approach’s philosophy
and poor time management (Albliwi et al., 2017)
• Lack of communication and synchronization among team
members and departments (Antony et al., 2018)
• Poor strategic plans and disregard of employee involvement and
engagement in the implementation and sustainment process
(Antony et al., 2018)
• Lack of advanced equipment, modern facilities, and innovative
technology to fulfill initiatives (Hussain et al., 2019)
• No sufficient mechanism to identify and trace activities for
proper implementation of projects (Cherrafi et al., 2017)
• Misconstruction of Six Sigma as a statistical toolkit as opposed
to a philosophy of continual improvement (Sunder, 2016)
Lean Management • Inadequate effect on developing product processes (Marodin et
al., 2016).
• Lack of training, knowledge, and the understanding of the long‐
term benefits of the practice (Abolhassani et al., 2016)
• Limited financial support, lack of a lean culture in the
organizations, and an inexperienced workforce (Al‐Aomar &
71
Hussain, 2018)
• Failure to verify and recognize long‐term benefits and outcomes
(Henao et al., 2019)
• Lack of management commitment, competence, and support in
adopting LS sustainability practices (Chaple et al., 2018)
• Insufficient quality and process management practices
(Kurilova‐Palisaitience et al., 2018)
• Limited employee engagement and poor recognition from
leadership (Khaba & Bhar, 2018)
• Lack of clarity on projects do not give the members the overall
view of how their role contributes to the bigger picture of the
project (Modranský et al., 2020; Sunder, 2016)
• Lack of system‐thinking philosophies in the organization that can
reduce the optimization of the approach (Sunder, 2016)
• Lack of definitive theory to support its methodology and
practices (Miao et al., 2019; Sunder, 2016)
• Significant restrictions in allocating full‐time dedication to
project teams who were also part of other teams in addition to
their regular jobs (Modranský et al., 2020)
• The rigid nature of the organizational structures can impede LM
creativity, exploration, and experimentation (Edison et al., 2018)
• Use of LM as a statistical toolkit as opposed to a philosophy of
72
continual improvement (Sunder, 2016)
Anticipated and Discovered Themes
Associated with the broader TQM philosophy, CI represents a vital tool in the
manufacturing industry used to enhance customer satisfaction and improve the competitiveness
and performance of a company (Ahmad et al., 2017; Hailu et al., 2018; Tasleem et al., 2019). CI
by TQM means incrementally improving people, capabilities, processes, and systems to prevent
and avoid nonconformities (Kumar & Sharma, 2018; Tavana et al., 2020). Kumar and Sharma
(2018) noted that the Deming improvement cycle of PDCA is a commonly used continuous
quality improvement model, which consists of four repetitive steps for CI and learning.
Challenges in CI initiatives affect TQM sustainability. CI and learning are the concepts of
persistently pursuing means to improve operational processes, which involves recognizing
benchmarks of best‐in‐class practices and instilling a sense of worker ownership of the process
(Moccia, 2016; Saleh et al., 2018). Benefits from continuous quality improvement initiatives will
result in gradual changes in culture or sharing of lessons learned between teams in the
organization (Backlund & Sundqvist, 2018; Simmert et al., 2019). CI accomplishments are
extensive and broad in scope, continuous, and incremental. The methodology will have to evolve
continually for the process to be sustainable (Brindle, 2020). Support of management across all
levels in the organization is indispensable to the accomplishment of all CI initiatives. Without
top management and employee commitment to continuous improvement, the process will fail
(Backlund & Sundqvist, 2018).
CI efforts have a high failure rate due to a systematic focus on success factors instead of
directly addressing failures in the business processes or service (McLean et al., 2017). The
73
authors also noted that the organizational culture significantly affects the environmental structure
that supports the CI activities, and this could influence employee involvement and engagement.
Management involvement in CI projects is marginal because of concerns for capacity needs and
flexibility, consequently limiting their support for sustaining future initiatives (Newham et al.,
2016; Talib et al., 2019). Lack of financial resources and commitment from workers are the main
barriers to CI because top management treats the practice as an optional program only when
resources become available and postpones it when the workload is high (Ahmad et al., 2017;
McLean et al., 2017). The authors further claimed that there is lack of recognition of CI
initiatives from top management and most workers perceive the practice as an added workload to
their existing jobs.
Challenges to CI practices include minimal cooperation from team members, improper
integration of the team in CI activities, inadequate management support, low employee
involvement, and lack of KM in the business to initiate CI projects (Ahmad et al., 2017; Stelson
et al., 2017; Tavana et al., 2020). To maintain sustainability of the approach, effective quality
improvement requires that short‐term transformation be incorporated expeditiously into a long‐
term strategy progression (Brindle, 2020). Successful CI activity places the worker as an active
participant of the change and not as a passive element, thereby improving job autonomy and
significance, with positive consequences of gaining higher commitment, reducing stress, and
achieving greater satisfaction (Gaiardelli et al., 2019). Appraising the effect of components of
continuous quality improvement initiatives can deliver evidence of their benefits, but evaluations
are time‐consuming, expensive, and intently focused (Brindle, 2020). The author further added
that sustaining continuous quality improvement initiatives needs trustworthy data, confirmation
of benefit and value, measurable results, and investment in an organizational culture that
74
preserves quality improvement. CI project teams frequently initiate resolving problems anew
instead of learning from experiences of earlier projects, and “re‐inventing the wheel” means lost
opportunity to progress or develop achievements from one CI project to another (Backlund &
Sundqvist, 2018).
Sustaining a consistent quality performance requires a more dynamic approach where
companies need to continually sense and adapt to variations to preserve their performance level
(Anthony et al., 2017). The concept of dynamic capability (DC) delivers an overarching
justification about how firms’ capabilities mutually sustain quality performance (Su &
Linderman, 2016). The company’s capability to incorporate, transform, and reconfigure external
and internal core proficiencies to address rapidly varying business environments creates patterns
from existing practices and learnings that enables it to adapt operations through changes in the
market (Wollersheim & Heimeriks, 2016). Differentiated from ordinary capabilities that
determine how a company functions daily by enabling operational effectiveness, DC empowers
the company to sense and seize new business opportunities and convert these to new value‐
creating strategies by transforming ordinary capabilities (Laaksonen & Peltoniemi, 2018). Some
studies explained that DC is the right strategy to maintain the sustainability of a business
management process in a company (Putri et al., 2018). According to Kumar et al. (2020b), the
dimensions of DC and quality management capabilities have a positive impact on performance;
DC assists a business in sustaining its competitiveness and effectiveness in the market’s dynamic
environment.
DC includes sensing, seizing, and reconfiguring to transform existing information to
produce new knowledge, which contributes to a company’s adaptability to change so they can
sustain a consistent quality performance (Laaksonen & Peltoniemi, 2018; Su & Linderman,
75
2016). DC helps sustainment of new processes by measuring new strategic designs and
initiatives to aid in making a quick and timely decision on matters like resource allocation,
organizational structure changes, and alliances (Putri et al., 2018). Businesses constantly develop
their products and processes to adapt to customers’ changing needs with their ability to
reconfigure timely. This adaptation helps TQM practices to positively influence companies’
innovation performance to adjust to customers’ varying demands (Laaksonen & Peltoniemi,
2018; Yusr, 2016). It is a strategic function of executives to develop DC to reconfigure
effectively whenever any change occurs and to keep up with the needs of re‐allocation and re‐
combination of the organization’s assets and physical resources (Putri et al., 2018). Research
found that teams with high DC awareness exhibit a collective efficiency of coordination, utilize
resources more efficiently, demonstrate superior reflection in action, and depend on more
suitable and structured actions compared to teams with low DC responsiveness (Wollersheim &
Heimeriks, 2016). DC’s quality dimensions also include the capacity to associate individual
knowledge into new functional capabilities and have the coordinating ability to distinguish,
assemble, and distribute resources by enabling the distribution of process intelligence across the
business unit (Kumar et al., 2020b).
DC has a positive association with quality management and other related fields, such as
HRM in the realization of adaptive capabilities in companies that are capable of enduring in
hypercompetitive business environments (Gutierrez‐Gutierrez et al., 2018). The authors further
noted that with this logic, quality management could play an important role not only in day‐to‐
day activities of the business but also in its long‐term strategic orientation for success. Studies
proposed that DC is distinctive to the company and cannot be examined by comparing their
utilization between firms. In contrast, studies also found that DC is comparatively similar across
76
companies in the form of “best practices” (Laaksonen & Peltoniemi, 2018). However, the
authors claimed that irrespective of their differences regarding the uniqueness of DC, the
treatment of DC as a business‐level performance variable is more prevalent in organizations. DC
is another course of action for optimizing existing organizational resources, advancing the
quality management position, and improving competitive advantage by integrating means that
help the company effectively adjust to dynamic changes in the overall business environment
(Maleki‐Minbashrazgah & Shabani, 2019). The nature of DC as a dependable mechanism for
resources adaptation comes from an organization’s systematic ability to renew the company’s
endowment of resources by forming new resources and reintroducing the mix of both external
and internal resources (Salvato & Vassolo, 2018). The authors claimed that in contrast, a
business whose adaptation is fragmented, comprising of intermittent acts of resourcefulness or
ad‐hoc problem solving to resolve quality issues only as they become known, is not performing
an appropriate DC.
Recent studies discovered that several HRM‐related TQM elements such as employee
training, empowerment, communication, recognition, and rewards contribute to the achievement
of employee involvement initiatives (Aamer et al., 2017; Baidoun et al., 2018; Bakotić &
Rogošić, 2017). These HRM‐driven results positively affect the sustainment of the TQM
practice, the systems approach to management, decision‐making, and the factual approach to
continuous improvement (Aquilani et al., 2017; Sila, 2020). The education and training
dimensions of HRM have a strong influence on TQM sustainability, which is reinforced by
appropriate compensation, benefits, and employee development and selection (Ali et al., 2020b;
Dubey et al., 2018). The authors further claimed that HRM practices are most common enablers
of TQM and that the HRM department has a significant role in the approach’s success. HRM
77
practices have links to quality and customer satisfaction through the process of organizing work
that allows employees the discretion to respond to diverse customer demands in maximizing
results (Lee et al., 2019). Enabling and empowering employee decision and involvement in the
quality decision‐making process improves motivation, cultivates engagement, reduces turnover,
and has a constructive relationship with the overall performance of the business (Aamer et al.,
2017; Aquilani et al., 2017).
HRM is a strategic management tool used for the successful implementation of corporate
objectives and sustainability that requires initiatives and engagement by employees at all levels
of the organization (Süßbauer et al., 2019). HRM contributes to better quality and performance
by helping design work to increase employee preference and involvement in operational
decisions. The role designs training to develop employees’ knowledge, skills, abilities, and
constructs incentives designed to motivate effort (Baidoun et al., 2018; Lee et al., 2019). HRM
promotes standard practices that form a workforce that has important company‐specific skills
and provides the opportunity to use those abilities successfully through organizational design
(Ali et al., 2020b; Cho & Linderman, 2019). This creates long‐term commitment and motivation
of employees to excel, most especially in quality and performance‐related initiatives planned by
the organization.
Studies showed that HRM‐related quality management practices, such as high‐
performance work practices, add to generating a learning‐oriented organization by supporting
successful new product development processes and incorporating innovative knowledge sharing
in the work system (Gutierrez‐Gutierrez et al., 2018). HRM has a critical role of managerial
sensitivity by supporting change through the creation of sound business strategies and a
responsive organizational climate where employees enthusiastically adhere to certain norms and
78
core values favorable to upholding business goals (Maleki‐Minbashrazgah & Shabani, 2019).
The authors further noted that successfully building the commitment needed from both
management and employees to support business process strategies would be beneficial in any
sustainability program created by the organization. The combination of effective HRM practices
and sustainment of TQM practices within business management processes supports the
company's initiatives to achieve a high level of business performance and total customer
satisfaction (Alkhazali et al., 2019).
KM is a strategic organizational resource that is associated with business success where
knowledge sharing enables innovation, creation of organizational practices, growth, process
sustainability, and attainment of competitive advantages (Calvo‐Mora et al., 2016). This
systematic process of outlining, configuring, retaining, and sharing of knowledge and experience
of employees gives the organization the capacity to turn threats into opportunities and adjust to
the fluctuating and challenging business environment. TQM and KM share the same elements
such as teamwork, worker training, empowerment and involvement, performance measurement,
management and leadership commitment, benchmarking, and a supportive organizational culture
to be successful in their implementation and sustainment. Knowledge creation, exploration,
accumulation, transaction, and management directly affects and influences quality management
activities involving problem solving and task improvement initiatives that lead to organizational
learning (Seo et al., 2016). Effective TQM practices such as CI, statistical control of quality,
management of customer satisfaction, individual learning and innovation, and process
improvement techniques accommodates the practice of KM (Calvo‐Mora et al., 2016; Honarpour
et al., 2017).
79
KM elements such as knowledge sharing, acquisition, and application have a significant
and positive impact on all of the dimensions of TQM, which indicates that the effective use of
KM results in sustainable TQM activities within the organization (Abbas, 2020). The author
further stressed that dynamic organizations take KM and TQM as inter‐subjective constructs and
underline the importance of building knowledge from experienced workers as key sources of
innovation to achieve success. Many project leaders know lessons learned and KM as important
and valuable parts of the work process, but do not have enough time to incorporate this in their
regular routine; this causes significant limitation to inter‐project improvement (Backlund &
Sundqvist, 2018). The authors further noted that the KM process, envisioned to share knowledge
between CI projects, would have to be supported by a work setting and environment that permits
team members to share openly and discuss solutions to problems. KM integration is positively
associated with quality management activities and new product development initiatives because
it determines important points in quality management applications that enable companies to be
more strategically flexible to the dynamic changes in the business environment (Gutierrez‐
Gutierrez et al., 2018).
Table 2
Anticipated and Discovered Themes
Process Anticipated and Discovered Themes related to TQM sustainability
Continuous
Improvement (CI)
CI represents a vital tool in the manufacturing industry used to enhance
customer satisfaction and improve the competitiveness and performance
of a company (Ahmad et al., 2017). CI by TQM means incrementally
improving people, capabilities, processes, and systems to prevent and
80
avoid nonconformities (Kumar & Sharma, 2018). CI accomplishments
are extensive in scope, continuous, and incremental; it will have to
evolve continuously for the process to be sustainable (Brindle, 2020). CI
efforts have a high failure rate due to a systematic focus on success
factors instead of directly addressing failures (McLean et al., 2017).
Management involvement in CI projects is minimal because of concerns
for capacity needs and flexibility, consequently limiting their support for
sustaining future initiatives (Newham et al., 2016; Talib et al., 2019).
Lack of financial resources and commitment from workers are the main
barriers to CI because top management treat the practice as an optional
program only when resources become available and postpone it when
the workload is high (Ahmad et al., 2017; McLean et al., 2017).
Dynamic Capability
(DC)
DC delivers an overarching justification about how firms’ capabilities
mutually sustain quality performance (Su & Linderman, 2016).
Businesses constantly develop their products and processes to adapt to
customers’ changing needs with their ability to reconfigure timely. This
adaptation helps TQM practices to positively influence companies’
innovation performance to adjust to customers’ varying demands (Yusr,
2016). DC’s quality dimensions also include the capacity to associate
individual knowledge with new functional capabilities and have the
coordinating ability to distinguish, assemble, and distribute resources by
enabling the distribution of process intelligence across the business unit
81
(Kumar et al., 2020b). DC has a positive association with quality
management and other related fields, such as HRM in the realization of
adaptive capabilities in companies that are capable of enduring in
hypercompetitive business environments (Gutierrez‐Gutierrez et al.,
2018).
Human Resource
Management
(HRM)
HRM‐driven results positively affect the sustainment of the TQM
practice, the systems approach to management, decision‐making, and the
factual approach to continuous improvement (Aquilani et al., 2017). The
education and training dimensions of HRM have a strong influence on
TQM sustainability in the organization, which is reinforced by
appropriate compensation, benefits, and employee development and
selection (Ali et al., 2020b). HRM practices have links to quality and
customer satisfaction through the process of organizing work that gives
employees the discretion and initiative to respond to diverse customer
demands in maximizing results (Lee et al., 2019). HRM contributes to
better quality and performance by helping design work to increase
employee preference and involvement in operational decisions. The
human resource role designs training to develop employees’ knowledge,
skills, abilities, and constructs incentives designed to motivate effort
(Baidoun et al., 2018; Lee et al., 2019). The combination of effective
HRM practices and sustainment of TQM within the business
management philosophy supports the company's initiatives to achieve
82
performance excellence and a high level of customer satisfaction
(Alkhazali et al., 2019). HRM has a critical role of managerial sensitivity
by supporting change through the creation of sound business strategies
and a responsive organizational climate where employees
enthusiastically adhere to certain norms and core values favorable to
upholding business goals (Maleki‐Minbashrazgah & Shabani, 2019).
Knowledge
Management (KM)
TQM and KM share the same elements such as teamwork, worker
training, empowerment and involvement, performance measurement,
management and leadership commitment, benchmarking, and a
supportive organizational culture to be successful in their
implementation and sustainment (Calvo‐Mora et al., 2016). KM
elements such as knowledge sharing, acquisition, and application have a
significant and positive impact on all of the dimensions of TQM, which
indicates that the effective use of KM results in sustainable TQM
activities within the organization (Abbas, 2020). Effective TQM
practices such as CI, statistical control of quality, management of
customer satisfaction, individual learning and innovation, and process
improvement techniques accommodate the practice of KM (Honarpour
et al., 2017). KM integration is positively associated with quality
management activities and new product development initiatives because
it determines important points in quality management applications that
enable companies to be more strategically flexible (Gutierrez‐Gutierrez
83
et al., 2018).
Summary of the Literature Review
Literatures confirming the TQM sustainment issues showed the presence of the suitability
position and practicability application of the approach to the current strategic framework of the
organization. TQM’s customer‐focused concepts concentrate on CI of processes and enhance the
company’s business management systems (Mendes & Jesus, 2018). Its theories equal quality as
the result of collaborative work efforts over total cost (Dilawo & Salimi, 2019), and total
participation of employees to maintain long‐term vision and planning (Dahlgaard et al., 2019).
However, there is no distinct theory that defines TQM and there is little consensus on what its
essential features can do for a particular application (Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017). As a result,
TQM models adapted by similar industries may result in different outcomes (Jaeger & Adair,
2016). This creates complications in its application in business practices and involves many
challenges and difficulties (Carmona‐Marquez et al., 2016; Nizamidou & Vouzas, 2020). While
TQM practices support development of an environment that empowers teams to recognize and
solve problems (Tortorella et al., 2019), there is a fundamental tension and conflict between the
principle of manipulation and empowerment (Banuro et al., 2017).
Many factors contribute to sustainability issues. Lack of top management commitment,
poor teamwork, insufficient resources, unreliable methods of measuring results, and poor
communication all contribute to the approach’s sustainability (Hwang et al., 2020; Kaur et al.,
2020). The general problem of TQM sustainability in the manufacturing industry involves
challenges in transforming TQM concepts into practices that can be compatible with the current
organizational structure (Muruganantham et al., 2018). The adoption and sustainment of TQM
84
requires the organizational culture to change, which may be a challenge to the methodology
(Haffar et al., 2019). The TQM concepts and theories confirm the rigidity of the approach and its
requirement of firm observance to its procedures (Gözükara et al., 2019). This inflexibility can
create operational constraints that can result in confusion and misalignment with the way
leadership executes their strategies.
The literatures showed conflicts of the TQM approach and the consequences of its
sustainability, which reduced overall operational performance as opposed to contributing to its
total efficiency. There are sufficient number of studies that showed successful application of
TQM practices and those that failed sustainability. The extent to how companies practice TQM
initiatives, how they structure TQM programs, and how they align their strategies are different.
Understanding the relationship between TQM and strategic sustainable development would
explain how and to what degree capitalizing in TQM elements contributes to realizing strategic
sustainable business objectives (Andrade Arteaga et al., 2020). Knowing how to sustain TQM
and quality performance could provide a basis for understanding how to sustain other business
dimensions of performance (Su & Linderman, 2016). For successful integration into the
organization’s resources and capabilities, any TQM approach should consider the needs and
expectations of all stakeholders, customers, the business’ competitive constraint, and CI
requirements (Benzaquen & Charles, 2020).
Summary of Section 1 and Transition
The first section of the research covered the foundation of the study. The manufacturing
industry has applied the TQM approach to their processes for decades but experienced problems
in translating and aligning TQM concepts with their existing organizational structure
(Muruganantham et al., 2018; Wei et al., 2019). The objective of the study was to understand the
85
sustainability issue of the TQM system in a water‐treatment company in the southeastern United
States, which has resulted in high cost of quality and low performance. The purpose of the
flexible design single case study was to discover, explore, and recognize the challenges of
sustaining the TQM system in manufacturing processes to provide a complete picture of the
phenomenon in its natural setting. The sustainment of TQM influences the operational
productivity of organizations and positively affects other dimensions of performance such as
financial effectiveness and customer satisfaction (Nasim, 2018; Psomas & Jaca, 2016). The
single case study considered various perspectives that were specific to the stakeholders and
practitioners of the TQM system to understand how and why a TQM sustainability issue existed
in a water‐treatment plant operation. The triangulation process employed qualitative methods
that included interviews, observations, and documents to establish the validity of the findings.
The case study assumptions enabled an in‐depth, multifaceted exploration of the problem based
on the research framework. The study authenticated the contributing and resulting constructs to
the TQM sustainability issue by studying their level of influence and impact on the site. Use of
the systematic approach in data analysis, triangulation, and data saturation addressed the
limitations inherent in the qualitative design to preserve validity (Du et al., 2020). The
delimitations of the single bounded case was limited to the scope of the TQM sustainability issue
of the chosen company and might not provide generalization or transferability of results to other
situations. The research integrated a biblical perspective and followed four phases of gradual
progression of revelation representing creation, fall, redemption, and restoration. The results of
the study presented evidence on how the organization could transform and establish coherence of
its strategic objectives to TQM practices that enhance quality and performance of their business.
The significance of the study contributed to the understanding of the TQM sustainability issue in
86
the manufacturing industry, and reinforced concepts and theories held true by literatures in
TQM. Coherence between TQM practices and the company’s strategic objectives would clarify
how much and to what degree supporting TQM methodology could contribute to the
achievement of business goals (Andrade Arteaga et al., 2020).
The second section of the study discussed the role of the researcher, the appropriateness
of the research methodology, the type of research participants involved in the study, and
discussion on the population and sampling. This section also included discussion on how
research data were collected and organized, how data were analyzed and interpreted, and how
reliability and validity were established. According to Robson and McCartan (2016), the
researcher’s principal job is to connect the research questions and the questionnaire. Reflexivity
is part of the research process and researchers must be continuously instinctive to avoid bias and
be conscious about risk of preconceptions and assumptions affecting the data collection (Fleet et
al., 2016). The single case study was appropriate for the chosen company as a single bounded
case, and a sample size of 50 full time employees who have experienced using the TQM
approach participated in the study. Qualitative data collection involved multiple activities such as
conducting interviews, observations, and checking archived documents related to the research
problem (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Yin (2018) noted that the researcher must be able to interpret
the information as it is composed and understand instantly if the information contradicts each
other, therefore requiring the necessity for more evidence. Creswell and Poth (2018)
recommended using at least two of the validation strategies such as researcher’s lens and
participant’s lens to establish validity in the study.
87
Section 2: The Project
The purpose of this flexible design single case research was to understand the
sustainability issue of the TQM system in a water‐treatment company in the southeastern United
States. Researchers should be familiar with the research framework and participants, and respect
varied knowledge systems and diverse means of interrelating (Azzari & Baker, 2020; Creswell &
Poth, 2018). The study included a review process that contained a proposal that detailed access,
selection, and permission for the targeted location, and participants were sought (Creswell &
Poth, 2018; Yin, 2018). To avoid personal bias in the research, the researcher started by
identifying the phenomenon to study and bracketing out her or his assumptions and experiences
and gathering data from participants who have experienced the phenomenon (Gregory, 2019).
The benefit of the flexible approach on this study came from its openness to unforeseen events
and its flexibility to adjust to evolving evidence as the study progressed (Zapf et al., 2020). The
importance of using documents in the research helped derive additional insights from the study
by enabling access to massive historical data and records of the organization’s activities and
events (Farquhar et al., 2020). The study incorporated one of the common practices of
triangulating multiple qualitative methods by combining observations and interviews with
documentary analysis (Natow, 2020). The research participants in the study were permanent
employees of the company who have been trained with the use of existing business management
systems such as TQM. Choosing participants from various groups and roles who had hands‐on
experience with the phenomenon helped develop an authentic picture of individual perspectives,
perceived values, and preferences in the study, and how these insights would have aligned or
contrasted (Levant & McCurdy, 2018; Wilkins et al., 2019). The documents related to the TQM
practice were included in this population and provided supplementary insight from different
88
perspectives by enabling access to retrospective records of the organization’s research‐related
activities, including assessment of evidence from quality forms (Bouncken et al., 2021).
The study used a purposeful sampling strategy to identify and create a selection of
information‐rich perspectives that had relevance to the phenomenon and research problems
under investigation (Ames et al., 2019). The study used a sample size of 50 participants for the
interview and quality‐related documents to gather pertinent information on TQM sustainability
issue. Studies proposed that researchers utilizing participant interviews initially conduct no more
than 50 interviews to allow researchers to cope with the complexity of the analytic task
(Kindsiko & Poltimäe, 2019; Sim et al., 2018; Vasileiou et al., 2018). Data collection included
information from interviews, observations, and archived documents, and were recorded using
field notes, observation, and interview protocols. The handwritten field notes were digitized and
imported into a qualitative software, and abbreviations were developed to make data
organization clearer (Hahlweg et al., 2017). The archived data sets were organized into a chart of
rows and columns in a file, with each column designated for its relevance in the study and each
row designated for an individual document (Baxter et al., 2016). The interpretation process was
done by creating the codes and developing the themes from the codes, before organizing the
themes into greater units of constructs to make sense of the collected data (Creswell & Poth,
2018). Computer‐assisted qualitative software, NVivo, was used to handle data synthesis,
analysis, storage, and management of data, but it was noted that the software was unable to
understand text and could not replace the researcher’s analytical skills (Houghton et al., 2017).
To enhance reliability in the study, comprehensive field notes using transcripts and digital files
were used (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The validity of the findings in this qualitative research
involved cautious recording and frequent verification of the data that was collected during the
89
investigative process, and its trustworthiness was maximized to create credible and defensible
results (Cypress, 2017).
This section covered the purpose statement and role of the researcher, who made
decisions based on personal experience in the field, oriented by epistemological and theoretical
understanding that resulted in rational interpretations of the data (Bispo, 2017; Wesely, 2018).
Researchers must ensure that research activities did not exploit vulnerable subjects and should
develop efficient practices for engaging participants in fair and nondiscriminatory means
(Devotta et al., 2016). The single case study used in this research provided the single bounded
case the needed details and descriptive information from participants in their specific roles. The
use of interviews and observations in the triangulation process provided a full and detailed
account of the experience from a participant and served as the baseline on which the findings
were analyzed (Bouncken et al., 2021). Appendices A through E showed the data collection
instruments. The appropriate population for the study was composed of permanent employees of
a water‐treatment company in the southeastern United States. The desired sample consisted of
participants who were full‐time employees of the company who had acquired sufficient
experience in leading, practicing, supporting, and having an in‐depth understanding of the effects
of TQM sustainability in the manufacturing process. Data were collected from interviews,
observations, and archived documents. Interpretations were drawn by using memoing and were
incorporated from a range of perspectives gathered during the interview analysis to discover
more about the participants’ lived experience of the phenomenon (Patel et al., 2016). Reliability
signified the dependability of the methodological process, and clarity was provided in the
analytical procedures and a justification of the methods used to increase the trustworthiness of
the study (Rose & Johnson, 2020). As proposed by Yin (2018), multiple sources of evidence,
90
pattern matching, logic models, key informants review, explanation building, and addressing
rival explanations were used to enhance validity in this case study.
Purpose Statement
The purpose of this flexible design single case study was to understand the sustainability
issue of the TQM system in the manufacturing industry, which has resulted in high cost of
quality and low performance. The study aimed to discover, explore, and recognize the challenges
of sustaining the TQM system in manufacturing processes to provide a complete picture of the
phenomenon in its natural setting. The investigation considered various perspectives that are
specific to the stakeholders and practitioners of the TQM system in a water‐treatment company
in the southeastern United States. Sustainment of the TQM system required a company‐wide
commitment to quality improvement, and the difficulty of achieving this obligation is real
(Muruganantham et al., 2018). The qualitative methodology considered the actual workplace
conditions, observations, and communication with participants to understand what TQM aspects
were incompatible to them and how they perceived the application of the TQM system on the
process. The application of a single case study design enabled an in‐depth, multi‐faceted
exploration of TQM sustainability issues in real‐life settings and authenticated the contributing
factors by studying its suitability, acceptability, and neutrality in the site. The research integrated
a biblical perspective and followed four phases of gradual progression of revelation representing
creation, fall, redemption, and restoration. The objective of the study was to reach out to the
development of the case with compassion and empathy to bring together pertinent evidence that
would help transform the participants to serve their true goals.
91
Role of the Researcher
The qualitative research methodology helps researchers access thoughts, perspectives,
and lived experiences of participants, which can facilitate the development of an understanding
of the meaning that they attribute to their involvement and experiences of the phenomenon
(Creswell & Poth, 2018). This situation required the researcher to have the capacity to make
good decisions based on his or her experience in the field, oriented by epistemological,
ontological, and theoretical understanding that resulted in the researcher’s coherent interpretation
of the data (Bispo, 2017; Wesely, 2018). The notion of reflexivity is an important component of
the qualitative research process and researchers persistently reflexive to eliminate bias and to be
cognizant when there is a risk of preconceptions and assumptions affecting the analysis (Fleet et
al., 2016; Probst, 2016). Concerns of bias and rigor are extant in all research concerning people
and there is normally a sound relationship between researcher and participant, and researcher and
setting (Robson & McCartan, 2016). The authors further noted that the notion of ‘researcher‐as‐
instrument’ was fundamental to most studies, and therefore the potential for bias was great, so
researchers needed to improve the reliability of their research practices and methods.
Researchers would have to recognize their social standing and motivations for conducting
research and how they interacted around participants; they had to be self‐reflexive to diminish
presumptions of the group and to conduct research that better represented their subjects’
experiences (Devotta et al., 2016; Henderson, 2018; Wesely, 2018). The authors added that self‐
reflexivity was important to the research process and that lived experience provided added depth
in the understanding and enhancement of knowledge creation.
In qualitative research, the risks to participants were well‐known, discussed, and
accounted for in literatures and ethical reviews, making it of utmost importance to understand the
92
consequences and impact of research on its subjects (Ngozwana, 2018; Stahlke, 2018). The
qualitative researcher deals with numerous ethical issues that arise throughout the data collection
phase in the field setting and in examination and distribution of qualitative information (Creswell
& Poth, 2018). Researchers should ensure that the study did not exploit or abuse susceptible and
vulnerable subjects and should develop efficient practices for enlisting and engaging participants
in fair and nondiscriminatory means (Devotta et al., 2016). It is the obligation of the researcher
to be familiar with the research framework and participants and to revere diverse knowledge
systems and different means of interrelating (Azzari & Baker, 2020; Creswell & Poth, 2018).
Researchers should carefully address concerns related to consent, confidentiality, and the role of
objectivity in improving shared understanding of the lived experiences of participants having
complex vulnerabilities (Probst, 2016). Preparing and conducting an ethical study helped the
researcher understand and address all foreseen and emergent ethical issues in the investigation
(Creswell & Poth, 2018). Participants’ protection from any harm in the study was important, as
well as keeping their information private and confidential so subjects were not accidentally
placed in an unwanted situation (Råheim et al., 2016; Yin, 2018).
Actions the Researcher Will Take to Conduct the Study
The researcher created a task review process that included submitting a proposal that
specified the details of the study in the project associated with how access, selection, and
permission for the targeted location and participants were sought (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Yin,
2018). This review process also included details of the sampling selection and collection
techniques for research data, and how the researcher managed, recorded, and stored the resulting
information. The ethical issues related to ethical guiding principles that included integrity,
fairness, justice, respect for person, and concern for welfare were considered to ensure that there
93
was equitable treatment of participants, protection of privacy, and minimum harm (Creswell &
Poth, 2018). The researcher protected the anonymity of the subjects, communicated to them their
role in participation in the study, clarified the objectives of the study, and did not employ
deception in the research (Azzari & Baker, 2020). The researcher was accountable for leading
the study with care and sensitivity by acquiring agreement and consent from all participants and
notifying them of the nature of the case study before soliciting participation and feedback (Fleet
et al., 2016; Yin, 2018). The author further noted that selection of participants was rightly
important so that groups of subjects relevant to the study were included. The researcher made
certain he or she was mentally, physically, emotionally, and spiritually‐centered to protect the
participants and their invaluable information (Azzari & Baker, 2020).
Researchers must have a full understanding of the research context from various angles
by observing and conversing with multifunctional participants in the study, especially those with
varied perspectives to identify patterns and offer insights in data collection and analysis (Devotta
et al., 2016; Robson & McCartan, 2016). Having a solid understanding of the literature base
helped the researcher focus the approach of the study and improved the data gathering design in
a way that improved the potential for contributing new knowledge to theory and practice (Azzari
& Baker, 2020). By being participant‐centric, the researcher provided a fluid interview structure
that enabled the participants to be more involved, so that an empathetic understanding of
subjects’ experiences that recognized root causes and solutions to help solve problems were
identified (Råheim et al., 2016; Wesely, 2018). Studies showed that when participants who
experienced the problems defined the true causes of the issues, solutions created to resolve the
issues based on their input were likely to be much more effective (Azzari & Baker, 2020;
Råheim et al., 2016).
94
The researcher began the analysis of data at the same moment as data collection by
writing down notes, constructing mental links between participants’ feedback and theory, and
committing to memory the most thought‐provoking and outstanding content (Azzari & Baker,
2020). The researcher was dedicated to listening, paying attention, and understanding each
participant to find the best link to the research question (Robson & McCartan, 2016; Yin, 2018).
Interviewing with a genuine interest in participants and inquisitiveness for the research topic led
to elevated quality of the data (Azzari & Baker, 2020; Yin, 2018). In principle, it provided the
means to integrate experiential knowledge of the participant into the research process (Devotta et
al., 2016).
Discussion of Bracketing to Avoid Personal Bias
Bracketing in qualitative research is a form of research engagement process where the
researcher sets aside his or her experiences and assumptions of the phenomenon under
investigation to allow more consideration of fresh perspectives from the experiences of others
(Gregory, 2019; McWhorter, 2019). Bracketing, as a theoretical construct, recognizes
participants’ subjectivity and puts it center‐stage in addition to objectivity; this helps achieve a
better understanding of the phenomenon in real‐time and is a powerful means to support and
clarify research findings (Dörfler & Stierand, 2020). The authors further noted that bracketing is
about being sensible to what is happening whether the researcher likes it or not and refraining
from bias judgement of participants and acknowledging their beliefs and values as sources of
insight. Since analyses of the data always integrate conventions that the researcher takes along
with the focus of the study, bracketing can be predominantly challenging most especially when
the researcher is profoundly knowledgeable of the specific theoretical model or framework
(Creswell & Poth, 2018; Gregory, 2019). This process is ongoing, and includes the careful and
95
thorough development of language, word context, and interpretations with which to represent
findings.
To avoid personal bias in the research, the researcher started by initially identifying the
phenomenon to study, bracketing out her or his assumptions and experiences, and gathering data
from a number of participants who had experienced the phenomenon (Gregory, 2019). The
researcher provided a supportive environment by revering the subjects’ personhood and this
required respecting participants’ autonomy and decisions (Dörfler & Stierand, 2020; McWhorter,
2019). Thereafter, the researcher evaluated and analyzed the data by converting and saturating
the information to significant quotes or accounts and incorporating these statements into
pertinent themes (Gregory, 2019; McWhorter, 2019). The researcher then created a textural
picture of the statements of the participants based on what they experienced, and a structural
interpretation of how they experienced these accounts in terms of the situation, condition, or
context (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The authors further noted that the researcher could then
combine all these structural and textural descriptions to represent a complete depiction of the
experience. It was important for the research collection and analysis to reach an instinctive and
intuitive understanding of the participants’ subjective real‐time accounts of their lived
experiences (Dörfler & Stierand, 2020).
Summary of the Role of Researcher
The role of the researcher is to have the capacity to make good decisions based on his or
her experience in the field, oriented by epistemological and theoretical understanding that results
in coherent interpretation of the data (Bispo, 2017; Wesely, 2018). The researcher ensured that
the study did not exploit or abused susceptible and vulnerable subjects and developed efficient
practices for enlisting and engaging participants in fair and nondiscriminatory means (Devotta et
96
al., 2016). It was the obligation of the researcher to be familiar with the research framework and
participants, and to respect diverse knowledge systems and different means of interrelating
(Azzari & Baker, 2020; Creswell & Poth, 2018). The researcher carefully addressed concerns
related to consent, confidentiality, and role of objectivity in improving shared understanding of
the lived experiences of participants having complex vulnerabilities (Probst, 2016). This was
done by creating a review process that included submitting a proposal that specified the details of
the study associated with how access, selection, and permission for the targeted location and
participants would be sought (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Yin, 2018). To avoid personal bias in the
research, the researcher started by initially identifying the phenomenon to study and bracketing
out his or her assumptions and experiences, gathering data from a number of participants who
had experienced the phenomenon (Gregory, 2019).
Research Methodology
The flexible design for the research study provided a multilayered depiction of the
phenomenon and the interpretation of detailed views of participants, the examination of word
contents, and the conduction of research in a natural setting (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The
suitability of the flexible approach in this study came from its ability to identify unforeseen
events and its flexibility to adjust to evolving evidence as the study familiarized with how
participants derived meaning from their varied TQM experiences (Bouncken et al., 2021; Zapf et
al., 2020). This research developed an understanding of the TQM sustainability issue and its
effects on the organization as a single bounded case. The single case study research design
consisted of the examination of a single bounded case delimited by a real‐life present‐day
context or setting and used multiple viewpoints to expedite the investigation of the phenomenon
(Yin, 2018). The relevance of using the single case study method on the unique case provided the
97
necessary detailed and descriptive information from participants in their specific settings within
the organization.
The TQM sustainability study used more than one type of qualitative data collection
procedure, such as gathering data by means of interviews, observations, and documents. The
importance of using interviews in the triangulation process was in its ability to acquire a full and
detailed account of the experience from a participant under study, serving as the baseline on
which the findings were refined (Bouncken et al., 2021). The authors further noted the
significance of using observation in the triangulation process was in its capability to supplement
and illuminate data acquired from participant interviews, along with explaining and confirming
the meaning of a participant’s spoken comments. The importance of using documents in the
triangulation process was that the process could derive complementary insights into the study
from various perspectives by enabling access to immense retrospective data and archives of the
organization’s research‐related activities and events (Farquhar et al., 2020).
Discussion of Flexible Design
The study aimed to capture specific lived experiences of TQM practitioners in a water‐
treatment company in the southeastern United States to understand the system’s sustainability
issue. Collecting these experiences required a clear understanding of the structure and patterns
found in the company’s organizational culture, strategies, and among the company’s TQM
participants to produce data in the actual work environment. The flexible design for the research
study provided a multifaceted representation of the phenomenon, examining word context,
interpreting detailed views of participants, and carrying out research in the natural setting
(Creswell & Poth, 2018). The appropriateness of the flexible approach in this study originated
from its openness to unforeseen events and its flexibility to adjust to evolving evidence as the
98
study recognized how the participants derived meaning from their varied TQM experiences
(Bouncken et al., 2021; Zapf et al., 2020). This included capturing participants’ perceptions and
interpretations that influenced their behavior toward sustainment of TQM.
The application of the flexible design in the study supported and facilitated the evolving
nature of the research and focused on participants’ views, the researcher as an instrument of data
collection, and presentation of multiple realities (Robson & McCartan, 2016). The flexible
research design promoted the understanding of existing traditions of the study. Based on the
study’s collection and analysis method, the research design covered and identified what data sets
were pertinent from participants in the sampling design (Tobi & Kampen, 2018). This design
was beneficial in recognizing participants’ strengths and weaknesses to create a better
understanding of the phenomenon and added to knowledge development. The flexible design in
the research incorporated a single case study design to examine the single bounded case and
create a richer picture of the phenomenon.
Discussion of Chosen Method for the Study
A case study is a recognized research strategy that employs systematic and intensive
investigation of an individual person, community, business unit, or an organization in its own
right, to examine in‐depth data relating to several constructs (Robson & McCartan, 2016). This
research developed an understanding of the TQM sustainability issue and its effects on a water‐
treatment company in the southeastern United States, as a single bounded case. The single case
study research design included the study of a single bounded case surrounded by a real‐life,
present‐day context or setting, and used multiple viewpoints to facilitate the investigation of the
particular occurrence (Yin, 2018). The appropriateness of the single case study method related to
99
its application to the unique case that was in need of detailed and descriptive information from
participants, in their specific settings within the organization.
This chosen method enabled the collection and integration of many forms of qualitative
data ranging from observations, interviews, and documents to answer the research questions
(Paddock et al., 2019). This methodology enabled identification of TQM activities that affected
quality and performance in each unit in the organization, which made its sustainability an issue,
and distinguished how TQM activities influenced process constraints and enablers. The
advantage of using a single case study method was its application of a comprehensive description
and analysis process to gain a better understanding of “how” and “why” the phenomenon
happened (Ridder, 2017). The methodology provided the opportunity to discover any subculture
or distinct behavioral patterns that arose when investigating deeper reasons of the TQM
sustainment issues. This approach delivered information that led to the identification of patterns
and relationships, and validation and confirmation of a theory that ensured quality and validity
(El‐Akruti et al., 2018; Yin, 2018).
Discussion of Methods for Triangulation
Triangulation reinforced the construct validity of the study by using multiple
methodological resources or practices to develop convergent evidence (Al‐Moghrabi et al.,
2020). The TQM sustainability study used more than one type of qualitative data collection
procedure, such as gathering data by means of interviews, observations, and documents. The
researcher aimed to establish multiple data sources by gathering data from different periods,
locations, or perspectives through the interview of TQM participants who possessed different
viewpoints or held varying levels of authority. The appropriateness of using interviews in the
triangulation process was its ability to acquire a full and detailed account of the experience from
100
a participant under study, serving as a baseline on which the findings were refined (Bouncken et
al., 2021). The authors further noted that through interview, the researcher could discover
descriptions of real‐life accounts of the interviewee about their interpretations of the meaning of
the phenomenon under study. Interviewing participants from various operational positions at
different settings in time and location formed strong evidence of the phenomenon because the
approach covered the diverse population in the organization (Natow, 2020).
Research observations took place at different times and process locations. The researcher
observed how participants performed tasks related to TQM practices at the start and end of the
shift, before and after breaks and lunches, and during normal operations. The appropriateness of
using observation in the triangulation process was its ability to complement and illuminate data
acquired from participant interviews, as well as its explanation and confirmation of the meaning
of a participant’s verbal comments (Bouncken et al., 2021). The authors also added that the
researcher could find alignment of meaning and importance by observing participants’ behaviors,
gestures, facial expressions, bodily tone, interview environment, and other nonverbal signs. The
observation process formed strong evidence that included select groups of participants for
extended periods, diverse activities at diverse locations, and work with different models (Moon,
2019).
The researcher investigated archived documents related to the TQM practice in the
organization. These documents included process audits, standard work reviews, critical‐to‐
quality forms, product non‐conformity reports, scrap summaries, productivity statements, quality
audits, root‐cause‐counter measure files, and quality manuals. The document analysis also
covered existing TQM operational control documents such as failure mode analyses, process
flow diagrams, control plans, escalation processes, and change management policies created to
101
safeguard operations. The appropriateness of using documents in the triangulation process was
its ability to derive supplementary insights into the study from different perspectives by enabling
access to immense reflective data and records of the organization’s research‐related activities and
events (Bouncken et al., 2021; Farquhar et al., 2020). The authors further explained that this
activity allows exploration of more concealed evidence from recording and contributes greatly to
the understanding of the phenomenon. One of the most common practices of triangulating
multiple qualitative methodologies was to combine observations and interviews with
documentary analysis (Natow, 2020).
Summary of Research Methodology
The study aimed to capture specific lived experiences of TQM practitioners in a water‐
treatment company in the southeastern United States to understand the system’s sustainability
issue. The appropriateness of the flexible approach in this study originated from its openness to
unforeseen events and its flexibility to adjust to evolving evidence as the study recognized how
the participants derived meaning from their varied TQM experiences (Zapf et al., 2020). The
importance of the single case study in this research related to its application to the unique case
that was in need of detailed and descriptive information from participants, in their specific
settings within the organization. The relevance of using interviews in the triangulation process
was in its ability to acquire a full and detailed account of the experience from a participant under
study, serving as a baseline on which the findings were refined (Bouncken et al., 2021). The
authors further noted that the use of observation in the triangulation process complements and
illuminates data acquired from participant interviews, providing explanation and confirmation of
the meaning of a participant’s verbal comments. The importance of using documents in the
triangulation process helped derive supplementary insights in the study from different
102
perspectives by enabling access to immense reflective data and records of the organization’s
research‐related activities and events (Farquhar et al., 2020).
Participants
The research included a diverse group of TQM participants from the chosen organization.
A participant is an individual from whom a study’s data were collected, typically through
interviews, who provided relevant information or understanding about the case and proposed
additional sources of evidence for the study to examine (Yin, 2018). Participants had knowledge
of social interactions in specific contexts as they occurred and gained it by practicing and
observing real‐life settings. This observation was important when the main objective was to find
out what was currently going on (Robson & McCartan, 2016). Participant involvement
acknowledged that individuals could contribute significant knowledge and experience to research
activities. They also created transparency and accountability between the research objectives and
the participants to provide the researcher an opportunity to respond to their concerns (Gregory et
al., 2018). The research participants were permanent employees who were employed with the
company at least three months and had been trained and familiarized with the use of existing
business management systems in place such as the TQM. These participants came from multiple
functional groups, which included leadership, manufacturing associates, operation support
members, suppliers, and warranty managers. It was important to understand what participants
already believed because their existing “mental models” shaped by their predispositions to
understand, accept, and apply the models laid down by management experts had real‐life value to
the study (Condit et al., 2016).
The type of participants who were eligible to be included in the study were those who had
a role in leading, practicing, supporting, or being at the receiving end of the TQM sustainment
103
effects. The participants in leadership roles were individuals who managed the structure of the
TQM system, which involved managing its application and monitoring employee compliance to
the approach’s requirements. These participants provided the top‐level support to the needs of
the operations team running the lines and were familiar with the TQM methodology, concepts,
and theories mentioned in the study. The leadership role has a positive relationship on the
effectiveness of TQM (Álvarez‐García et al., 2016). The participants in the operations roles were
the manufacturing and assembly associates who practiced and sustained TQM methodology in
the processes. These participants were responsible for ensuring that the application of the TQM
methodology was effective in capturing non‐conforming products from the manufacturing or
assembly lines, and that the proper identification and disposition of these products took place
appropriately. The effectiveness of the function of this group directly related to TQM
sustainability. The effectiveness of TQM depended on employees performing their roles and
moving toward common objectives (Álvarez‐García et al., 2016).
The participants in the operations support roles were individuals who maintained the
calibration of quality instruments, updated quality‐related documents, examined engineering
changes, verified machine process settings, performed first article inspections, and regulated
line‐tester parameters. This group also included buyers, business partners, and suppliers.
Partnership with business suppliers improves quality, which satisfies the company’s
requirements to process products that meet the customer’s expectations (Bevilacqua et al., 2017).
Necessary for TQM sustainment, these participants verified product specifications, assembly
processes, supplies, internally made parts, and other purchased components before the lines
could use them. The operations support group focused on preventive initiatives to maximize the
operational efficiency of business processes (Dahlgaard et al., 2019). The participants handling
104
warranty claims and service requests from the company’s customers provided closed‐loop
feedback from the field regarding product quality and delivery. Their input from the customer
measured the effectiveness of TQM sustainment in the organization.
Population and Sampling
The appropriate population for the study was composed of permanent employees of a
water‐treatment company in the southeastern United States. These individuals belonged to the
manufacturing division of the company and had a role in leading, practicing, supporting, and
having an in‐depth understanding of the effects of TQM sustainability in the manufacturing
process. Choosing participants from various groups and roles who had hands‐on experience with
the phenomenon helped develop an authentic picture of individual perspectives, perceived
values, and preferences in the study and how these insights might have aligned or contrasted
(Levant & McCurdy, 2018; Wilkins et al., 2019). The documents related to the TQM practice in
the company were included in this population. These documents provided supplementary
insights from different perspectives by enabling access to retrospective records and data of the
organization’s research‐related activities, including assessment of concealed evidence from
quality forms that greatly contributed to the understanding of the phenomenon (Bouncken et al.,
2021). The study used a purposeful sampling strategy. This method identified and created a
selection of information‐rich perspectives that had relevance to the phenomenon and research
problems under investigation (Ames et al., 2019). The sampling method increased the credibility
of the results by defining the target group specifically for the purpose of the study and collecting
data from a comprehensive range of settings to increase the level of detail on the phenomenon
(Bungay et al., 2016).
105
The study’s sample frame comprised of participants from the molding, filter, and pumps
departments and included participants from the units’ support structure and the quality
documents associated with the units’ activities in the manufacturing division of the site.
Rationale of the sample frame selection came from the performance metrics of the company that
indicated that these departments had significantly low productivity results, high production costs,
and high reject rates compared to other departments. The desired sample consisted of participants
who were full‐time employees of the company who acquired sufficient experiences in leading,
practicing, supporting, and having an in‐depth understanding of the effects of TQM sustainability
in the manufacturing process. The study used a sample size of 50 participants for the interview
and quality‐related documents to gather pertinent information on the TQM sustainability issue.
Studies proposed that researchers utilizing participant interviews initially conduct no more than
50 interviews to allow researchers to cope with the complexity of the analytic task (Kindsiko &
Poltimäe, 2019; Sim et al., 2018; Vasileiou et al., 2018). This setup provided substantial
information to explain the phenomenon and reach data saturation. As a current employee of the
chosen company and part of the postgraduate educational plan supported by the employer, the
researcher had permission to access the sample.
Discussion of Population
The eligible population for the study was composed of full‐time and permanent
employees of a water‐treatment company in the southeastern United States. These individuals
belong to the manufacturing division of the company and had a role in leading, practicing,
supporting, and having an in‐depth understanding of the effects of TQM sustainability in the
manufacturing process. This population was composed of multifunctional groups such as senior
management, operations engineers, line supervisors, manufacturing personnel, assembly
106
associates, support teams, and warranty managers that had experienced TQM practices and had
diverse perspectives about its application and sustainment. Selecting participants from various
groups and roles who had hands‐on experience with the phenomenon helped develop an
authentic picture of individual perspectives, perceived values, and preferences in the study and
how these insights might have aligned or contrasted (Levant & McCurdy, 2018; Wilkins et al.,
2019). This population shared common experience and knowledge on how the practice of TQM
affected quality and productivity in the manufacturing process. They were familiar with the
contrasting results when they did not apply the methodology correctly and were knowledgeable
of how their actions translated into conflict and confusion in the manufacturing line. Their
experiences in utilizing TQM practices made this population of about 450 employees appropriate
for the single case study.
The documents related to the TQM practice in the company were included in this
population. The selection of population in qualitative research not only covered multiple varying
data sources, such as people, events, accounts, organizations, sites, and documents, but also
elements of investigation such as cases to be examined for case studies (Gentles & Vilches,
2017). The authors added that it was important to highlight that in qualitative research, the
possibilities regarding what can be sampled and studied are highly diverse, flexible, and seldom
restricted to people only. These documents included process audits, standard work reviews,
critical‐to‐quality forms, product non‐conformity reports, scrap summaries, productivity
statements, quality audits, root‐cause‐counter measure files, and quality manuals. The document
analysis also covered existing TQM operational control documents such as failure mode
analyses, process flow diagrams, control plans, escalation processes, and change management
policies created to safeguard operations. These documents provided supplementary insight from
107
different perspectives by enabling access to retrospective records and data of the organization’s
research‐related activities, including assessment of concealed evidence from quality forms that
greatly contributed to the understanding of the phenomenon (Bouncken et al., 2021). This made
approximately 14 types of documents related to TQM practices in the company’s archive eligible
for the study.
Discussion of Sampling
The qualitative research used a single case study design to understand the TQM
sustainability issue in a chosen company as a bounded phenomenon. Case studies were not good
methods for evaluating the prevalence of phenomena, so this made a sampling logic, which
required an operational estimation of the entire population of potential respondents not
applicable as a sampling method (Yin, 2018). The qualitative nature of case studies did not use
quantitative conventions of sampling; instead, the study chose participants who were able to
provide data, which were most relevant to the research problem and the central phenomenon
through purposive sampling (Ames et al., 2019). The authors added that this method allowed the
achievement of an adequately varied geographic spread of respondents who had rich data and
information, which were relevant to the study, while establishing a good representation from a
larger population. The researcher determined the type of purposeful sampling strategy that
applied to the case and the rationale for the selection, along with the sampling information used
with the case (Creswell & Poth, 2018). This was possible when there was no purpose or reason
to generate a statistical generalization to any population outside or beyond the sample examined
(Robson & McCartan, 2016).
The study used a purposeful sampling strategy. This method identified and created a
selection of information‐rich perspectives that had relevance to the phenomenon and research
108
problems under investigation (Ames et al., 2019). The sampling method increased the credibility
of the results by defining the target group specifically for the purpose of the study and collecting
data from a comprehensive range of settings to increase the level of details on the phenomenon
(Bungay et al., 2016). In this qualitative case study, sample size might not matter, but indices
such as data repeatability, adequacy, and saturation were important in achieving the full
understanding of the research topic (Ghorbani et al., 2018). Identifying and selecting participants
or groups of participants who were particularly experienced and knowledgeable about the
phenomenon of interest had the ability to share experiences and opinions in an expressive,
eloquent, and contemplative manner to achieve depth of understanding (Creswell & Poth, 2018).
This non‐probability sampling method was subjective and relied on the judgement of the
researcher based on clear criteria and related to selecting participants with specific characteristics
and units of data, which would best answer the research questions (Ghorbani et al., 2018).
The purposeful sampling strategy was appropriate in this study since it focused on the
concentrated range of information‐rich perspectives of participants and documents to strengthen
the credibility of the phenomenon and provided the depth of understanding. Embedded in the
sampling strategy was the ability to associate, differentiate, and to identify differences and
similarities in the phenomenon. The sampling method helped the researcher understand if a
logical generalization and maximum utilization of data and information applied within the
bounded case to prove that the phenomenon was happening throughout the chosen site (Bungay
et al., 2016). The sampling of information‐rich participants and documents covered the range of
variations needed in the study and the iterative approach of comparing the results drew enough
input to make certain that the theoretical saturation happened appropriately (Ames et al., 2019;
Bungay et al., 2016). The appropriateness of the sampling method in the study allowed a very
109
thorough examination of the TQM sustainability issue in the site through the lens of the
participants who had in‐depth knowledge and experience of the process. The method also
allowed the use of relevant documentation that supplemented participants’ experiences and
strengthened the credibility of the TQM sustainability issue in the chosen site (Bouncken et al.,
2021; Farquhar et al., 2020).
A sampling frame is a list of specific participants or other device selected from the
research population used to define a researcher's topic of interest (Robson & McCartan, 2016).
The frame defined a set of features or elements from which a researcher could choose
a sample of the target population. Frames were persistent patterns of cognition, presentation, and
interpretation of data collection, emphasis, and exclusions that preserved a central organizing
idea for constructing a sense of significant events, which suggested what was at issue (Yang &
Van Gorp, 2019). The authors added that this organizing approach worked to structure the
phenomenon meaningfully by promoting a precise interpretation of an issue through careful
selection and prioritization of certain aspects and developments, while downplaying or excluding
other data. In the study, the justification or reasoning of the selection was related to the functions
of framing that included the definition of the phenomenon, the causal interpretation, solution
generation, and ethical evaluation (Robson & McCartan, 2016). This was to make sure that the
frame designed for the study was not problematic, inconsequential, marginal, or biased. In
addition, analysis of the company’s documents related to quality and productivity that confirmed
departments’ performance helped this non‐randomized selection avoid sampling bias and
generalization of data by separating the researcher’s influence in the selection. There was a
strong relationship among strategic factors and performance; without these tactical drivers and
110
enablers, successful and effective TQM sustainment was not possible (Carmona‐Marquez et al.,
2016; Psomas & Jaca, 2016).
The sample frame included participants from the molding department, which has the
highest internal rework rate in the site; the filter department, which has the highest internal scrap
costs; and the pumps department, which has the highest external rejects. The sample frame
included participants from the departments’ support structure and the quality documents related
to the three major departments in the manufacturing division of the site. Justification of the
sample frame came from the analysis of data from the quality and performance metrics of the
company that indicated that these three departments had significant systemic issues with quality
management and productivity compared to other departments. The quality‐related documents
such as the product non‐conformity report, warranty versus sales, scrap report, and the increased
number of root‐cause countermeasure documents supplemented the evidence of elevated TQM
sustainment failures in these three departments. Use of documents in research provided
background information and comprehensive coverage of data that were helpful in supplementing
and contextualizing the study within its field (Bouncken et al., 2021). The sample frame reflected
the environmental characteristics that revealed the selected participants to be undergoing the live
experience of the phenomenon at its highest level (Yang & Van Gorp, 2019). The company’s
daily management documents such as production reports, first‐pass yield, and past due orders
confirmed the departments’ struggle with quality and performance. The participants’ lived
experiences, perspectives, and participation, along with the supplementary evidence from related
documents that confirmed the phenomenon, provided real‐time information on the sustainability
issue of TQM in the site, making this frame appropriate for the study (Farquhar et al., 2020;
Yang & Van Gorp, 2019).
111
The selection of the desired sample reflected the essential population characteristics to
assure coverage of important aspects of the phenomenon (Burgette et al., 2018, 2019). The
desired sample consisted of participants who were full‐time employees of the company who had
acquired sufficient experience in leading, practicing, supporting, and having an in‐depth
understanding of the effects of TQM sustainability in the manufacturing process. These
participants possessed meaningful perspectives and relevant information needed to answer the
research questions in the study and had a deeper understanding of the phenomenon. They
described dominant patterns and characteristics that contributed to the conflict, confusion, and
possible resolutions to the sustainability of TQM through their roles in the manufacturing
process. In addition to the selected participants, the quality‐related documents such as the
product non‐conformity reports, warranty versus sales, scrap report, productivity statements, and
root‐cause countermeasure files were included as desired samples for the study. This desired
sample of participants, along with the selected quality‐related documents, provided new
information for the study to reach saturation point, making this selection appropriate for the
study.
Qualitative studies had no upfront scheme as to how many participants needed to be part
of the study and that sample size depended on a number of factors relating to methodological,
practical, and epistemological issues (Turner‐Bowker et al., 2018; Vasileiou et al., 2018). In
general terms, Robson and McCartan (2016) suggested that qualitative sample sizes should be
sufficient to allow the unraveling of a new and richly textured understanding of the phenomenon
that may apply to what may be happening in other cases. Creswell and Poth (2018) offered a
general recommendation for determining sample size in qualitative research to not only
investigate a few locations or participants but also to gather general detail about each location
112
and participant examined. An estimate of sample size in qualitative studies was essential for
initial planning, while the sufficiency of the succeeding samples and final size depended on the
continuous evaluation of results during the duration of the research process (Robson &
McCartan, 2016; Turner‐Bowker et al., 2018). In appraising the principles of sample size in
qualitative studies, Malterud et al. (2016) claimed no formula could predict the sample size or by
perceived redundancy. The authors further noted that using tools to determine sample size should
not depend on procedures from a particular analysis method but should depend on collective
methodological principles for approximating a substantial number of participants, events, or
units.
The study used a sample size of 50 participants for the interview and quality‐related
documents to gather pertinent information on the TQM sustainability issue. Studies proposed
that researchers utilizing participant interviews initially conduct no more than 50 interviews to
allow researchers to cope with the complexity of the analytic task (Kindsiko & Poltimäe, 2019;
Sim et al., 2018; Vasileiou et al., 2018). The authors further added that the researcher could
utilize the criterion of data redundancy where he or she terminates the sampling when there is no
more new information produced by sampling more participants. The sample size covered a
sufficient number of participants that provided impactful evidence and data to bridge theoretical
concepts, established adequate information that aligns with literature, supported the objectives of
the study, and answered the research questions. The selected number of experienced TQM‐
frontline participants provided power information to the study, making this sample size
appropriate for the study. Malterud et al. (2016) presented the model of information power as a
reasonable guiding principle for determining sample size by proposing that a smaller sample
could be adapted if the sample could provide more information power, and vice versa. Table 3
113
shows the number of participants selected in the study. The core sampling focused more on
participants who practiced and sustained TQM. These employees, who were assembly associates,
had direct hands‐on involvement in TQM activities.
Table 3
Participants in the Study
Position in Company /
Actors
Department Role in TQM
Study
Number of
Participants
% in Total
Sample
% in
Group
Assembly Associates
Molding
Practicing Role
9 18%
54% Filters 9 18%
Pumps 9 18%
Department Managers
Molding
Leading Role
1 2%
16%
Filters 1 2%
Pumps 1 2%
Quality Manager All 1 2%
Lean Leaders All 2 4%
Human Resource All 2 4%
Quality Technicians
Molding
Supporting Role
1 2%
18%
Filters 1 2%
Pumps 1 2%
Process Technicians
Molding 1 2%
Filters 1 2%
Pumps 1 2%
Buyers /Suppliers All 3 6%
114
Field Representatives All
Receiving Role
3 6%
12% Warranty Managers All 3 6%
Total Number of Participants 50 100% 100%
The quality of the desired sample combined with the selected sample size of the study
participants who were frontline TQM practitioners generated a comprehensive database for the
TQM sustainability issue and drew clear and credible explanations of the phenomenon. This
setup provided substantial information to explain the phenomenon and reach data saturation. The
researcher has access to the sample. As a current employee of the chosen company, and part of
the postgraduate educational plan supported by the employer, the researcher had permission to
access the sample.
Summary of Population and Sampling
The eligible population for the study was composed of full‐time employees of a water‐
treatment company in the southeastern United States. These individuals belonged to the
manufacturing division of the company and had a role in leading, practicing, supporting, and
being at the receiving end of TQM sustainment effects. Choosing participants from various
groups and roles who had hands‐on experience with the phenomenon helped develop an
authentic picture of individual perspectives, perceived values, and preferences in the study and
how these insights might have aligned or contrasted (Levant & McCurdy, 2018; Wilkins et al.,
2019). This population shared common experience and knowledge on how the sustainment of
TQM affected quality and productivity in the manufacturing process, making this population of
about 450 employees appropriate for the single case study. The documents related to the TQM
practice in the company were included in this population. These documents provided
115
supplementary insight from different perspectives by enabling access to retrospective records
and data of the organization’s research‐related activities that greatly contributed to the
understanding of the phenomenon (Bouncken et al., 2021). This made approximately 14 types of
documents related to TQM practices in the company’s archive eligible for the study.
The study used a purposeful sampling strategy. The sampling method increased the
credibility of the results by defining the target group specifically for the purpose of the study and
collecting data from a comprehensive range of settings to increase the level of details on the
phenomenon (Bungay et al., 2016). The purposeful sampling strategy was appropriate in this
study because it focused on the range of information‐rich perspectives of participants and
documents to strengthen the credibility of the phenomenon and provided depth of understanding.
The sample frame included participants from the molding department, which had the highest
internal rework rate in the site; the filter department, which had the highest internal scrap costs;
and the pumps department, which had the highest external rejects. Justification of the sample
frame came from the analysis of data from the quality and performance metrics of the company
that indicated that these three departments had significant systemic issues with quality
management and productivity compared to other departments.
The desired sample consisted of participants who were full‐time employees of the
company who had acquired sufficient experience in leading, practicing, supporting, and having
an in‐depth understanding of the effects of TQM sustainability in the manufacturing process.
These participants possessed meaningful perspectives and relevant information needed to answer
the research questions in the study and had a deeper understanding of the phenomenon. The
study used a sample size of 50 participants for the interview and quality‐related documents to
gather pertinent information on the TQM sustainability issue. Studies proposed that researchers
116
utilizing participant interviews initially conduct no more than 50 interviews to allow researchers
to cope with the complexity of the analytic task (Kindsiko & Poltimäe, 2019; Sim et al., 2018;
Vasileiou et al., 2018). This setup provided substantial information to explain the phenomenon
and reach data saturation. As a current employee of the chosen company, and part of the
postgraduate educational plan supported by the employer, the researcher had permission to
access the sample.
Data Collection & Organization
Data collection and organization structured in a systematic approach enabled the
researcher to address research questions of the study. Data sets were collected from interviews,
observations, and archived documents, and were recorded using field notes, observation, and
interview protocols. Data and transcriptions were then be stored in digital files. Utilization of a
semi‐structured and face‐to‐face interview for the overall data collection process was beneficial
because of the method’s ability to gain astute information based on prepared questions (Alam,
2020, 2021). The researcher observed how participants answered the questions, recorded notes
on observed behaviors and expressions, and captured activities within each participant’s
workstation. Observation of participants in their working environment assisted the researcher in
developing a deeper understanding of the phenomenon because the process supplemented and
supported participant engagement (Gilmore et al., 2019). Collecting data from archived
documents from the company related to the phenomenon enriched and supplemented the primary
data gathered through interviews and observations (Bouncken et al., 2012). Member checking
was performed to ensure that participants’ reconstructions were distinguishable to them as
acceptable representations of their lived experience and realities. Follow‐up interviews were
important, most especially when the participant offered other sources of evidence relevant for the
117
study or suggested other individuals who had specific experience with the phenomenon (Alam,
2020, 2021).
Interview guides, observation protocols, and archived data were utilized to gather
information related to the research problem. Appendices A through E show the data collection
instruments. In qualitative research, examining different perspectives of multiple participants and
observing them at the same time produces an increased understanding of complex phenomena
and diminished potential limitations intrinsically associated with the qualitative research practice
(Scheffelaar et al., 2018). A question‐and‐answer format served as one method of organizing the
database and had a benefit of allowing the researcher to create a targeted cross‐case and custom‐
made synthesis by evaluating participants’ responses to a specific question (Yin, 2018). The
information was filtered and sorted in a manner that represented the desired responses that served
the inquiry at hand while searching for insights, patterns, or concepts that stood out. This process
was especially helpful in managing, storing, and handling interview data during and after the
completion of the study. The handwritten field notes were digitized and imported into a
qualitative software, and abbreviations were developed to make data organization clearer
(Hahlweg et al., 2017). The archived data were organized into a chart of rows and columns in a
file, with each column designated for their relevance in the study and each row designated for an
individual document (Baxter et al., 2016). This format aided with labeling and identification of
findings into meaningful information.
Data Collection Plan
In a case study, the researcher traditionally investigates the bounded system, such as an
activity, a process, a program, an event, or individuals of a chosen site (Creswell & Poth, 2018).
The authors added that this examination would require access to extensive forms, such as
118
internal company documents and records, observations, interviews, and physical artifacts from
multiple cases. In this study, the researcher collected data from interviews, observations, and
archived documents, and recorded this information using field notes, observation, and interview
protocols. The researcher then stored information and transcriptions in digital files. A semi‐
structured and face‐to‐face personal interview was utilized in the study for the overall data
collection process because of the method’s ability to gain astute information based on prepared
questions on the research topic (Alam, 2020, 2021). Furthermore, the author noted that using a
personal interview stimulated the depth of responses from the participants by promoting
independence and individuality in their opinion, which was highly valued information in the data
collection process. This made face‐to‐face interviews appropriate for the research project.
The researcher observed how participants answered the questions, noted down observed
behaviors and expressions, and captured activities within the participant’s workstation to
understand other contributors to the study. Observation of participants in their working
environment assisted the researcher in developing a deeper understanding of the phenomenon
because the process supplemented, supported, and unpacked participant engagement (Gilmore et
al., 2019). It was one way to identify reality from the viewpoint of participants inside the case
(Yin, 2018). Collecting data from archived documents from the company related to the
phenomenon enriched and supplemented primary data gathered through interviews and
observations (Bouncken et al., 2012). This made these data collection activities appropriate for
the study. All ethical concerns were observed across the research activities in selecting the site,
gaining proper access and consent for all participants, sampling purposely to increase credibility
of results, and collecting information through documents, observations, and interviews (Creswell
& Poth, 2018).
119
An essential means of safeguarding against researcher bias is member checking. This
technique includes returning to participants, either via face‐to‐face, or through email or phone, to
show them the transcripts, records, explanations, and interpretations of the researcher based on
the interview (Robson & McCartan, 2016). The authors added that the process reveals the value
of the participants’ perceptions and contributions. Member checking was completed to settle and
reflect on the concerns of the participants and the needs of the study. The process involved
participants reviewing interpretations, thinking independently, and appraising findings that
increased the transactional validity of the results by giving voice to informants, and establishing
more equitable researcher‐participant relationships (Brear, 2019). Returning the results or data
back to participants to check or validate for resonance, meaning, and accuracy with their
experiences increased the credibility and the trustworthiness of results (Birt et al., 2016; Naidu &
Prose, 2018). Participants were given a chance to check the researcher’s data or interpretation
from their viewpoint and to increase the fidelity of the research by maintaining the participants’
integrity and worth (Iivari, 2018; Varpio et al., 2017). Member checking was performed to
ensure that participants’ reconstructions were distinguishable to them as acceptable
representations of their lived experience and realities, and further reassessed their intentions and
corrected errors as necessary. Additional information provided by the participant was captured
and summarized, taking into account any evidence that might be corrected, expanded, or that
might lead to new discoveries.
The interview serves as one of the most important sources of case study evidence and
could especially assist by proposing explanations of the “hows” and “whys” of significant events
in the study, as well as insights reflecting informants’ relativist perceptions (Yin, 2018). As
suggested by the author, case study interviews were open‐ended dialogues rather than planned
120
inquiries, and there were follow‐up conversations with participants to satisfy the needs of the
original investigation. Qualitative follow‐up interviews helped in constructing a deeper
understanding and knowledge of the collected data related to what was of significance in the
day‐to‐day experiences of the participants in the study (Kristoffersen, 2019). Follow‐up
interviews were important and were done most especially when the participant offered other
sources of evidence relevant for the study or suggested other individuals who had specific
experience with the phenomenon (Alam, 2020, 2021). New interview questions were created and
followed up, most especially when these arose from responses to the initial interviews. This
action reinforced the data and information related to the study. This action also helped
supplement the credibility of the results by adding more information to corroborate any insights
that might be comparable or contrary to the data already collected (Yin, 2018).
Instruments
Data collection in qualitative research is the process of gathering information on the
phenomenon in a systematic approach that enables the researcher to answer queries related to
research questions; frequently used instruments are participant interviews, observations, and
group discussions (Moser & Korstjens, 2017, 2018). As recommended by the authors, the
qualitative interviews were open‐ended questions and took descriptive answers with little or no
numerical value. Research instruments in this qualitative study collected new ideas and
opportunities to test their value and accuracy to explore a deeper understanding of the
phenomenon and formulate predictions for possible practical solutions (Scheffelaar et al., 2020).
The authors added that the usability and feasibility of the qualitative instruments were contingent
on the interaction of several factors and the participants to determine which instruments applied
best to serve the objectives of the study under certain conditions. Interview guides, observation
121
protocols, and archived data were used to gather information related to the research problem.
These instruments gave the researcher an active position in understanding, monitoring, and
supplementing the research findings collected from participants in the real‐time setting. In this
qualitative research, examining different perspectives of multiple participants and observing
them at the same time produced an increased understanding of the complex phenomenon and
diminished possible limitations intrinsically associated with the qualitative research practice
(Scheffelaar et al., 2018).
The semi‐structured case study interview guides resembled guided conversations to allow
pursuit of consistent and fluid lines of inquiry regarding the participant’s in‐depth experience
with the phenomenon (Yin, 2018). The author noted that the guide should allow the interviewer
to satisfy the needs of the line of his or her inquiry while instantaneously asking questions in the
open‐ended interview. The interview guides shown in Appendices A through D contained
inquiries focused on answering the research questions with consideration to the roles the
participants took related to TQM sustainment. This grouping consisted of participants in the
leading role, practicing role, supporting role, or receiving role in the sustainment of TQM
methodology. The inquiries also considered the influence of various related themes from
management processes such as continuous improvement, dynamic capabilities, human resource
management, and knowledge management that contributed to the current state of the
phenomenon.
To maintain focus and emphasis on addressing the four research questions, the interview
questions were categorized into four groupings representing four participant roles, such as
leading, practicing, supporting, and receiving. This setup maintained the alignment of the
interview inquiries in getting the appropriate information to answer each research question.
122
Appendices A through D show the interview guide format for the groupings of interview
questions. This format also allowed a concentrated path in achieving saturation of relevant data
that was specific to each research question. Creswell and Poth (2018) suggested that the
interview questions were refined through pilot testing to assess the degree of researcher bias and
make this instrument more adaptable to the environment. The interview inquiries had been
through pilot testing for fine‐tuning and development of the relevant lines to improve each
question’s content. The interview guide carried the awareness of the principle of confidentiality
to protect participants, most especially in research conducted in a workplace environment
(Creswell & Poth, 2018).
To preserve mutual trust and respect with participants helping with the study, the
researcher only used observation as a data collection instrument when they gave their informed
consent. Observing participants as part of the study without their permission and knowledge for
the purpose of the researcher is against the principle of informed consent (Robson & McCartan,
2016). Participant observation was utilized to watch what their actions meant and to pay
attention to what they shared to supplement and corroborate data gathered from other collection
instruments. Being part of the working and social environment of the chosen company in the
study, the researcher easily discerned the meaning of the experiences of participants through the
experience of the observer (Northcote & Phillips, 2019; Simonÿ et al., 2018). Preserving the
researcher‐participant relationship was important while conducting participant observation to
learn about the subjects under study in their natural settings, through observing and participating
in their activities to reconcile between what participants said, and what they did in reality
(Franco & Yang, 2021).
123
To satisfy the objectives of the study in aiming to understand the sustainability issue of
TQM practices, the observation focused on the actual standard work and procedures happening
in the manufacturing lines to examine compliances and non‐compliances. This type of
observation captured actions in real‐time and covered the phenomenon’s context (Yin, 2018).
Execution of quality inspection activities per critical‐to‐quality instructions by participants was
observed to understand how these checks were done, or whether these actions were completed at
all. Explanations from participants were collected on what worked well in their practice of TQM
and what activities caused issues in its sustainment based on findings from observations to
validate their actions. In addition, the observer also noted down response time to quality issues
and captured other inputs introduced to the line such as purchased components, kits, internally
made parts, and schedules that contributed to the phenomenon under study. To answer the
research questions, observation also focused on observable factors that affected process
capabilities and enablers, which influenced how participants sustained TQM practices in the line.
This observation included how leadership recognized, supported, or stimulated the participants’
actions throughout the shift. Robson and McCartan (2016) recommended using an existing
coding scheme that was appropriate to provide relevant information to answer the research
question. The authors added that a straightforward and reliable scheme is one that is objective,
focused, explicitly defined, exhaustive, non‐context dependent, mutually exclusive, and easy to
record. Appendix E shows the observation protocol designed for the study. The observation form
was specifically designed and tailored to gather visual and recognizable information related to
answering research questions of the study in the site.
Documents could supply distinct details to substantiate information from other data
collection sources (Yin, 2018). The archival data that was gathered to support the study were
124
documents related to the company’s TQM practices, which include warranty versus sales reports,
quality alerts, first pass yield, and standard work audits. Additional documents such as product
non‐conformance reports, site scrap summaries, critical‐to‐quality forms, process audits, daily
productivity reports, root‐cause countermeasures, and archived documents supporting evidence
of TQM implementation were included. These documents provided supplementary insight from
multiple viewpoints by allowing access to reflective records and data of the organization’s
quality‐related activities, including assessment of concealed evidence from quality forms that
greatly contributed to the understanding of the phenomenon (Bouncken et al., 2021). This made
approximately 14 types of documents related to TQM practices in the company’s archive eligible
for the study. Table 4 shows the documents used in the study.
Table 4
Quality‐Related Archived Documents of the Company
Documents Specific Purpose in understanding TQM sustainability in the Site
Warranty versus Sales
Report
The document tracked warranty performance and top‐level quality
issues to show quality performance trends. The contents helped
define the current state of TQM sustainability and gaps in the
process.
Quality Alerts
The document tracked direct customer complaints that were reported
directly by field representatives to the organization’s customer
service hotline. The contents helped define the current state of TQM
sustainability and gaps in the process.
125
First Pass Yield The document tracked individual lines and their throughput
performance to identify top process defects and trends. The contents
helped define the current state of TQM sustainability and gaps in the
process.
Standard Work Audits The document tracked compliance and non‐compliance to standard
work procedures. The contents helped define the current state of
TQM sustainability and gaps in the process.
Product Non‐
Conformity Report
The document tracked occurrence of internal defects and their
disposition. The contents helped define the current state of TQM
sustainability and gaps in the process.
Site Scrap Summaries The documents tracked rejected material or components due to
process issues. The contents helped define the current state of TQM
sustainability and gaps in the process.
Critical‐to‐Quality
Forms
The document showed evidence of critical inspections driven by
past significant quality events. The contents helped define the
current state of TQM sustainability and gaps in the process.
Process Audits The document showed evidence of process variations and corrective
measures. The contents helped define the current state of TQM
sustainability and gaps in the process.
126
Daily Productivity
Report
The document tracked manufacturing’s daily performance. The
contents helped define the current state of TQM sustainability and
gaps in the process.
Root‐Cause
Countermeasures
The document showed evidence of corrective measures of
significant quality events. The contents helped define the current
state of TQM sustainability and gaps in the process.
Control Plans These are supporting documents that show quality controls and
procedures. These documents showed evidence of TQM
implementation and baseline expectations.
Quality Manual These are supporting documents that show quality policy and
guidelines. These documents showed evidence of TQM
implementation and baseline expectations.
Change Management
Policies
These are supporting documents that regulated change management
processes. These documents showed evidence of TQM
implementation and baseline expectations.
Process Failure Mode
Analyses
These are supporting documents that identified and evaluated the
potential failures of a process and reaction plans. These documents
showed evidence of TQM implementation and expectations.
Data Organization Plan
Part of the data organization plan was the creation of a case study database that organized
the information gathered for the single case study and had a format that enabled data to be
127
conveniently examined and recovered. Conversion of data from the field required making
choices about the suitable text units of the data and digital representations of the instrument
materials (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Utilizing the questions that were part of the original study
procedure, a question‐and‐answer format was served as one method of forming and organizing
the database (Yin, 2018). The author further suggested that the question‐and‐answer format had a
benefit because it allowed creation of a targeted cross‐case and custom‐made synthesis by
evaluating the participants’ responses to a specific question from a data set. This was an
appropriate process for the research project since organizing the data in such a way that all the
questions were visible and distinguishable allowed the full measure of scope and benefits of the
original database. The setup filtered and sorted information in a manner that best represented the
desired responses that served the inquiry at hand while searching for insights, patterns, or
concepts that stood out. This process was especially helpful in managing, storing, and handling
interview data during and after the completion of the study.
The data organization plan that incorporated observational information included the use
of a tabulated format that captured observed actions of participants and their compliance to TQM
practices in their station. Key phrases or words from the observation, with reference to time,
date, and place were highlighted (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Yin, 2018). Handwritten field notes
were digitized and imported into a qualitative software, and abbreviations were developed to
make data organization clearer (Hahlweg et al., 2017). The authors further noted that initial
coding was helpful when organizing field information on a phrase‐by‐phrase approach and
clustering these into categories or themes. This technique also derived meaning from text by
systematic coding and classification to recognize recurring themes or patterns. The archived data
were organized into a chart of rows and columns in a file with each column designated for their
128
relevance in the study and each row designated for an individual document (Baxter et al., 2016).
This format assisted with the labeling and identification of results into meaningful information
related to the study. This data organization plan was appropriate for the study because it was
systematic and comprehensive in organizing qualitative content to maintain the chain of evidence
that served the objectives of the research.
Summary of Data Collection & Organization
Data were collected from interviews, observations, and archived documents, and
recorded using field notes, observation, and interview protocols. Data and transcriptions were
then stored in digital files. A semi‐structured and face‐to‐face interview was utilized for the
overall data collection process because of the method’s ability to gain astute information based
on prepared questions (Alam, 2020, 2021). This made face‐to‐face interviews appropriate for the
research project. The researcher observed how participants answered the questions, noted down
observed behaviors and expressions, and captured activities within the participant’s workstation.
Observation of participants in their working environment assisted the researcher in developing a
deeper understanding of the phenomenon because the process supplemented and supported
participant engagement (Gilmore et al., 2019). Collecting data from archived documents from
the company related to the phenomenon enriched and supplemented interviews and observations
(Bouncken et al., 2012). This made these data collection activities appropriate for the study. All
ethical concerns were observed across the research activities (Creswell & Poth, 2018).
It was important to give participants a chance to check the researcher’s data or
interpretation from their viewpoint to increase the fidelity of the research by maintaining the
participant’s integrity and worth (Iivari, 2018; Varpio et al., 2017). Member checking was
performed to ensure that participants’ reconstructions were distinguishable to them as acceptable
129
representations of their lived experience and realities, upon which they further reassessed their
intentions and corrected errors as necessary. Follow‐up interviews were important most
especially when the participant offered other sources of evidence relevant for the study or
suggested other individuals who had specific experience with the phenomenon (Alam, 2020,
2021). New interview questions were created and followed up that arose from responses to the
initial interviews. This action reinforced the data and information related to the study. Interview
guides, observation protocols, and archived data were used to gather information related to the
research problem. In this qualitative research, examining different perspectives of multiple
participants and observing them at the same time produced an increased understanding of this
complex phenomenon and diminished possible limitations intrinsically associated with the
qualitative research practice (Scheffelaar et al., 2018).
A question‐and‐answer format served as one method of organizing the database and had a
benefit of creating a targeted cross‐case and custom‐made synthesis by evaluating the
participants’ responses to a specific question (Yin, 2018). The setup filtered and sorted
information in a manner that best represented the desired responses that served the inquiry at
hand while searching for insights, patterns, or concepts that stood out. This process was
especially helpful in managing, handling, and storing interview data during and after the
completion of the study. In organizing observation data, key phrases or words, which were the
product of observation containing actual evidence, were highlighted (Yin, 2018). Handwritten
field notes were digitized and imported into a qualitative software, and abbreviations were
developed to make data organization clearer (Hahlweg et al., 2017). The archived data were
organized into a chart of rows and columns in a file with each column designated for their
relevance in the study and each row designated for an individual document (Baxter et al., 2016).
130
This format aided with the labeling and identification of outcomes into meaningful information
related to the study. This data organization plan was appropriate for the study because it was
systematic and comprehensive in organizing qualitative content to maintain the chain of evidence
that served the objectives of the research.
Data Analysis
Data analysis assisted in the classification, interpretation, and representation of data into
meaningful information that provided context for the study. It was a process of breaking up
something complex into its minor components and using logical and analytical reasoning to
determine properties, patterns, relationships, or trends (Robson & McCartan, 2016). After
organization of the data, Creswell and Poth (2018) suggested prioritizing memoing during the
course of the analysis phase by starting the process at the initial review of the data and
continuing until the inscription of the conclusion. Memos based on the unit of text were
organized to create descriptions that were reflective of content to assist in data sorting activities.
The process of describing and classifying codes into themes included understanding and making
sense of the words, transcript, and phrases collected from data collection instruments such as
interviews, observations, and archived documents. Codes were designated to units of meaning of
the descriptive information collected during a study and were attached to varying sizes of words,
sentences, phrases, or paragraphs, associated with or independent from a study’s setting
(Røddesnes et al., 2019).
The interpretation process was done by creating the codes and developing the themes
from the codes, afterwards organizing the themes into greater units of constructs to make sense
of the collected data (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Interpretations were prepared within a social
construct, ideas, or a grouping of individual views based on hunches, intuitions, and insights that
131
the researcher could link to a larger research developed by others (Ravitch & Mittenfelner Carl,
2016). Data visualization has a social power in its ability to create feelings, meanings, and
engagement in its audience and users because it awakens a wide range of viewpoints in
individuals who participate with it (Engebretsen, 2020). To conduct the analysis for
triangulation, the results of the interview against the shop floor observation and the findings in
the TQM‐related documents were checked. Multiple methodological resources such as diverse
techniques, various data sources, and different data analysis procedures were used to check on
objectivity and incorrectness that any data source, method, or analysis procedure had generated
(Rooshenas et al., 2019). Computer‐assisted qualitative software, NVivo, was used to handle
data synthesis, analysis, storage, and management of data, but it was noted that the software was
unable to understand text and could not replace the researcher’s analytical skills (Houghton et al.,
2017). The software allowed the evaluation of a broader range of data sources, such as video,
audio, and data sets, and offered increased data visualization options and the capability to
generate predefined and custom‐made reports (Phillips & Lu, 2018).
Emergent Ideas
Creswell and Poth (2018) explained that scribbling memos or notes in the margins of
filed transcripts or underneath observation diagrams or images assisted in this preliminary
process of exploring and understanding the contents of a database. The authors added that
scanning texts, words, and phrases allowed the researcher to construct a sense of the
information’s relevance in its entirety in addressing the research questions. Interpretations were
drawn by using memoing and were incorporated from a range of perspectives gathered during
the interview analysis to discover more about the participants’ lived experience of the
phenomenon (Patel et al., 2016). The in‐depth analysis of transcripts involved a series of
132
interactions in other contexts to uncover other changes that transpired over time, which revealed
other developments that affected the research topic. Memoing helped in capturing thoughts,
ideas, and questions during data analysis, and aided in the discovery of essential categories that
led to the identification of relationships among other components of the study (Leger & Phillips,
2017).
Creswell and Poth (2018) suggested prioritizing memoing during the course of the
analysis phase by starting the process at the initial review of the data and continuing until the
inscription of the conclusion. Memos based on the unit of text were organized to create
descriptions that were reflective of content to assist in data sorting activities. Three levels of
analysis, such as segment memos, document memos, and project memos were used to capture
ideas from reading particular phrases in the data, concepts developed from reviewing an
individual file, and the integration of ideas across one concept (Ravitch & Mittenfelner Carl,
2016). This helped in authenticating multiple concepts that fit together across the study. A
sorting strategy was utilized to retrieve and sort memos through time, participant, content, or
data form. Memoing was used as a complementary tool in the systematic analysis of the study
since it tracked progression of ideas through the process, which in turn led to the trustworthiness
of the investigation of the qualitative data and results. This process helped anticipate the
discovery of some evidence through informed premonitions, intuition, and unexpected
incidences that led to richer and more meaningful explanations of the background, context, and
participant actions in the research (Creswell & Poth, 2018).
Coding Themes
The process of describing and classifying codes into themes was important in this
qualitative study and included understanding and making sense of the words, transcript, and
133
phrases collected from data collection instruments such as interviews, observations, and archived
documents. Codes were designated to units of meaning of the descriptive information collected
during a study and attached to varying sizes of words, sentences, phrases, or paragraphs,
associated with or independent from a study’s setting (Røddesnes et al., 2019). The process of
coding was used in combining the visual data or text into classifications of information,
searching for evidence of the code from multiple records in the research, and then giving a
designation to the code (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The codes were used as the basic building
block that formed the structure of the analysis and were clustered into themes or narratives that
interpreted the relevance of the concept (O’Connor & Joffe, 2020). The authors encouraged
researchers to be transparent about their rationale in developing the thematic structure since this
level of interpretive flexibility was significant in qualitative research. An initial list of about 25
potential codes were developed that closely described word segments or phrases irrespective of
the size or content of the database (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The temporary codes were examined
for their relationship to the themes based on the research framework and the literature review.
The coding process helped reveal patterns among events to conceptualize the empirical
content of the area of research. A line‐by‐line analysis of the data were performed to understand
and determine what codes were appropriate for participants’ responses. This process continued
until a main category related to the main concern of the TQM study participants was identified.
The description and classification of codes was related to the main category, along with the
emerging patterns extracted from the data. The coding process provided the direction and
synchronization for simultaneous data collection, analysis, and category saturation to help create
underlying structural patterns of the study (Leger & Phillips, 2017). The codebook for the study
contained the finalized list of codes and descriptions; the book helped articulate the codes’
134
distinctive boundaries in assessing inter‐rater reliability among them (Creswell & Poth, 2018).
The authors noted that the codebook should contain a condensed label suitable to apply in a
margin, a description with inclusion and exclusion criteria to define boundaries, and an example
of the codes using data from the research for clarification.
Interpretations
In qualitative research, interpretation involves conceptualizing beyond the codes and
themes to the greater significance of the study; a well‐established view of this process was about
clarifying or shedding light on meaning (Robson & McCartan, 2016). To start the interpretation
process, codes were created, and themes were developed from codes, and then these themes were
organized into greater units of constructs to make sense of the collected data (Creswell & Poth,
2018). As suggested by the authors, categorical aggregation was used to seek a collection of
instances from the data in anticipation that issue‐relevant meanings might materialize. This
categorical aggregation was also used to examine a single instance and to draw meaning without
searching for multiple instances. Data were pulled separately and assembled back together in
meaningful ways to establish patterns while looking for associations between several categories
(Creswell & Poth, 2018). Interpretations were done within a social construct, ideas, or a grouping
of individual views based on hunches, intuitions, and insights that the researcher could link to a
larger research developed by others (Ravitch & Mittenfelner Carl, 2016). Specifically, this was
done by gathering ideas, perceptions, and personal views of TQM participants and comparing
these insights to existing interpretations from relevant literatures. Peer advice on initial data
interpretations and audit trails was acquired to evaluate preliminary findings that helped
articulate any patterns identified in the data sets. As suggested by Creswell and Poth (2018), the
study incorporated diagraming as a means of visually demonstrating the relationship among
135
concepts at certain points, which were also beneficial in final reporting because of the way
diagrams display clarity.
The information was interpreted as this was being composed and recognized
instantaneously; if multiple sources of information contradicted each other, there was a need for
supplementary evidence (Yin, 2018). The author further emphasized that the researcher should
stay on course with the data collection and interpretation, and the key technique was to recall the
purpose and the rationale of the study. Researchers defined integrity in terms of transparency,
honesty, and objectivity, and commonly stressed the significance of being vested in the research
questions and removing bias in the interpretation of data (Shaw & Satalkar, 2018). To create a
valid and effective interpretation, a framework was generated on what was happening instead of
what was occurring or emerging from what researchers learned during their participation within
the setting (Robson & McCartan, 2016). As suggested by the authors, a preexisting framework
was started, and this was validated on its appropriateness to the study with potential
modification.
Data Representation
Data representation and visualization make the data engaging and digestible by helping to
identify trends and outliers within the data set (Engebretsen, 2020). The authors added that the
process assists in telling a narrative within the data while supporting an opinion or argument and
highlighting the significant parts of a collection of data to convey complex patterns and facts
quickly and efficiently. Data representation and visualization in the study consisted of a word
cloud, items clustered by word similarity, and multiple comparison diagrams between themes
and constructs. To facilitate understanding, persuasion, and clarity, data visualization in the study
also consisted of a flow diagram that categorized and organized information based on categories
136
and themes that were broken down into understandable portions. Data visualization has a social
power in its ability to create feelings, meanings, and engagement in its audiences and users
because it awakens a wide range of viewpoints in individuals who participate with it
(Engebretsen, 2020). According to the authors, it is stimulated by the textual content of
visualizations and contextual dynamics like users’ previous experiences with the phenomenon.
The data sets stored in text, tabular, or figure form were represented by creating a visual
image of the information. A word table was generated to display data from various data sets that
were arranged in a uniform framework; the benefit of this setup allowed a search for differences
and similarities in the information to be performed (Yin, 2018). A matrix that contains text and
not numeric characters were used to cross‐reference and compare categories that were utilized to
establish a representation of data ranges or patterns (Creswell & Poth, 2018). As suggested by
the authors, a cause‐and‐effect diagram could be created to show the level of abstraction. In
creating the display, the selected themes and type of information presented were drafted and
feedback was sought on structuring ideas, noting patterns and potential comparisons, and
revisiting associated texts and conclusions. As suggested by Creswell and Poth (2018), feedback
was sought on the preliminary outlines and data displays by sharing information back to
participants as an important validation step in research.
Analysis for Triangulation
Triangulation helps to reinforce the construct validity of the study by using multiple
methodological resources or practices to develop convergent evidence (Al‐Moghrabi et al.,
2020). The TQM sustainability study used more than one type of qualitative data collection
procedure, such as gathering data by means of interviews, observations, and documents. Multiple
data points were established by gathering information from different periods, locations, or
137
perspectives through the interview of TQM participants who possessed different viewpoints or
held varying levels of authority. This process included interviewing senior leadership and
production employees within the company from different product value streams. Shop floor
observations of the TQM sustainability issue in multiple departments were completed and
documentary examination of the occurrence on file was performed. The results of the interview
were checked against the shop floor observations and the findings in the TQM‐related
documents. Multiple methodological resources such as diverse techniques, various data sources,
and different data analysis procedures were used to check on objectivity and incorrectness that
any data source, method, or analysis procedure had generated (Rooshenas et al., 2019).
Triangulation involved use of multiple data sources to corroborate evidence. When qualitative
researchers uncover evidence to document a code, theme, or perspective from multiple and
different sources of data, they are triangulating information and establishing validity of the
results (Creswell & Poth, 2018).
The multiple sources of evidence included interviewing diverse groups of TQM
participants in the company, covering 50 subjects across five value streams and four functional
groups. Interviewing participants in a variety of different operational positions at different
settings in time and location built up strong evidence of the phenomenon because the approach
covered the diversity of organization (Natow, 2020). The second source of evidence came from
observations taking place at different times and process locations. Actors were observed on how
they performed tasks related to TQM practices at the start and end of the shift, before and after
breaks and lunches, and during normal operations. The observation process established strong
evidence that included select groups of participants for extended periods, diverse activities at
different locations, and work with different concepts (Moon, 2019). The third source of evidence
138
included the examining of documents related to the TQM practice in the company. These
documents included process audits, standard work reviews, critical‐to‐quality forms, product
non‐conformity reports, scrap summaries, productivity statements, quality audits, and root‐cause
countermeasure files. One of the most common practices of utilizing multiple qualitative
methodologies was to combine interviews and observations with documentary analysis (Natow,
2020). A convergent evidence was developed from these three sources to help strengthen the
construct validity of the case study. Use of multiple sources of evidence to provide multiple
measures of the same phenomenon would increase confidence that the research had rendered the
incident accurately (Yin, 2018).
Use of Leading Qualitative Analysis Software
The purpose of the qualitative software as an analysis tool is to assist with the
management aspect of the investigation; the researcher must do the hard analytic thinking and be
aware of its limitations (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Qualitative synthesis consisted of processing
large volumes of data, and it required an effective system for managing study results and
decisions concerning exclusion and inclusion, handling reproductions of research reports,
organizing, and combining data. An electronic database was created for organizing the search
strategy and sorting references. Computer‐assisted qualitative software, NVivo, was used to
handle data synthesis, analysis, storage, and management of data, but it was noted that the
software was unable to understand text and could not replace the researcher’s analytical skills
(Houghton et al., 2017). NVivo helped alleviate the workload in constructing and examining
qualitative research data by enabling the researcher to handle large amounts of data through
structuring tasks spontaneously (Røddesnes et al., 2019). The software allowed the evaluation of
a broader range of data sources, such as video, audio, and data sets, and offered increased data
139
visualization options and the capability to generate predefined and custom‐made reports (Phillips
& Lu, 2018). The software was used to support three phases of the research process, such as data
collection, data analysis, and data representation of findings (Woods et al., 2016). As suggested
by the authors, the software was used to assist in creating text and audio files, making it possible
to create interview notes, field notes, reflective journal records, and interview transcriptions
within the software.
Using NVivo in the study provided an anchor to brainstorm around the development of
themes that was grounded in data, enabling further in‐depth analysis of the findings (Dalkin et
al., 2020, 2021). The study benefited from the dynamic nature of the software that allowed
merging, deleting, or coining of new codes during analysis and kept track of how an
interpretation strategy deployed while addressing the same data in numerous repetitions
(Rossolatos, 2019). NVivo did not completely scaffold the analysis process and limited data
collaboration might constrain the interpretative research processes, so it was important that the
researcher remained true to the objectives of the study while benefitting from this technology
(Maher et al., 2018). It was important that the researcher did not let the technology itself drive
the research design and analysis, prompting him or her to collect large volumes of data that
might not be appropriate for answering the research questions. (Robins & Eisen, 2017).
Summary of Data Analysis
Data analysis is a process of breaking up something complex into its minor components
and using logical and analytical reasoning to determine properties, patterns, relationships or
trends (Robson & McCartan, 2016). Interpretations were drawn by using memoing and were
incorporated from a range of perspectives gathered during the interview analysis to discover
more about participants’ lived experience of the phenomenon (Patel et al., 2016). The in‐depth
140
analysis of transcripts involved a series of interactions in other contexts to uncover other changes
that transpired over time, which revealed other developments that might affect the research topic.
Memos based on the unit of text were organized to create descriptions that were reflective of
content to assist in data sorting activities. The process of describing and classifying codes into
themes included understanding and making sense of the words, transcript, and phrases collected
from data collection instruments such as interviews, observations, and archived documents.
Codes were designated to units of meaning of the descriptive information collected during a
study and were attached to varying sizes of words, sentences, phrases, or paragraphs, associated
with or independent from a study’s setting (Røddesnes et al., 2019).
The description and classification of codes should relate to the main category along with
emerging patterns extracted from the data. The coding provided the direction and
synchronization for simultaneous data collection, analysis, and category saturation to help create
underlying structural patterns of the study (Leger & Phillips, 2017). The interpretation process
was performed by creating the codes and developing the themes from the codes, and then
organizing the themes into greater units of constructs to make sense of the collected data
(Creswell & Poth, 2018). Data were pulled separately and re‐assembled in meaningful ways to
establish patterns while looking for associations between several categories. Interpretations were
prepared within a social construct, ideas, or a grouping of individual views based on hunches,
intuitions, and insights that the researcher could link to a larger research developed by others
(Ravitch & Mittenfelner Carl, 2016). To facilitate understanding, persuasion, and clarity, data
visualization in the study consisted of illustrations and diagrams to categorize and organize
information based on categories and themes that were broken down into understandable portions.
Data visualization has a social power in its ability to create feelings, meanings, and engagements
141
in its audiences and users because it awakens a wide range of viewpoints in individuals who
participate with it (Engebretsen, 2020).
The results of the interview were checked against the shop floor observations and the
findings in the TQM‐related documents. Multiple methodological resources such as diverse
techniques, various data sources, and different data analysis procedures were used to check on
objectivity and incorrectness that any data source, method, or analysis procedure might have
generated (Rooshenas et al., 2019). An electronic database was created for organizing the search
strategy and sorting references. Computer‐assisted qualitative software, NVivo, was used to
handle data synthesis, analysis, storage, and management of data, but it was to be noted that the
software was unable to understand text and could not replace the researcher’s analytical skills
(Houghton et al., 2017). Data analysis is an iterative process that involves moving back and forth
between sampling, data collection, and data examination to collect meaningful data and thought‐
provoking findings; what materializes from data analysis outlines succeeding sampling decisions
(Moser & Korstjens, 2017, 2018). This allowed the researcher to have a comprehensive
understanding of personal experiences and reasons influencing the participants’ preferences
(Vennedey et al., 2016).
Reliability and Validity
Replication of findings in quantitative research aids in the systematic self‐correction
process used in generating ideas to reflect a more accurate understanding of the phenomenon
(Collingridge & Gantt, 2019). Research methods were reliable if these were sufficiently free of
bias and consistently produced the same results given similar contexts such as participants and
research conditions. Reliability signified the dependability of the methodological process. Clarity
was provided in the analytical procedures and a justification of the methods was used to increase
142
the trustworthiness of the study (Rose & Johnson, 2020). The validity of the findings in this
qualitative research involved cautious transcriptions and frequent verification of the data that was
collected during the investigative process, and its trustworthiness was maximized to create
credible and defensible results (Cypress, 2017). This process allowed systematic categorization
of the findings to find common themes or groupings by removing overlapping information
(Creswell & Poth, 2018).
There was a need to acknowledge the researcher’s role in the study, including biases,
assumptions, feelings, and how these affected how research was conducted, including analyses,
outcomes, and conclusions (FitzPatrick, 2019). As Yin (2018) proposed, multiple sources of
evidence, pattern matching, logic models, key informants review, explanation building, and
addressing rival explanations were used to enhance validity in this case study. Bracketing, as a
theoretical construct, recognized participants’ subjectivity and placed it center‐stage in addition
to objectivity; this was used to achieve a better understanding of the phenomenon in real‐time
and was a powerful means to support and clarify research findings (Dörfler & Stierand, 2020).
To avoid personal bias in the research, the phenomenon to study was specifically identified,
bracketing out any existing assumptions and experiences, and gathering data from a number of
participants who had experienced the phenomenon (Gregory, 2019). A supportive environment
was provided by respecting the subjects’ personhood and this required valuing participants’
autonomy and decisions (Dörfler & Stierand, 2020; McWhorter, 2019). Subsequently, the data
were evaluated and analyzed by converting and saturating the information to significant quotes
or accounts and incorporating these statements into relevant themes (Gregory, 2019; McWhorter,
2019).
143
Reliability
Replication of findings in quantitative research is important as it assists the systematic
self‐correction process for the modification of ideas to reflect a more accurate understanding of
the phenomenon and increases confidence in the accuracy of findings (Collingridge & Gantt,
2019). The authors added that research methods are reliable if they are sufficiently free of bias to
consistently produce the same results given similar contexts such as participants and research
conditions. Defining the suitable method to show reliability was important and was contingent on
a certain range of the data itself. In cases where the coding scheme was multifaceted and
additional interpretation was required, a consensus coding method was utilized (Watts &
Finkenstaedt‐Quinn, 2021). This qualitative study was done honestly, carefully, and thoroughly
in conducting the research and one way of realizing this was through an audit trail that verified
the repeatability and accuracy of the results (Robson & McCartan, 2016). Another common way
of dealing with reliability challenges was to produce as many procedures as explicitly as possible
and to carry on research as though an auditor was monitoring the process (Yin, 2018). The author
advised that it was beneficial to conduct case studies so that an assessor in principle, would
replicate the procedure and optimistically conclude the same results.
To enhance reliability in the study, comprehensive field notes using high‐quality
recording instruments and digital files were used (Creswell & Poth, 2018). As suggested by the
authors, the transcriptions included notes that captured the inconsequential, but often essential,
overlaps and pauses. Reliability signified the dependability of the methodological process.
Clarity was provided in the analytical procedures and a justification of the methods was used to
increase the trustworthiness of the study (Rose & Johnson, 2020). The authors further noted that
the researcher would need to consider to what level this research methodology might be
144
replicable, and whether comparable analyses and results would transpire if the data collection
processes were repeated. Related to coding, priori decisions were performed regarding the
number of codes, amount of data that was coded, the unit of coding, the conceptual depth that
codes captured, the reliability measured, and its acceptable threshold (O’Connor & Joffe, 2020).
The authors added that the qualitative reliability specified that the methodological approach
needed to be consistent across different researchers and different studies.
Credibility was maintained by depicting an accurate and truthful representation of
participants’ lived experiences through persistent observation and prolonged engagement to
examine the situation of the phenomenon in its current state. Transferability was achieved by
utilizing purposive sampling methods and providing thick and robust data with an extensive
range of information through accurate and detailed descriptions of the participants and their lived
experiences (Cypress, 2017). Interviews of TQM participants and data collection were carried on
until data saturation and replication was attained to enhance the adequacy and appropriateness of
the study. To achieve dependability, a company’s doctoral level researcher review was requested
to analyze the transcribed materials, and validate the descriptors, themes, and findings. The
analyst’s feedback and recommendations were compared to the study’s thematic analysis to
consider proposals that were acknowledged after agreement and understanding were met from
both parties (FitzPatrick, 2019). The researcher, who was the lone instrument of the study,
maintained a reflexive journal to capture all the notes, summaries, and documents daily during
the research process to satisfy the confirmability of the study. The interview records were part of
the audit trail that aided in the examination of the TQM process as data collection, analyses,
interpretations, and representation were made. Reliability improved when care and consistency
145
were applied in research practices that were observant of the subjectivity and limits of the
research outcomes (Cypress, 2017).
Validity
Validity is the process of determining the result’s accuracy from the perspectives of the
researcher, the participants, and the reviewer of the research (Creswell & Poth, 2018). It is a
provisional construct that is based on the objectives and processes of specific research
methodologies rather than a universal concept that is both singular and fixed (Rose & Johnson,
2020). In this qualitative research, the validity of the findings involved cautious recording and
frequent verification of the data that was collected during the investigative process; its
trustworthiness was maximized to create credible and defensible results (Cypress, 2017). The
author broadly defined this process as the state of being well grounded, pertinent, meaningful,
coherent, consistent with accepted principles, and the quality of being sound and well founded. A
valid research would establish accurately what existed in reality, and a valid measurement or
instrument would essentially assess what it intended to measure. The underlying constructs, such
as physical anxiety and emotional security, were assessed to understand whether the
measurement instruments provided an adequate measure of the construct under study compared
to other measures of the same phenomenon (Collingridge & Gantt, 2019).
To ensure validity in the study, corroboration of evidence through triangulation of
multiple data sources, which included interviews, observation, and archived data, was done. This
process allowed systematic categorization of the findings to find common themes or groupings
by removing overlapping information (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The researcher also clarified bias
or engaged in reflexivity, so the reviewer understood the position from which the former
undertook the inquiry. There was a need to acknowledge the researcher’s role in the study,
146
including biases, assumptions, feelings, and how these affected how research was conducted,
including analyses, outcomes, and conclusions (FitzPatrick, 2019). As suggested by the author,
discrepant evidence was reported to understand this intriguing aspect of the findings and its
influence or relationship to the interactions of the participants’ lived experiences with the
phenomenon. Member checking and participant feedback were incorporated to solicit their views
of the credibility of the findings, interpretations, and representations. Seeking participant
validation ruled out the likelihood of misinterpreting what participants said and did and their
perception of what was going on, as well as a way of identifying the researcher’s biases that
could negatively affect the study (FitzPatrick, 2019).
Prolonged engagement and persistent observation constructed solid field‐based decisions
on what were relevant to the objectives of the study; with the collaboration of participants,
credibility and support of the findings were established (Creswell & Poth, 2018). External audits
and a peer review of the data and research process were enabled. Deliberations about the analysis
and findings aligned the researcher back with the data and enhanced trustworthiness and
debriefing with participants to explain results reinforced researcher understandings and
interpretations (Rose & Johnson, 2020). This validation process also showed respect for the
participants’ contributions, and reinforced ethical consideration. As proposed by Yin (2018),
multiple sources of evidence, pattern matching, logic models, key informants review,
explanation building, and addressing rival explanations to enhance validity in this case study
were used. In making more sense of the phenomenon’s reality, saturation of data were achieved
from the broadest possible range until no additional information could be found that would
develop properties for the category (Constantinou et al., 2017; Saunders et al., 2018). The
147
researcher had a commitment and rigor, sensitivity to context, transparency and coherence, and
maintained impact and relevance to develop the quality of qualitative research (Yardley, 2017).
Bracketing
In qualitative research, bracketing is a form of a research engagement process where the
researcher sets aside his or her experiences and assumptions of the phenomenon under
investigation to allow more consideration of fresh perspectives from the experiences of
participants (Gregory, 2019; McWhorter, 2019). Judgment concerning the true nature of reality
was suspended to preserve pure consciousness and pure phenomena through the separation of
assumptions and biases to achieve an understanding of the occurrence as experienced by the
participants in real‐time (Cypress, 2017). Bracketing, as a theoretical construct, recognized
participants’ subjectivity and placed it center‐stage in addition to objectivity; this helped achieve
a better understanding of the phenomenon in real‐time and was a powerful means to support and
clarify research findings (Dörfler & Stierand, 2020). The authors further noted that bracketing
was about being sensible to what was happening whether the researcher liked it or not and
refraining from bias judgment of participants and acknowledging their beliefs and values as
sources of insight. Since analyses of the data always integrated conventions that the researcher
took along with the focus of the study, bracketing could be predominantly challenging, most
especially when the researcher was profoundly knowledgeable of the specific theoretical model
or framework (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Gregory, 2019). This suspension of inquiry was ongoing
in the study, and included the careful and thorough development of language, word context, and
interpretations with which to represent true and actual findings.
To avoid personal bias in the research, the phenomenon to study was specifically
identified, bracketing out any existing assumptions and experiences, and gathering data from a
148
number of participants who had experienced the phenomenon (Gregory, 2019). It was important
for the researcher to be explicit about their preunderstanding and orientation of the phenomenon
and bracketed these out during data collection and analysis (Cypress, 2017). A supportive
environment was provided by revering the subjects’ personhood and this required respecting
participants’ autonomy and decisions (Dörfler & Stierand, 2020; McWhorter, 2019). Thereafter,
the data were evaluated and analyzed by converting and saturating the information to significant
quotes or accounts and incorporating these statements into pertinent themes (Gregory, 2019;
McWhorter, 2019). A textural picture of the statements of the participants was created based on
what they experienced, and a structural interpretation of how they experienced these accounts in
terms of the situation, condition, or context was made (Creswell & Poth, 2018). As suggested by
the authors, all these structural and textural descriptions were combined to represent a complete
depiction of the experience. To achieve credibility, the collected and analyzed data were
presented to the participants, and they were asked if the narrative was a precise and factual
reflection of their lived experience of the phenomenon (Cypress, 2017). It was important for the
research collection and analysis to reach an instinctive and intuitive understanding of the
participants’ subjective real‐time accounts of their lived experiences (Dörfler & Stierand, 2020).
Summary of Reliability and Validity
Defining the suitable method to show reliability was important and was contingent on a
certain range of the data itself. Qualitative researchers should be honest, careful, and thorough in
conducting the research and one way of realizing this was through an audit trail that verified the
repeatability and accuracy of the results (Robson & McCartan, 2016). To enhance reliability in
the study, comprehensive field notes using high‐quality recording instruments and digital files
were used (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Reliability signified the dependability of the methodological
149
process. Clarity was provided in the analytical procedures and a justification of the methods was
used to increase the trustworthiness of the study (Rose & Johnson, 2020). Credibility was
maintained by depicting an accurate and truthful representation of participants’ lived experience
through persistent observation and prolonged engagement to examine the situation of the
phenomenon. Transferability was achieved by utilizing the purposive sampling method and
providing thick and robust data with an extensive range of information through accurate and
detailed descriptions of the participants and their lived experiences (Cypress, 2017). To achieve
dependability, a company’s doctoral level researcher review was requested to analyze the
transcribed materials, and validate the descriptors, themes, and findings. The researcher
maintained a reflexive journal to capture all the notes, summaries, and documents daily during
the research process to satisfy the confirmability of the study.
The validity of the findings in qualitative research involved cautious transcriptions and
frequent verification of data that the researcher collected during the investigative process, and its
trustworthiness was maximized to create credible and defensible results (Cypress, 2017). To
ensure validity in the study, corroboration of evidence through triangulation of multiple data
sources, which include interviews, observations, and archived data, was done. This process
allowed systematic categorization of the findings to discover common themes or groupings by
removing overlapping information (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The researcher also clarified bias or
engaged in reflexivity so that the reviewer understands the position from which the former
undertook the inquiry. There was a need to acknowledge the researcher’s role in the study,
including biases, assumptions, feelings, and how these affected how research was conducted,
including analyses, outcomes, and conclusions (FitzPatrick, 2019). As proposed by Yin (2018),
multiple sources of evidence, pattern matching, logic models, key informants review,
150
explanation building, and addressing rival explanations were used to enhance validity in this case
study.
Bracketing, as a theoretical construct, recognized participants’ subjectivity and placed it
center‐stage in addition to objectivity; this helped achieve a better understanding of the
phenomenon in real‐time and was a powerful means to support and clarify research findings
(Dörfler & Stierand, 2020). To avoid personal bias in the research, the phenomenon to study was
specifically identified, bracketing out any existing assumptions and experiences, and gathering
data from a number of participants who had experienced the phenomenon (Gregory, 2019). A
supportive environment was provided by revering the subjects’ personhood and this required
respecting participants’ autonomy and decisions (Dörfler & Stierand, 2020; McWhorter, 2019).
Thereafter, the data were evaluated and analyzed by converting and saturating the information to
significant quotes or accounts and incorporating these statements into pertinent themes (Gregory,
2019; McWhorter, 2019). A textural picture of the statements of the participants was created
based on what they experienced, and a structural interpretation of how they experienced these
accounts in terms of the situation, condition, or context was made (Creswell & Poth, 2018).
Summary of Section 2 and Transition
The purpose of this flexible design single case research was to understand the
sustainability issue of the TQM system in a water‐treatment company in the southeastern United
States. The study included a review process that contained a proposal that detailed access,
selection, and permission for the targeted location and participants (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Yin,
2018). The benefit of the flexible approach in this study came from its openness to unforeseen
events and its flexibility to adjust to evolving evidence as the study progressed (Zapf et al.,
2020). The study incorporated triangulating multiple qualitative methods by combining
151
observations and interviews with documentary analysis (Natow, 2020). The research participants
in the study were permanent employees of the company who were familiar with the use of TQM.
The study used a purposeful sampling strategy to identify and create a selection of information‐
rich perspectives that had relevance to the phenomenon and research problems under
investigation (Ames et al., 2019). The study employed a sample size of 50 participants for the
interview and quality‐related documents to gather pertinent information on the TQM
sustainability issue. Studies proposed that researchers utilizing participant interviews initially
conduct no more than 50 interviews to allow researchers to cope with the complexity of the
analytic task (Kindsiko & Poltimäe, 2019; Sim et al., 2018; Vasileiou et al., 2018). Data
collection included evidence from interviews, observations, and archived documents, and was
recorded using field notes, observation, and interview protocols. The interpretation process was
done by creating the codes and developing the themes from the codes, and then organizing the
themes into greater units of constructs to make sense of the collected data (Creswell & Poth,
2018). As suggested by the authors, a textural picture of the statements of the participants was
created based on what they experienced, and a structural interpretation of how they experienced
these accounts in terms of the situation, condition, or context was made. To enhance reliability in
the study, comprehensive field notes using high‐quality recording instruments and digital files
were used. The validity of the findings involved careful recording and frequent verification of
the data that was collected during the investigative process, and its trustworthiness was
maximized to create reliable and defensible results (Cypress, 2017).
The third section of the study included the defense and acquisition of the Institutional
Review Board approval for the research proposal. The approved baselines for Section 1 and
Section 2 documents that included the problem statement, research questions, methodology,
152
participants, sample, data collection, data analysis, reliability, and validity were submitted. After
approval of the research proposal, the qualitative investigation took place. This involved
execution of what had been outlined in the research project proposal. After completion of the
field study, presentation of the findings included discovered themes, interpretation,
representation, and visualization of data. Qualitative research findings and presentations served
important knowledge‐related functions to improve the rigor, influence, and impact of such
methodology (Bekker & Clark, 2018). The relationship of how the findings related to each
research question, conceptual framework, anticipated theme, literature, and problem were
discussed. An overview was provided on how the findings addressed the problem being studied,
the purpose of the research, and the research questions. The qualitative research findings had the
potential to advance the company’s ability to gain a better understanding of the specific needs of
the population, tailor interventions effectively, and optimize resolutions (Wu et al., 2016). The
supporting material that included overview of the study, application to professional practice,
recommendation for further study, and reflections were discussed after the investigation and
analysis had been completed.
Conclusion of the Research Proposal
The study aimed to explore and understand the sustainability issue of the TQM system in
the manufacturing industry. The general problem of TQM sustainability in the manufacturing
industry involved multi‐level challenges in transforming TQM concepts into sustainable business
practices that could be compatible with the current organizational structure (Muruganantham et
al., 2018). Professional and academic literatures confirmed the existence of TQM sustainment
issues in companies’ strategic business practices (Carmona‐Marquez et al., 2016; Nizamidou &
Vouzas, 2020). Even though studies had shown that TQM practices supported the development
153
and empowerment of teams to improve the quality of product and processes (Tortorella et al.,
2019), there was still an underlying tension and conflict between the concept of manipulation,
control, and empowerment (Banuro et al., 2017). The TQM concepts and theories confirmed the
rigidity of the approach and its requirement of firm observance to its procedures (Gözükara et al.,
2019). The TQM theories and concepts defined the stringency of the methodology and its
requirement of strict compliance to its procedures (Gözükara et al., 2019), and the sustainment of
the approach required the organizational culture to change, which might be a challenge to some
organizations (Haffar et al., 2019). TQM models adapted by manufacturing industries had
resulted in different outcomes (Jaeger & Adair, 2016), because there was no distinctive principle
that defined TQM and there was little agreement on what its vital features could do for a specific
setting (Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017). Understanding the relationship between TQM and strategic
sustainable development would explain how and to what degree investing in TQM practices
contributed to realizing sustainable business objectives (Andrade Arteaga et al., 2020).
The flexible design single‐case research aimed to understand the sustainability issue of
the TQM system in a water‐treatment company in the southeastern United States. The study
included a review process that contained a proposal that detailed access, selection, and
permission for the targeted location and participants (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Yin, 2018). The
study incorporated triangulating multiple qualitative methods by combining interviews,
observations, and documentary analysis (Natow, 2020). The use of a purposeful sampling
strategy identified and created a selection of information‐rich perspectives that had relevance to
the phenomenon and research problems under investigation (Ames et al., 2019). Considering the
data collection plan for the sample size of 50 participants, the study created a textural picture of
the participants’ experiences and a structural interpretation of how they experienced these
154
accounts. Reliability and validity involved careful transcription and frequent verification of the
data that was collected during the investigative process (Cypress, 2017).
Presentation of the findings included discovered themes, interpretation, representation,
and visualization of data after the completion of the field study. The relationship of how the
findings related to each research question, conceptual framework, anticipated theme, literature,
and problem were deliberated. A top‐level view of the study was provided on how the findings
addressed the problem being studied, the purpose of the research, and the research questions.
Qualitative research served significant knowledge‐related functions that improved the objectivity
and impact of the methodology on the research topic (Bekker & Clark, 2018). The qualitative
research had the potential to advance the company’s capability to address the specific needs of
the population, customize interventions, and optimize solutions (Wu et al., 2016). The study
looked inward at the company’s internal processes and culture to explore what was working,
what had become irrelevant, and what had been the focus. Understanding how to sustain TQM
and productivity performance provided a foundation for knowing how to sustain other business
dimensions of success (Su & Linderman, 2016). Any TQM approach should consider the needs
and expectations of all stakeholders, customers, the business’ competitive constraint, and CI
requirements for successful integration into the organization’s core resources and dynamic
capabilities (Benzaquen & Charles, 2020).
Section 3: Application to Professional Practice and Implications for Change
Research findings revealed the importance of creating coherence between TQM
methodology and the organization’s strategic objectives. The participants advocated that the
existing quality management system and the company’s defined set of strategic initiatives need
to improve fit and alignment with each other to support a productive and interactive
155
environment. McAdam et al. (2019) describe this approach as a dynamic alignment of
manufacturing processes and systems made by attaining a spontaneous fit instead of an exact fit.
The practitioners claimed that sustaining TQM in the industry may require additional capabilities
to reinforce what it takes to achieve it, and this includes DC to integrate and transform (Putri et
al., 2018) and HRM to facilitate engagement and empowerment (Süßbauer et al., 2019). KM is
also necessary to improve knowledge creation (Seo et al., 2016) which will help companies
become more strategically adaptable to the dynamic changes in their manufacturing environment
(Gutierrez‐Gutierrez et al., 2018).
Overview of the Study
The objective of the study was to understand the sustainability issue of TQM in a water
treatment company in the southeastern United States, resulting in high product warranty costs,
field failure rates, and cost of quality. The presentation of the findings included discovered
themes, their interpretation, data representation, and visualization. The study discussed the
relationship of how the findings correlated to each research question, conceptual framework,
anticipated theme, literature information, and the research problem. The semi‐structured
interviews of the participants from different roles revealed varied evidence of TQM
sustainability in the water treatment company. Based on leadership interviews, the organizational
culture’s dominant attribute was towards achievement of its strategic goals and competitiveness
to attain market superiority and deliver higher customer experiences. The findings revealed that
the organization’s centered focus on immediate success and business results created conflicts
with TQM methodologies’ high cost and time‐consuming sustainment processes that required
additional activities. This was in line with the outcomes noted by Georgiev and Ohtaki (2019) in
their study. Participants acknowledged that the sustainment of TQM practices was costly and
156
impractical in a short‐term strategy, even though the methodology had a long‐term potential to
help the company achieve competitive advantage.
Management claimed that the company’s strategic emphasis was towards competitive
advantage and dominance in the market, while its quality management system had a customer‐
focused process that aimed for continual support of the company’s strategic goal and objectives.
Albuhisi and Abdallah (2018) noted that alignment of TQM practices could affect the preset
company’s strategies and operational target variables if there was no balance or coherence
between the two standards. The inability of the practitioners to sustain TQM practices revealed
contributors such as complex methodology, concerns with the applicability of techniques, lack of
communication, training, understanding, knowledge, and support. The incoherence between
TQM practices and production targets created participant responses that led to behavioral
concerns, most especially when neither quality nor production objectives were achieved due to
conflicts. Practitioners experienced operational constraints due to worn tools, unreliable
equipment, and poor process capability, which resulted in lack of observance to proper
monitoring, noncompliance to scheduled preventive maintenance, and inattentiveness to the
quality management system. While TQM practices had positive relationships with organizational
performance and productivity (Sila, 2018a), in addition to providing tools and methods to reduce
errors, waste, and inefficient procedures (Alkhaldi & Abdallah, 2019, 2020), management
needed to give full commitment to TQM’s quality standards (Pham, 2020).
Data from the study produced relevant information that related to all research questions
and supported the conceptual framework initially outlined in the foundation of the research. The
findings confirmed that failure in sustaining the quality system in place resulted in high product
defects, leading to excessive reject costs and loss in productivity. This supported Nasim’s (2018)
157
claim that the sustainment of TQM influenced the operational productivity of organizations,
which also affected other dimensions of performance such as financial effectiveness and
customer satisfaction. Data from the interviews confirmed that TQM methodology was not in
coherence with the company’s strategic objectives that focused more on business results because
of contradictions with its complex and time‐consuming activities and measurement processes. It
took more work and time for TQM initiatives to produce benefits that influence performance,
making it costly and impractical in the short term (Qasrawi et al., 2017). This complication and
suitability issue caused TQM practitioners to lose engagement, involvement, and commitment, as
described by Chiarini and Vagnoni (2017). Based on leadership interviews, the organizational
culture acknowledged competitiveness as a combination of strategies and quality, but it was
sensitive to the methodology’s timely results and benefits designed to influence performance. Li
et al. (2018) shared this same concern that when changes did start to take place in the business,
the sustainment of TQM programs became a challenge because management expected immediate
changes from a transformation that usually takes time to produce results. Panuwatwanich and
Nguyen (2017) also stressed the same findings that organizations dominated by market and
rational cultures did not support a favorable environment for the effective sustainment of TQM
compared to cultures controlled by adhocracy or the group‐type system.
The practitioners shared that the methodology created constraints and overwhelmed
operational‐enablers through its high frequency, repetitive, and labor‐intensive inspection
checks. The research findings aligned with each element in the conceptual framework that
contributed to the sustainment issues of TQM in the company. The results also confirmed the
presence of anticipated themes that cover CI, DC, HRM, and KM, and have many similarities
with the information taken from professional and academic peer‐reviewed literatures. Based on
158
the findings of the research, the water treatment company in the southeastern United States
experienced TQM sustainability issues that resulted in high product warranty costs, field failure
rates, and cost of quality. Even though findings showed that the company supported the
development and empowerment of teams to improve the quality of products and processes
(Tortorella et al., 2019), there was still an underlying tension and conflict between the concept of
manipulation, control, and empowerment (Banuro et al., 2017). Practitioners confirmed the
rigidity of the TQM approach and its requirement of firm observance to its procedures as noted
by Gözükara et al. (2019), and the sustainment of the approach requires the organizational
culture to change, which may be a challenge for the company (Haffar et al., 2019). The TQM
model adapted by the company has resulted in different outcomes, because there was no distinct
standard that defined TQM and little understanding on what its vital features could do for the
company’s specific setting (Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017).
Presentation of the Findings
The purpose of the study was to understand the sustainability issue of TQM in a water
treatment company in the southeastern United States, resulting in high product warranty costs,
field failure rates, and cost of quality. All participants have been verified to have the basic
understanding of the meaning of TQM in the site. The study incorporated three instruments for
data collection that were gathered from the selected population. These instruments included
semi‐structured interviews with the participants, observations of the workplace environment, and
examination of the company’s archived documents related to the sustainment of TQM in the site.
Member checking was used for each interview to ensure reliability and validity of the
information. Bracketing was applied to preserve the participants’ subjectivity and objectivity of
the information. Results from the interviews were checked against the observations collected
159
from the workplace and the findings in the archived documents related to TQM activities. All
findings were transcribed and converted to digital word files for proper organization of the
electronic database after the information therein were triangulated for accuracy, validity, and
reliability. The digitized data from the three instruments were imported to the NVivo qualitative
software to assist with the management aspect of the study that included data synthesis, in‐depth
analysis, and storage. The data from three different sources were synthesized and an open
inductive coding approach was used so literature information and empirical findings were set
side by side as suggested by Creswell and Poth (2018). These data collections were compared
and contrasted utilizing the initial conceptual framework as a preliminary foundation of the
analysis. The evolving themes and sub‐themes from the coding process were then organized to
present the findings in a rational manner, as suggested by Robson and McCartan (2016). Any
outstanding issue was clarified by revisiting interviews with the participants. These steps were
utilized in a repetitive manner to ensure accurate information in building up the findings as
suggested by Yin (2018). The presentation of the findings includes discovered themes, their
interpretation, data representation, and visualization. The study also discusses the relationship of
how the findings relate to each research question, conceptual framework, anticipated themes,
literature information, and the research problem. The presentation will discuss how the findings
address the research problem, the purpose of the research, and the research questions. The
findings were supported by evidence gathered from the population. To protect the identity and
valuable information acquired in the study, the population was coded according to the table
below.
Table 5
Research Population Codes
160
Code Population Description
AD1 to AD14 14 Archived Documents related to TQM activities in the site
L1 to L7 Participants who have leading roles in TQM
OF1 to OF18 18 Observation Forms taken from 18 observation points
P1 to P27 Participants who have practicing roles in TQM
R1 to R7 Participants who experienced TQM sustainment effects
S1 to S10 Participants who have supporting roles in TQM
Themes and Resulting Constructs Discovered
The semi‐structured interviews of the participants from different roles revealed varied
evidence of TQM practices in the water treatment company. The participants in the practicing
roles are generally responsive to the TQM methodology only when it supports their ability to
achieve their productivity goals and are less receptive of the practices that constrain them from
realizing their targets. Their perspectives, actions, and behaviors are aligned with the findings
from the observations made on their workstations as they practiced TQM. According to
participants, their priorities were generally influenced by the centered emphasis on meeting
production targets to meet internal and external demands. An apprehensive participant related,
P6: The quality system in place is practical only when it helps us achieve our targets. The
inspections become unsustainable when they are used to compensate for issues with
parts, machines, tooling, and suppliers. 100 percent inspections add too much work for
us, and these are not 100 percent effective. It is hard to make production numbers with so
many checks, and noncompliance to these requirements is common. We totally support
management’s focus on speed to stay in business, and what is important to them is
161
important to us. This does not mean I will not do the right things for quality; I will still do
my checks because it is the right thing to do, even though these inspections slow me
down and add too much work.
The TQM practitioners have to deal with a lot of effort in balancing the needs of the
quality requirements as well as satisfying production targets. The participants in the supporting
roles shared their experiences with keeping up with the demands of operations and the
opportunities with training, knowledge sharing, and communication. Based on interviews, this
group understands the roles they have in sustaining processes to enable operations to achieve
their targets. They experienced challenges with getting proper information and availability of
time to support production personnel. One supporting participant noted,
S2: When it comes to reactive quality activities, the workload is plenty. As for
preventative quality activities, it is extremely hard to find time to help as much due to
day‐to‐day activities, so it can be overwhelming when assisting operators at times.
Improper guidance and misinformation set up the potential for quality problems to recur.
From a production and morale standpoint, when associates are continuously receiving
good information and guidance that helps them assist with production, they are more
willing to help sustain quality practices versus misinformation and poor guidance, which
only create doubt and eventually more resistance to helping sustain quality.
Participants in the supporting roles struggled with the prioritization of work and lack of
guidance or information to help them optimize their ability to support operations. The
participants that deal directly with customers and quality issues have shared their own narratives
related to missed opportunities, gains, and losses in the field. They confirmed the increased rate
on the annual fluctuation of warranty cost and field failures. They have experienced increased
162
workload and associated costs with recovery customers’ business and loyalty. A concerned
warranty service manager said,
R5: Quality issues always increase warranty dollars. Depending on the criticality of the
issue, it can and often does dramatically increase workload on our service managers,
sales representatives, warranty coordinators, technical service, and/or administrators. I
believe ongoing quality issues affect overall sales when we do not solve these issues in a
timely manner. We end up losing more customers and sales.
This claim is supported by the company’s warranty reports, which showed fluctuations in
costs due to field failures and took a physical and emotional toll on field service managers. The
participants in the leading roles interpreted and generated the quality management policies and
guidance. The leadership required firm observance and adherence to all of the company’s
business management systems. They enforced the quality policies and measurement system to
gauge performance, and frequently monitored for compliances through the site’s internal
business management audits. One manager claimed,
L7: We have procedures and practices that enable us to incorporate quality management
practices into our yearly strategic goals. One is through change management policies that
include product change orders, temporary deviation approvals, and use of the business
management system (BMS). This system includes maintenance of our core practices such
as internal audits, training and awareness, control of documents, corrective and
preventive actions, management review, and nonconforming materials. The human
resource team plays a major role in training and awareness and maintains a training
matrix for the whole site. The quality group is instrumental in laying the groundwork for
both hard and soft aspects of total quality management. They carry much of the
163
knowledge transfer of responsibilities to make sure we have sustainability in every
system we implement, whether this be lean management, six sigma, continuous
improvement (CI), or any process capability initiatives.
The company’s leadership acknowledged that implementation of TQM in the
organization had many benefits, but its process application does have many sustainment
challenges. The TQM practitioners experienced substantial adversity in sustaining TQM in the
company. Major themes concerning the lived experiences of the practitioners developed in their
descriptions of the sustainment of TQM were the following: (a) market‐oriented organizational
culture, (b) rigid TQM methodology, (c) pacesetting leadership style, (d) highly competitive
strategies. The resulting constructs from these themes were high cost of quality and external
warranties, inconsistent productivity and performance, impassive employee behavior,
unpredictable operational constraints, and overwhelmed process enablers.
Market‐Oriented Organizational Culture. According to leadership interviews, the
company’s organizational culture aligned with its strategic objectives of improving its
competitiveness and achieving its goals with its distinct orientation of utilizing market
intelligence and inter‐functional coordination aimed in gaining excellence in business
performance. This aligned with Ali et al.’s (2020a) claim that market‐oriented companies
generate potential sustainable competitive advantage through information sharing and forming
synchronization among all the functional divisions within the business. The company’s structure
and ranking of priority was bonded on production objectives, goal positioning, risk, flexibility,
and competition, while maintaining strategic emphasis on market superiority and growth
innovations. McAdam et al. (2019) noted that this ranking of operational priorities played a
significant role in the successful sustainment of TQM because it showed how leadership
164
formulated an effective plan that can optimize limited resources for its sustainment. According to
leadership interviews, the company’s flexible framework supported differentiation and
integration of the BMS that enabled the implementation of quality management structure to be
successful. Sinha and Dhall (2018, 2020) supported this condition, noting that flexibility‐oriented
organization cultures with organic structures promote TQM implementation. Concerning the
business orientation, a site manager affirmed,
L4: The importance of implementation of the quality management system is implied in
our first company value (of six values): Customer First. The top‐level corporate quality
policy supports this: “We are committed to delivering world‐class products and services
that contribute to the success of our customers and meet or exceed their quality
requirements. All employees are responsible to continuously improve the products and
services we provide.” Although the site did not have a formally registered quality system,
its BMS – a hybrid of International Organization for Standardization (ISO) core
processes and Lean‐based processes – was developed and continued to evolve to support
both the ‘Customer First’ mindset and quality policy. These processes were designed to
support functional and cross‐functional activities at all levels of the organization.
The company used a range of quality management practices that included TQM and BMS
adaptation to coordinate the process of aligning its strategic goals, including its lean and CI with
quality requirements. McAdam et al. (2019) referred to this positioning as a dynamic process of
adjusting to uncertainty and environmental change. However, parallel to Sachdev and Agrawal’s
(2017) claim, the company’s strategy formulation focused more on business results and less on
business processes, which affected the initiative’s execution, resource infrastructure, and work
prioritization for TQM frontline practitioners. A participant in a leading role advised,
165
L5: It is important for quality to support operations and vice versa. There has to be
coherence between operations and quality so both processes support each other and not
constrain each other. The quality methodology should be process‐focused and the more
proactive it could be the better for defect prevention. We understand that poor product
quality affects customer loyalty. We also understand that we need to be profitable to be
competitive and stay in business. We have a responsibility to deliver returns to our
shareholders. There is cost to maintain high quality, and investments to improve quality
need to be fully understood and justified. Our culture, no matter what the rational
orientation is, will not stand against quality standards; no one here wants to ship bad
products to our customers.
The leaders in the site understood the requirement for soundness between quality and
operational activities. However, they cautioned the need for justification on any quality
investment. A reasonable payback period is expected to be able to deliver planned returns to the
shareholders. Another company manager supported this claim,
L6: The two aspects (quality and operational objectives) of business are integral. Quality
initiatives need to match the leadership’s strategic objectives and customer requirements,
while manufacturing needs to operate in a fashion so as not to negatively affect the
customer quality experience while achieving their goals. There are ongoing alignment
opportunities with these two aspects to help improve sustainment on both sides. These
aspects need to feed on each other, not consume each other, so we can flourish as a
business.
The information provided by this participant in the leading role has meaningful
implications. This finding concurred with Sinha and Dhall’s (2018, 2020) claim that there is a
166
need to align the organizational culture and the requirements of quality systems to support
sustainment of the approach in the increasing complexity of manufacturing processes. The
company’s leadership acknowledged the importance of TQM and the opportunities in its
sustainment through alignment with strategic objectives. However, they need to see the effects of
the methodology on their bottom line. TQM initiatives focus primarily on customer satisfaction
and not on the company’s bottom line improvements; management needs to see tangible
improvements in cost savings or increased performance, or they will lose commitment (Anthony
et al., 2017). Corresponding to what Carmona‐Marquez et al. (2016) claimed, the site
management wants to develop and achieve a strong relationship among strategic factors and
performance in order to have successful and effective TQM sustainment.
Rigid TQM Methodology. Based on interviews, the company maintained a structured
and systematic approach to TQM to facilitate CI focused on customer satisfaction. The
company’s leadership have enforced this methodology on a concentrated effort by providing
necessary resources such as training, funding, staffing, and clearly defined objectives to
aggressively manage product quality on a continuing basis. This customer‐focused business
management philosophy given emphasis to the continual enhancement of the processes and
management of business systems by means of policy positioning and resource management
strategies, is in alignment to Mendes and Jesus’ (2018) studies. In reviewing the company’s
quality manual, the details showed,
AD12: The quality manual specifies firm observance and compliance to the company's
TQM requirements. It lays out rules, policies, procedures, and clear expectations. The
company’s management team are assigned to make sure those responsibilities and
authorities are defined and communicated through individual roles in each value stream.
167
Each department concentrates on doing their part to ensure product quality. Any changes
to the quality management system are taken into careful consideration and planned
accordingly. When any changes occur, their potential consequences, the integrity of the
quality management system, the availability of resources, and the allocation or
reallocation of responsibilities and authorities are taken into effect immediately upon
approval by management.
This document stated the company's objectives for preserving quality in operating and
executing the processes within its quality management system with firm compliance to all of its
policies. The site’s leadership understood the need for a process‐based approach to TQM;
however, the methodology is still operator‐dependent, according to the practitioners. This is in
alignment to what Moccia (2016) recommended, that quality management should not focus on
control and sanctions of employees but should put more emphasis on management of processes.
One TQM practitioner recalled,
P5: The methodology is too dependent on operators who can easily make mistakes, and
we are constantly audited for compliance to make sure we are doing the checks correctly.
This is a fast‐paced environment, and it is hard to keep up with too many labor‐intensive
quality inspections. The visual checks are very subjective, and mistakes can easily
happen. There are different standards between quality inspectors on what a cosmetic
defect is, so it can be confusing and frustrating at times. When we have issues, it takes a
lot of time to go over the process of problem‐solving, and it takes more time to see the
results.
The participant confirmed multiple manual and laborious quality checks that contributed
to the sustainment issue of TQM practices. The site’s quality management system has required
168
firm adherence to policies and procedures to maintain product quality. The leadership shares the
same concept with Amin et al. (2017) that TQM is a strenuous management philosophy that
requires full commitment to improve product quality and processes, otherwise, a halfhearted
execution will lead to failure that translates to high cost and low performance.
Pacesetting Leadership Style. The site’s leadership has been focused on achievement
and production goals, and they set the model for performance, speed, and quality of work. The
manufacturing supervisors on the shop floor share this competitive orientation and results are
what counts in the end, according to the practitioners. One participant recollected,
P7: Our supervisor recognizes us for our work in the cell, and often times, he works side‐
by‐side with us so he can understand what we are experiencing. We maintain three
complex cells, so it is important to do what is expected of us from the quality standpoint.
He is very focused on production numbers and he is all about standard work. He
motivates us in making our targets and sets the drumbeat in producing parts. He does
standard work audits frequently to make sure we are on the mark of achieving our
numbers every hour. We feel the pressure to keep up with the pace because it does not
take much to fall behind, and then mistakes start to add up in our attempt to recover.
Participants felt the sense of urgency to heed the needs and expectations of their
pacesetting leader. This progressive leadership style is detrimental for the practitioners’
engagement, involvement, and motivation in the long term. This is in line with Campion’s
(2018) claim that this pacesetting leadership style sets the pace for the team, demands a high
level in performance, and expects excellence at all times with minimal supervision.
Highly Competitive Company Strategies and Operational Targets. Review of the
company’s productivity report revealed that its strategies and operational targets have been
169
geared towards improving competitive advantage and market superiority. The productivity report
also showed its dominant strategic attribute to achieve its goals and operational objectives. The
document further exhibited the timeframe of the company’s operational objectives that were
broken down into workable tasks on short term basis and had a targeted measurable and specific
focus. Based on the company’s strategic transformation plan, more than half of the strategic
projects were focused on improving costs and less than half on other metrics that include projects
on quality, employee retention, and training. A participant shared the experience of satisfying
production’s higher expectations while adhering to quality requirements:
P18: I understand the benefits of doing my quality checks, but these are additional
workloads to me. I have production targets I need to satisfy and no time to waste. Why do
we have to check most components from suppliers? Our number one priority is to make
production targets every day, and I have to make extra time for inspections before I can
complete a product. Supervisors measure me by my production numbers, and these none‐
value‐added checks are slowing me down. Is there a way these quality checks can be
made to support me in making production targets? It is hard to stay engaged and involved
when these quality checks are working against my time to make production targets.
The participant noted this condition to be negatively affecting the level of engagement
and involvement in sustaining the needs of TQM practices. The speed of production‐oriented
processes require more cohesion with the existing quality management requirements, so outputs
were often time‐affected according to the practitioners. Conflict in the appropriateness of the
TQM application in manufacturing processes can also affect soft variables most especially if this
impact production goals (Antony & Sony, 2019, 2020; Shamsi & Alam, 2018).
170
High Cost of Quality and Warranty. The company’s sales and warranty report detailed
the high cost of quality and warranty experienced by the company. The quality metrics and
measurements showed clear data on the process output that were calculated from internal and
external sources such as scrap summaries and field reports. Albuhisi and Abdallah (2018) noted
that TQM practices have direct positive relationships with cost related to quality and its
sustainment issues resulted in high cost of quality and external warranties that were outcomes of
failed prevention and correction initiatives. Examining the company’s warranty versus sales
report, the details revealed,
AD1: The warranty data shows that the customer claims rate, which is calculated as a
percentage of sales, is steadily oscillating indicating that product and service quality
issues come and go, as these issues get resolved and recur. The claims trend line does not
display a certain sustained period even when lower claim percentages remained below the
targeted goal of the company for its quality metric. Since warranty claims rates represent
an interaction between total product sales and warranty expenses, consideration is given
when the percentage rates rise because the sales volume falls short. In this case, however,
the data shows that the underlying warranty expenses are still high.
The company uses the scrap summaries report to track internal cost of quality in terms of
defects produced by production. The data are used to determine top contributors to the scrap
issue and a Pareto is created to determine the priorities and focus of the countermeasures and
resources needed to resolve issues. The document displays the top scrap parts for the site and the
overall year to date trend. Evaluating the company’s scrap summaries report, the details showed,
AD6: The current year‐to‐date scrap data shows scrap cost percentage improvement on
the first quarter but exhibited an inconsistent trend in the second quarter. The document
171
also shows that the root‐cause countermeasure actions are focused on the top 10 scrap
contributors for the site, and most of these actions are designed for repeat issues that have
been resolved before. Inherent to the countermeasures, there is focus on detection
measures as well as preventative solutions.
The fluctuating scrap rate indicates challenges in quality control of incoming materials
and unsustainable manufacturing processes. This also includes worn tools, inadequately
maintained equipment, and training issues as presented in the failure and defect codes of the
data. The recurrent spike in internal scrap costs indicated a sustainability issue with process
capability and quality control in general.
Inconsistent Productivity and Performance. The company’s productivity report
showed opportunities for sustainment of performance and the evidence included overtime and
weekend work to catch up with missed targets and goals. Examination of the document also
showed that these low performance challenges were caused by lack of resources, technical
support, rework, and training issues. Further assessment of the company’s productivity report
showed,
AD9: The daily productivity report displays the regular activities to improve and reduce
the productivity variances between the forecasted and actual production outputs. Major
inputs that affect labor productivity such as quality defects, machine downtime, material
shortages, and inventory issues are common and seriously taken into consideration to
make sure output per labor hours are maintained and fully supported. The current
information dictates scheduling overtime and weekend work due to productivity misses.
A separate countermeasure form is updated to address any input that would disrupt
productivity, and a champion is assigned to lead the mitigation process.
172
The document captured multiple contributors to production inefficiencies, including
various quality control misses. The situation supported Boikanyo and Heyns’ (2019) claim that
proper sustainment of TQM improves the effectiveness of production resources and their
capabilities to support the process and specific tasks tied to reject nonconformities and maintain
higher productivity. Feedback from the shop floor reinforced the current condition and
challenges experienced in the manufacturing environment, as one participant reminisced,
P2: We have quality issues with the parts we receive from the supplier, so we have to
check these parts often, even though it is taking us longer to assemble units. We did not
sustain these checks when we completed three pallets of finished goods. A quality auditor
told us we could not ship these because of a crack issue found with one of the
components. We wasted half a day building those, and another half a day in rework. We
are now working weekends to catch up. We could have minimized the productivity
problem if we had the resources to detect this issue beforehand and had communicated
the problem appropriately. It is tough to make production targets consistently if we do not
catch this quality condition.
The participant understood the effects of quality practices on productivity and
performance. Albuhisi and Abdallah (2018) noted that an effective implementation and
sustainment of TQM relates to quality and performance success for as long as practitioners
adhere properly to its methodology and guiding principles. While TQM has been effective in
enhancing quality and improving performance, its sustainment in the manufacturing field
involves many challenges (Bouranta et al., 2017; Carmona‐Marquez et al., 2016)
Employee Behavior and Condition. The company’s quality manual required strict
adherence to its quality management policies and fulfillment of its strategic objectives at the
173
same time. Based on feedback from the shop floor participants, the sustainment of TQM is
mostly operator‐dependent and not process‐based. This condition causes workload issues that
affect performance and productivity on TQM practitioners. One participant recalled,
P5: I understand the need for the change, but most times, these quality activities create
confusion in my standard work and throw me out of sync. They say it is as simple as just
looking for this or that, but it is not, most especially when I am primed to do things the
same way over and over again. These inspections are making it harder for me to reach my
hourly targets. Some of these assessments are just too hard to follow no matter how
simple they say they are. Some leaders only see things from their perspectives, not from
our side, and that is where most of our misunderstandings are coming from. Sometimes I
feel stressed out with some of these complex quality changes; I just go ahead and carry
on. I am already working the best I can, and I still cannot fulfill expectations. It is
discouraging and difficult to stay engaged.
The company’s existing standard work lacks some integration of quality activities and
contributes to the frustration and unwanted stress on associates who are doing their best to
achieve production targets. Employees behave sensibly to gain respect and recognition while
adhering to strict company regulations and policies at the workplace (Andrade et al., 2017;
Kumar & Sharma, 2017). Based on observations, when the goals become unattainable because of
perceived interruptions to their standard work, the operators adopt an impassive behavior.
Unpredictable Operational Constraints. The company has experienced unpredictable
operational constraints partly due to challenges in sustaining TQM practices, according to
participants in the supporting roles. The company’s quality management system also captures
and measures process indicators that are detrimental to the useful life of its mold tools and
174
equipment. Evidence from interviews show that failure in sustaining quality practices, which
safeguards equipment, leads to unpredictable operational constraints that affect both quality of
parts and productivity, as one participant explained,
P4: Quality checks help me determine when it is time to change my cutting tools. It is
hard to sustain quality when the machine is not making acceptable parts. I think this
fixture is slowly breaking apart and it takes a while to fix it. Sometimes we are extending
the life of the tools until support gets here to fix it for us. They are also busy fixing other
issues in other cells. The problem with extending the tool life is that it also overloads the
equipment and creates a much bigger problem. These quality inspections only help us if
we sustain these and address what these are telling us to do.
The participant understood the benefits of maintaining quality checks. He struggled with
support resources for helping sustain the quality requirements to avoid operational constraints.
Jaeger and Adair (2016) noted that issues in sustaining TQM would create unpredictable
operational constraints and overwhelm process‐enablers that limit the optimization of any part of
the manufacturing system or infrastructure to fulfill operational targets.
Overwhelmed Process Enablers. The company’s process enablers provide the
foundation for the functional drivers of the business’ processes and their support is interwoven in
all activities of the operation, according to participants on the supporting role. Based on
observations of the shop floor, any deviation from the standard process that resulted from a
quality incident because of an improperly sustained TQM practice significantly affects the
company’s information system and the facilities environment. One participant elaborated on the
significance of sustaining TQM:
175
P13: We learned hard lessons when we skip certain quality checks at the end‐of‐line.
Those final inspections have to be sustained; if not, the condition will create a bigger
problem that will involve many resources to mitigate the issue. The last time the final
inspection was not done, and the audit found missing components, we had to recall
everything we built that day. Finance has to create a nonconforming trailer to fit all
suspect parts, shipping has to undo all the invoiced units, IT has to help us trace the serial
numbers, and quality techs have to reassign the inventory. The quality incident
overwhelmed everyone. It placed more work on everybody, the system, support group,
and these included our IT specialist, our process technicians, and team leads who have to
manipulate the system to scrap, transfer, quarantine, rework, and so on. We lost a day’s
worth in production, and we have to work extra hours to recover productivity.
Participants understood the consequence of not sustaining TQM properly. The result of
the quality miss overloaded the system and productivity suffered. Gaiardelli et al. (2019)
explained that the operational performance of the business includes high‐level quality and
process leanness in terms of equipment capability, speed of delivery, and product dependability
that are supported by process enablers. Observation on the shop floor confirmed the
ramifications of not sustaining quality checks:
OF10: The material handler brought back pallets of finished goods and operators were
opening the boxes to check the parts. They shut down production to inspect what had
been produced. The team lead and quality technician were busy removing the labels and
tagging the pallets for nonconformance. One of the final inspections was not done and a
defect was found after the part was assembled. The line is reprocessing all the suspect
assemblies instead of making their production targets.
176
The observation captured all the non‐valued added activities that were taken to
accommodate reprocessing of finished goods. The productivity setback was significant. This
situation supports Boikanyo and Heyns’ (2019) claim that poor quality practices could cause
multiple operational disruptions, major financial loss, and low productivity.
Interpretation of the Themes and Resulting Constructs
The site’s leadership believes that the sustainability of TQM practices carries a lot of
benefits and advantages to the company’s performance and competitiveness. However, for the
participants in the study, the sustainability of TQM practices come with opportunities and
challenges. The participants experienced considerable adversity in sustaining TQM requirements
to realize the benefits related to quality conformance and reduced reprocessing costs. Most
participants have experienced TQM practices being in the way of their production goals and
objectives. The themes concerning the live experiences of the participants emerged in their
descriptions of their practice of TQM in the company, including the impact of the market‐
oriented organizational culture, pacesetting leadership style, firm TQM methodology, and highly
competitive strategies and operational targets. The resulting constructs from these themes are
high cost of quality and external warranties, inconsistent productivity and performance,
impassive employee behavior, unpredictable operational constraints, and overwhelmed process‐
enablers.
Market‐Oriented Organizational Culture. Based on interviews, the organizational
culture’s dominant attribute has been towards achievement of its strategic goals and
competitiveness to attain market superiority and deliver higher customer experience. The
organization’s centered focus on immediate success and business results creates conflicts with
TQM methodologies’ high cost and time‐consuming implementation processes that require
177
additional activities as noted by Georgiev and Ohtaki (2019). Participants acknowledged that the
sustainment of TQM practices is costly and unpractical in a short‐term strategy even though the
methodology has a long‐term potential to help the company achieve competitive advantage. This
condition agrees with what Haffar et al. (2019) claimed, that production and goal‐oriented
organizations lean towards losing commitment when TQM benefits are not readily seen in the
short‐term basis and leadership starts questioning the suitability of the practice. This conflict
cascades to other forms of issues that include reduced involvement and engagement from the
management side that in turn affects the allocation of resources necessary to support TQM
initiatives. Kaur et al. (2020) noted that lack of involvement of key strategic partners in quality
improvement programs is one of the main barriers that contributes to the TQM sustainability
issue. The authors further added that the attributes related to this theme are extensive focus on
goal achievement, competitiveness, and market superiority.
Pacesetting Leader. The leader’s orientation in supporting the organizational culture is
an indicator of how TQM is practiced and a prime driver for achieving objectives in the
manufacturing environment, as it could influence the job satisfaction and organizational
performance (Polese et al., 2019). Based on observations, the company’s leadership style is
oriented heavily on achieving production goals and is not in favor of supporting complex and
time‐consuming process measurement systems in the manufacturing lines that slow down cycle
time and affect productivity. Some participants in the leading role question the suitability and
appropriateness of some complicated TQM practices as they set the pace for their team to gain a
high level in performance and proficiency at all times with minimal supervision. The
perspectives of these pacesetters influence the way they motivate employees and their behavior
in carrying out the company’s business management systems such as TQM (Bendermacher et al.,
178
2017). The authors added that the pacesetting leader is considered to have a high achievement
orientation, high performance expectations, decisive and influential, focused on production
targets and a high‐risk taker according to the practitioners.
Firm TQM methodology. Based on interviews, the company’s TQM system has
maintained a vigorous management philosophy that demands full commitment to its policies and
guidelines to improve product quality and processes. This philosophy has been in alignment to
what Al‐Ali et al. (2019) noted, that uncommitted TQM sustainment activities will lead to
failure, which turns into high quality costs and low performance. According to participants, the
current TQM system in place is complex and manually managed, causing poor participation from
all members in all levels of the organization because of its labor intensive, perceived non‐value‐
added activities, and time‐consuming practices. These aspects support what Shafiq et al. (2019)
have referred to in their studies. The practitioners referred to the methodology as complex,
difficult, operator‐dependent, detection‐based, time‐consuming, confusing, excessive, rigid,
impractical, and not suitable for the processes they were managing. While the participants
understood the long‐term benefits, they had more focus on the current and short‐term benefits
needed to help quality and their performance. According to leadership interviews, the company
is still in the process of converting to a process‐based approach that is projected to be completed
in the near future. The practitioners noted that there are opportunities in creating an appropriate
supervision and understanding of the interconnectedness of organizational culture and the TQM
system to help develop organizational effectiveness, claimed by Toke and Kalpande (2019) in
their studies.
Highly Competitive Company Strategies and Operational Targets. Review of the
company’s productivity report showed that its competitive strategies and operational targets have
179
been geared towards supporting their goals of achieving market superiority and competitiveness
in the marketplace. The archived document also revealed that the company’s strategic emphasis
has been towards competitive advantage and dominance in the market, while its quality
management system has had a customer‐focused process that aims for continual support of a
company’s strategic goal and objectives. Albuhisi and Abdallah (2018) noted that alignment of
TQM practices could affect the preset company’s strategies and operational target variables if
there is no balance or coherence between the two standards. Practitioners experienced
incompatibilities and conflicts between serving operational targets and TQM system. The main
reason is the lack of understanding of the trade‐off between the degree of quality improvements
and the potential accruing benefits towards productivity and performance, as outlined in some
studies made by Anthony and Sony (2019, 2020). The authors added that company strategies
involving Lean and Six Sigma methodologies have had similar sustainment issues because the
models failed to deliver the anticipated results after implementation, and resources were
withdrawn due to increasing costs and limited funding. According to the practitioners, conflict in
the appropriateness of these models included non‐value‐added activities, poor time management,
and unproductive use of valuable resources taken from production and manufacturing processes.
Practitioners experienced low morale and engagement problems that indicated that these soft
variables that Shamsi and Alam (2018) indicated in their studies, have a significant effect on the
models’ sustainment and delivery.
The company has utilized CI strategies to support TQM practices and performance by
using existing process‐owners to sustain initiatives in addition to their regular workload. While
process‐owners’ in‐depth knowledge and expertise over the manufacturing process have
advantages in the sustainment of CI projects, they stated that their commitment, involvement,
180
and engagement are limited because their work priorities are vested on production needs. This is
in line with what Ahmad et al. (2017) claimed that limited resources and commitment from
workers are the main barriers to CI because management handles the initiatives as an optional
strategy only when production resources become available and suspend it when the workload
capacity is tight. According to practitioners, similar to TQM initiatives, there are no dedicated
resources assigned to any of the Lean or CI initiatives, except when participants volunteer to
multitask.
According to leadership interviews, the company has exercised DC to reconfigure and
adapt to the changing needs of their manufacturing processes and customer needs through their
“best‐in‐class” practices. The management stated that DC is primarily used to support and
sustain the company’s BMS system, and the company combines KM and HRM to enable
innovation and sustainability of processes such as the TQM system to be successful. This setup
agrees with Alkhazali et al. (2019) who claimed that the combination of these systems supports
the company's initiatives to achieve a high level of business performance and total customer
satisfaction. According to practitioners, company’s competitive strategies have high focus on
productivity, cost effectiveness, high profit orientation, and emphasis on speed of delivery.
High Cost of Quality and Warranty. Based on the company’s sales and warranty
charts, the claim trend’s varied fluctuation shows how unstable the events are from the warranty
claims and sales activities standpoint. There is evidence of sporadic failures of some top products
indicating challenges with quality management sustainability in their value streams. Even though
most product lines show decent trend improvements, others are showing recurring
nonconformance, product defects, and lagging support problems. The warranty chart shows
temporary transformative improvements that influence favorable warranty claim trends and
181
sales, but not at a consistent level. This conclusion is based on the appraisal of the current and
previous years’ warranty costs. The variances from the comparison of previous and current
warranty costs show that some product lines have challenges with warranty costs compared to
last year. The 12‐month rolling average shows a recurrent and oscillating drift that indicates
instability in product quality and services despite indicating a positive trend. The document also
shows that productivity and performance is affected by far more than just product sales, but also
the warranty expenses those sales generate. This supports Albuhisi and Abdallah’s (2018) claim
that sustainment issues with TQM, such as failed prevention and correction initiatives, result in
high costs of quality and external warranties. Archive data showed that these costs on quality
include high defect rates, rejects, rework, and repeat customer complaints.
Inconsistent Productivity and Performance. Boikanyo and Heyns (2019) asserted that
failure to sustain TQM could result in poor quality and performance, which translate to high
costs, inefficient productivity, and loss of competitive position. The participants identified
underlying problems related to the sustainment of TQM as the cause of inconsistency in their
processes, and the symptoms of this discrepancy include reprocessing of parts and overtime
work, in some cases, over the weekend. The inability of the practitioners to sustain TQM
practices revealed contributors such as complex methodology, concerns with the applicability of
the techniques, lack of communication, training, understanding, knowledge, and support. While
TQM practices have positive relationships with the organizational performance and productivity
(Sila, 2018a), and provide tools and methods to reduce errors, waste, and inefficient procedures
(Alkhaldi & Abdallah, 2019, 2020), management needs to give full commitment to TQM’s
quality standards (Pham, 2020). Leadership commitment enables a rational and premeditated
approach to maintaining TQM sustainability rather than a reactive process that requires
182
containment and added work according to practitioners. Observations from the shop floor
supported Georgiev and Ohtaki’s (2019) claim that proper sustainment of TQM increased the
effectiveness of production support resources and their capabilities to maintain processes and
specific tasks to eliminate nonconformities and achieve higher productivity. According to
practitioners, proper sustainment of TQM resolved excessive overtime, lowered equipment
downtime, and addressed standard work issues.
Employee Impassive Behavior. Gaiardelli et al. (2019) defined employee behavior as
the attitude or actions of an employee in the company and is affected by factors related to job
satisfaction, commitment, and concern that characterize the main reasons for employees’
emotional outlook. Research findings similar to Baidoun et al.’s (2018) study showed that the
impassive employee behavior, such as an apathetic reaction to follow directions, reflected their
response to the TQM sustainment when these practices negatively affect achievement of their
objectives. Based on observations, the incoherence between TQM practices and production
targets created participants’ responses that lead to behavioral concerns most especially when
neither production objectives nor quality are achieved due to conflicts. Participants find ways to
overcome or resist change by modifying procedures to satisfy all production expectations, and in
the process, fail to produce the intended outcomes that result in rejects or reprocessing of parts.
As described by participants, these lead to frustration, stress, fatigue, low morale, and overwork
that ultimately affects their involvement and engagement. This condition is in line with the claim
from Aquilani et al. (2017) that employees’ main virtues represent the vital enabling elements to
overcome the resistance to change that can successfully sustain TQM programs. While TQM
promotes involvement of employees and builds participatory strategies that enhance the
performance of employees (Al‐ Saffar et al., 2020), their behavior towards initiatives and
183
decision‐making processes to achieve business objectives needs to be considered (Baidoun et al.,
2018). Jiménez‐Jiménez et al. (2019) suggested that TQM needs a framework in which social
dynamics can develop, operate, and be successful, so the connection between hard and soft
features in the methodology needs to be an ongoing business management process. Soft TQM
constructs such as leadership commitment, employee involvement, and strategic quality
management are critical to the successful sustainability of TQM in the company (Georgiev &
Ohtaki, 2019; Hwang et al., 2020).
Unpredictable Operational Constraints. Based on the company’s quality manual and
interviews, TQM practices play an important role in reducing the company’s operational
constraints through quality measurement systems and reaction plans that detail corrective actions
and escalation procedures. The leadership claims that the company’s quality management system
in place not only safeguards against nonconforming products and procedures, but also protects
process equipment in the manufacturing line. Practitioners experienced operational constraints
due to worn tools, unreliable equipment, and poor process capability, which resulted from lack of
observance to proper monitoring, inadequate preventive maintenance, and inattentiveness to the
quality management system. According to practitioners, these constraints affects production,
place strain on the quality system, and reduce the overall performance and productivity. This
condition agrees with Jaeger and Adair’s (2016) claim that TQM practices can help normalize
manufacturing processes by determining how to optimize tool changes and measuring process
capabilities to improve quality and overall performance. The company’s operational performance
depends on the high‐level quality and process leanness in terms of adaptability to change,
equipment capability, speed of delivery, product dependability, and overall costs (Gaiardelli et
al., 2019). Based on interviews, the site’s quality assurance believes that the effectiveness of
184
process capabilities depend on the successful sustainment of quality management practices and
process maintenance.
Overwhelmed Process Enablers. Noted in the company’s process audits, every major
quality incident in the company that requires reprocessing of finish goods demands more
resources that have to operate and manage the existing system to un‐produce, transfer inventory,
and quarantine suspect products. These activities also include re‐inspection, rework, disposition,
re‐serialization, and repackaging of finish products. According to the practitioners, the cost and
added activities get more overwhelming when suspect products have already left the site and are
in distribution centers or in customers’ hands. Research findings showed that it takes
multifunctional teams from production, shipping, supply chain, warranty administration,
engineering, and product management to reprocess suspect products through non‐standard work
and change management processes. In agreement with Wei et al. (2019), the sustainment issues
with TQM programs could overload the coordination of process enablers and contribute to the
performance failures that can prevent the company from achieving their planned goals.
Representation and Visualization of the Data
All digitized files were imported into the NVivo software and upon completion of the
download, a word frequency query was initially done to determine the prevalent words in the file
based on frequency and relevance. The intent was to get a quick and modest visual insight that
may lead to more in‐depth analyses. Based on the display, length, and grouping setting
calculated from all files, the word ‘quality’ (1604 count, 3.32% weighted), ‘products’ (724 count,
1.50% weighted), ‘support’ (626 count, 1.29% weighted), and ‘sustain’ (581 count, 1.20%
weighted) were the most common words present in the data. Figure 3 shows the visual
representation of the text in terms of their weight in a Word Cloud generated from the files.
185
Figure 3
Word Cloud – TQM Sustainability Issue
A cluster analysis by word similarity was produce to visualize patterns in the data by
groupings that share similar words. Figure 4 shows the graphical representation of files to see
differences and similarities. This confirms that the groupings such as the participants in the
practicing roles are more similar than they are far apart. Majority of the files for this grouping
showed a Pearson coefficient of above 0.50 up to 0.779827 that proves that the strength of linear
association is positive. The case is the same with participants in the leading roles and those that
have experienced TQM sustainability effects. Appendix A shows the summary of the Pearson
correlation coefficient generated from the files.
186
Figure 4
Items Clustered by Word Similarity
Figure 5 on the next page shows the input and the output constructs of TQM
sustainability issue in the company. This lists the major themes concerning the lived experiences
of the practitioners developed in their descriptions of the sustainment of TQM as the following:
(a) market‐oriented organizational culture, (b) rigid TQM methodology, (c) pacesetting
leadership style, (d) highly competitive strategies. The resulting constructs from these themes
were high cost of quality and external warranties, inconsistent productivity and performance,
impassive employee behavior, unpredictable operational constraints, and overwhelmed process
enablers. The figure also shows the attributes that relate to the major themes and constructs.
187
Figure 5
Contributors to TQM Sustainment Issue and its Effects
Codes were created in NVivo qualitative software based on the meaningful information
from each individual files. The resulting themes were then compared to understand the impact of
the input themes to the problem and the effects of the problem to the resulting constructs. Figures
6 to 9 show the comparison diagrams between the input constructs and the TQM sustainability
issue. In equating the four comparison diagrams, these show that most participants considered
the ‘Rigidity of the TQM Methodology’ as the major contributor to the TQM sustainment issue.
TQMSustainability
Issue
Market-OrientedOrganizationalCulture
Leadership Orientation
Pacesetting Leadership Style
Highly Competitive Strategies and Operational
Targets
Inconsistent Productivity and Performance
TQM Methodology High Cost of Quality and External Warranties
Impassive Employee Behavior
Unpredictable Operational Constraints
Overwhelmed Process Enablers
Complex and Difficult
Confusing and InflexibleDetection-based Controls
High Initial cost Lack of Coherence & ImpracticalLow Short-term Benefits
No Distinctive PrincipleOperator Dependent
Time Consuming Activities
Centered on Market Superiority
Focused on CompetivenessGoal Achievement
Decisive and Influential
Focused on Production TargetsHigh Achievement Oriented
High Performance ExpectationsHigh Risk Taker
Emphasis on Speed of Delivery
Focus on Cost EffectivenessHigh Focus on Productivity
High Profit Orientation
High Field Failure Rates
High Reject or Scrap CostsHigh Rework or Repair Costs
Repeat Customer Complaints
Excessive Overtime
High Equipment DowntimeStandard Work Issues
Frustrated and Discourage
Low MoraleOverworked or Stressed Out
Restless or Numb
High Maintenance Tools
Low Equipment ReliabilityPoor Process Capability
Constrained Resources
System Overload
Manufacturing Line Members
Operations Support Members
Lack of Accountability
Lack of Adequate TrainingLack of Appropriate Support
Lack of Commitment and MotivationLack of CommunicationLack of Competencies and Skills
Lack of EngagementLack of Proper Tools and Equipment
Lack of Teamwork and Collaboration
Alignment to Strategic Goals
Cost SensitiveHigh Focus on Business Results
Prioritization on CompetitivenessProduction Commitment PositionSystemic Focus on Success Factors
188
The comparison diagrams also show how closely the ‘Pacesetting Leadership Style’ and ‘Highly
Competitive Strategies’ relate to each other in contributing to the problem, according to the data.
Figure 6
‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Rigid TQM Methodology’ Comparison Diagram
Rigid TQM
Methodologyand
TQM Sustainability
Issue
189
Figure 7
‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Market‐Oriented Organizational Culture’ Comparison Diagram
Market-Oriented
OrganizationalCulture
and TQM
Sustainability Issue
190
Figure 8
‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Pacesetting Leadership Style’ Comparison Diagram
Pacesetting
Leadership Style
and
TQM Sustainability
Issue
191
Figure 9
‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Highly Competitive Strategies’ Comparison Diagram
Figures 10 to 14 show the comparison diagrams between the TQM sustainability issue
and the output constructs. In equating the five comparison diagrams, these show that most
participants considered ‘Impassive Employee Behavior’ as the output construct most affected by
Highly
Competitive Strategies
and
TQM
Sustainability
Issue
192
the TQM sustainability issue. The figures also show that the ‘Inconsistent Productivity and
Performance’ being the second construct to be affected maybe influenced by the resulting
impassive behavior as suggested by most participants in the practicing roles.
Figure 10
‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘High Cost of Quality and Warranty’ Comparison Diagram
TQM
Sustainability Issue
& High Cost of Quality and
Warranty
193
Figure 11
‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Impassive Employee Behavior’ Comparison Diagram
TQM
Sustainability Issue &
Impassive Behavior
194
Figure 12
‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Inconsistent Productivity and Performance’ Comparison
Diagram
TQM
Sustainability Issue &
Inconsistent Productivity
& Performance
195
Figure 13
‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Unpredictable Operational Constraints’ Comparison Diagram
TQM
Sustainability Issue &
Unpredictable Operational
Constraints
196
Figure 14
‘TQM Sustainability Issue’ and ‘Overwhelmed Process Enablers’ Comparison Diagram
TQM
Sustainability
Issue &
Overwhelmed
Process
Enablers
197
Relationship of the Findings
The research findings revealed multiple contributors to the sustainment of TQM in the
company. The analysis of the data showed that the firmness of TQM methodology, orientation of
organization culture, type of leadership style, and highly competitive strategies and operational
targets affected the sustainment of TQM in the site. Data from the study produced relevant
information that related to all research questions and supported the conceptual framework
initially outlined in the foundation of the research. Information from three research instruments
showed evidence of anticipated themes and their contribution to the research topic. The results of
the research also supported the academic and professional findings noted in peer‐reviewed
literatures and reinforced the facts that contributed to the research problem concerning the
sustainability issue of TQM in the manufacturing industry.
The Research Questions. Then research findings produced information that were
relevant to all the research questions. The lived experience of the TQM practitioners in the
company highlighted their perception of the phenomenon and enabled the sharing of their
narratives and meanings they attributed to their TQM experience. Interviews with the
practitioners from cross‐functional roles, combined with shop floor observations and analysis of
archived documents related to the quality management system confirmed the presence of the
sustainability issue with TQM.
RQ1: How does the TQM sustainability issue affect the company’s cost and productivity?
According to participants in leading roles, the organization utilizes TQM practices to help
in the prevention and detection of nonconforming products in their manufacturing and assembly
processes. The company quality policies require compliance to execution of quality controls by
employees to protect processes and ensure conforming products. The same quality rules also
198
measure and monitor the effects of wear and tear of tools, fixtures, machines, and equipment of
the manufacturing facility that affect the overall process capability. One assertive participant
related,
P8: The quality checks and requirements, no matter how intricate, were put in place to
protect us. We have seen what happens when we skip these inspections. We get more
interruptions and downtime because we use parts that will not fit together or will not pass
the tester when assembled. Even though these are complex and time‐consuming, quality
helps us avoid expensive rework and lost productivity. Inspections can catch defects
before these go into production and prevent costly downtime from happening. We just
wish these quality assessments were more process‐friendly and not too operator‐
dependent.
According to the participant, failure in sustaining the quality system in place results in
high product nonconformance and defects, leading to excessive reject costs and loss in
productivity. Based on this interview, the TQM sustainment issue leads to loss of control and
measurement of processes and products in compliance with customer requirements. This
supports Nasim’s (2018) claim that the sustainment of TQM influences the operational
productivity of organizations, which also affects other dimensions of performance such as
financial effectiveness and customer satisfaction.
RQ1a: How does the TQM sustainability issue influence external warranties, internal costs,
and performance?
The company’s external warranties, internal cost, and performance are affected in the
manner it sustains its TQM practices, according to its warranty versus sales report, scrap
summaries, and productivity reports. Evidence from interviews has shown that adherence to
199
TQM procedures safeguards product quality, which minimizes the cost of rejects and
reprocessing. One participant confirmed the importance of sustaining TQM:
P12: Some molds are old and manually operated, so if we do not sustain what quality
requires us to check, the odds of making rejects are very high. We can make many parts,
but only the good ones count. Our ability to monitor the quality of our parts affects not
only the assembly lines downstream but also the customer. If we do better in producing
quality parts, the assembly cells do better in assembling these into finished goods. Our
quality performance and productivity go hand‐in‐hand. Many of our processes depend on
quality inspections and not sustaining these required activities can disrupt operations
even though the quality methodology involves more work on our side. In some ways, not
checking parts can slow down throughput significantly, and that eventually relates to
poor performance and more warranty issues.
The participant recognized the importance of sustaining TQM and acknowledged the
impact it had on quality and performance. Based on observations, absence of nonconforming
products and proper execution of TQM practices in the manufacturing lines improves the flow of
the processes and enhances productivity and performance. Shafiq et al. (2019) asserted that
productivity increases with sustainment of quality and failure to maintain TQM can result in low
quality, which translates to high costs and loss of competitive position. To support this claim
further, review of the company’s warranty versus sales report showed,
AD1: The document displays the gradual seasonal and annual oscillations of the trend
lines of warranty claim rates from previous to current year. Some product warranty
claims continued to be high in the current year despite a positive trend, indicating some
opportunities with the sustainment of quality practices. During the 2020 pandemic, both
200
warranty claims and sales volumes plunged almost proportionately, but then later in the
year, some customer claims rose slightly along with product sales.
Reviewing data in the company's quarterly financial statements and annual reports,
spending on product warranty costs is seen in a wavering trend within the target goals. By
examining the expense changes from year to year, the company’s cost cutting initiatives and its
effects are observable based on the unexpected spending on some product warranties. The
warranty cost and service expenses reveal the effects on the results of the company’s
productivity and performance.
RQ1b: How does the TQM sustainability issue affect product warranty cost, field failure
rates, and cost of quality?
The company experiences high product warranty costs, field failure rates, and cost of
quality for every product quality defect it was not able to contain and had already shipped out to
customers, according to interviews from participants in receiving roles. The associated cost to
warranty and quality includes reprocessing of orders, replacement parts, disposition of defects,
labor involved in exchanging and correcting field issues, and potential loss of customers. A field
technical service manager explained,
R5: A number of times, I have to drive to a customer who is two hours away only to find
out when I arrive there that the product is missing an assembly kit. Just imagine driving
another four hours to get the replacement from the distribution center and back to the
customer. The cost of wasted time, money, effort, and customer dissatisfaction is just
staggering. We went through a good season without having these issues; why are these
problems happening again? We are losing customers to our competitors who are just
waiting in a corner for something like this to happen.
201
The field service support team experiences significant cost and dissatisfied customers due
to quality issues that could have been prevented. This supports Banuro et al.’s (2017) claim that
failure in maintaining the TQM methodology results in increases in costs, compromised
products, and unsatisfied customers. The company’s warranty versus sales report also supports
the claim regarding the negative effects of poor quality practices:
AD1: The variances of previous and current warranty costs show that some product lines
continue to have challenges in the current year. The 12‐month rolling average shows a
recurrent and oscillating drift that indicates instability in product quality and services
despite indicating a positive trend. This also displays that productivity and performance is
affected by far more than just product sales, but also the warranty expenses those sales
generate.
The document reveals top‐level warranty items of top products that have recurring issues.
It also shows the year to date percentage of warranty of each product based on the corresponding
cost of warranty versus sales report. The current and previous years’ warranty costs are
compared to determine the performance based on the variance. The data shows the state of TQM
sustainability and gaps in the process.
RQ2: Why is there a potential TQM sustainability issue in the water‐treatment plant
operations?
The site’s leadership has supported a structured TQM framework and maintained a
standard approach in maintaining quality practices throughout the site. The TQM methodology
adopted in the company requires observance to its guidelines and policies based on its quality
manual. This application has aligned with Mendes and Jesus’ (2018) claim that TQM
methodology is a structured approach that necessitates full engagement from all participants to
202
improve operational effectiveness, quality, and competitiveness of the company. However, based
on interviews, the TQM methodology has not been in complete coherence with the company’s
strategic objectives that focus more on business results because of contradictions with its
complex and time‐consuming activities and measurement processes. A participant identified one
of the situations that confirmed this case:
P1: The quality tollgate is just one of the many evidence of why we cannot sustain
quality. That safety net has been there longer than planned because the auditors keep
finding defects after the line has inspected their parts. The recurring failures at the
assembly line testers also show how defects made it through critical inspection points.
The effects of these quality sustainment issues can be seen as high costs in scrap, extra
labor, rework, and low productivity. We rely mostly on operators to manually check the
parts, and you know that is not 100 percent effective. There are too many complex
quality instructions that adds to our labor and time, making it difficult for us to achieve
our targets.
The quality management system is operator‐dependent, according to the practitioner, and
this condition added to the sustainment issue of TQM. In addition, it takes more work and time
for TQM initiatives to produce benefits that influence performance, making it costly and
impractical in the short term (Qasrawi et al., 2017). This complication and suitability issue
causes TQM practitioners to lose engagement, involvement, and commitment, as described by
Chiarini and Vagnoni (2017). The complexity of TQM practices in the site creates other
challenges to its sustainment according to participants. These include lack of operational control
of manufacturing processes, lack of monitoring of process improvement, lack of information
203
about quality cost, and poor benchmarking of existing processes, as noted by Aamer et al. (2017)
in their study.
RQ2a: How does TQM sustainment affects the company’s operational targets?
Based on the research findings, the TQM methodology creates too much work for the
practitioners and lengthens assembly cycle times. The practitioners perceive the quality approach
as having too many repetitive non‐value added activities that slow down the production rate and
negatively affect overall performance. To some practitioners, the quality practices have no
practical short‐term benefits that help with current manufacturing issues, leading to unproductive
use of limited resources and costs, as described by Nguyen et al. (2017). Their perspectives were
based on the fact that the methodology placed more concentration on quality inspection and
control instead of prevention, and they struggled to resolve the issue that was on a detection‐
based system, as defined by Li et al. (2018). One participant explained,
P24: Some reasons why operators cannot sustain quality practices is the fact that these
slow them down and add more work to their job. Sustaining TQM adds to the workload
and stress that they already have to achieve their production targets. In this perspective,
TQM sustainment negatively affects their performance and productivity. It is not because
they do not want to do these checks; some of the inspections used were impractical to the
process and do not always catch the nonconformance that these were designed to detect.
There is too much subjectivity to most visual checks, for example. They do not trust
some of the checks, and they have to do more work just to complete them. Most times,
these checks help us catch bad parts but do not really help us make our targets. There are
just too many conflicts. We have an automated torque driver system that ensures correct
204
torque and sequencing that was shut down because it was too complex and disruptive to
production. We cannot stay in business using that system.
There were too many analyses done on an issue that paralyzed the process in some cases,
according to participants. These quality activities included ambiguous data on process output,
inappropriate measures of nonconformance issues, and wrong emphasis on solving the problem
instead of recurrence prevention, as defined by Sachdev and Agrawal (2017). According to
practitioners, the company’s operational targets were affected by the ruminating quality analyses
that led to endless internal strife over the upsides and downsides of each action, and the failure to
choose the appropriate initiative.
RQ2b: How does sustaining TQM practices align with the company’s operational
strategies?
According to the practitioners, the current TQM methodology in place is primarily
focused on customer satisfaction and not on process performance or overall productivity. This is
in alignment with what Anthony et al. (2017) studied, that at some point, leadership needs to see
concrete evidence in performance, productivity, and increased business, or they will lose
commitment. According to interviews, this difference in focus was one of the main reasons why
the sustainability of TQM practices in the site is an issue. A participant in a leading role
elaborated,
L4: Quality KPIs exist at multiple levels of the organization. Some are designed to
measure customer experience, costs of poor quality, and/or internal performance. Internal
quality performance is primarily measured by First Pass Yield (FPY), scrap dollars, and
inventory discrepancy dollars. Tools are in place to measure each of these at the cell,
value stream, and site levels, and the trends are monitored by cross‐functional teams with
205
actions developed to net improvements. These actions may be simple individual
contributor tasks or may lead to longer‐term projects or Kaizen events for fast and
focused action. When scrap is high, or FPY is low, we lose productivity and miss on‐time
delivery requirements as well.
The company’s leadership reiterated the need for the business to be competitive to
survive as a business unit. They emphasized the need to alignment quality practices with
operational needs to optimize overall performance. Another participant in a leading role
reinforced this requirement,
L5: Our tools under BMS and managing for daily improvement (MDI) allow us to design
quality projects that are supposed to support productivity goals. Instead of considering
the quality management as a separate system, we understand that in order to be successful
in our sustainment of a quality management system, we need to synchronize with our
Lean enterprise principles and “best in class” practices.
The company’s management needs to make sure the suitability of the quality system in its
processes support the business goals, according to leadership interviews. The complexity of
TQM causes the company’s leadership to question the appropriateness of the system in their
production processes after the implementation, and this creates a barrier that causes management
to lose commitment and involvement (Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017). This situation leads to less
motivated leaders that are not involved and fully integrated in supporting TQM practices (Kumar
& Sharma, 2017).
RQ3: How does the organizational culture of the company affect sustainability of the TQM
system?
206
According to leadership interviews, the company is focused on its mechanism and means
of improving its ability to respond to demands and changes in the market. Its management claims
that its organizational culture operates in the competitive market and decisively adjusts its
internal processes and systems to achieve its objectives of market superiority and competitive
advantage. This dominant attribute drives the organization’s firm orientation to its production
and strategic goals, as one participant with a leading role clarified,
L5: Quality projects need to support the operational needs of the organization to sustain
overall performance. There is a synergistic requirement to do so because productivity and
quality work hand‐in‐hand in accomplishing the strategic objectives. All process
performance analyses must include effectiveness, compliance, efficiency indicators, and a
continuous improvement plan that is supported by continuous knowledge‐transfer to
promote sustainability. System‐thinking is imbedded in our standard work to make this a
part of our daily activities. We also cross‐train staff on BMS management, reporting for
sustainment, and sharing best practices between sites. Continuous review of the system
for sustainability and improvement opportunities are done with management reviews and
internal audits.
While the organizational culture acknowledges competitiveness as a combination of
strategies and quality, it is sensitive to the methodology’s timely results and benefits designed to
influence performance, as seen in its daily productivity report and interviews. Li et al. (2018)
shared this concern that when changes do start to take place in the business, the sustainment of
TQM programs become a challenge because management expect immediate changes from a
transformation that usually takes time to produce results. Panuwatwanich and Nguyen (2017)
also stressed that organizations dominated by market and rational cultures do not support a
207
favorable environment for the effective sustainment of TQM compared to cultures controlled by
adhocracy or the group‐type system.
RQ3a: How does leadership perceive the importance of TQM sustainment in operations?
Based on interviews, leadership plays an important role in the sustainment of TQM
within the company, and they set the policies and guidance essential for TQM to flourish.
Álvarez‐García et al. (2016) noted that without the correct leadership to motivate and influence
compliance, sustainment of TQM could not fully succeed in the long‐term. Participants noted
that the company employs a pacesetting leadership style to support and execute its market‐
oriented position and expectations by effectively executing competitive strategies and
operational targets to gain market superiority. A participant related,
P8: I engage more in work when my supervisor empowers me. Leadership can stir me to
whatever direction they want me to go as far as production goes. I do what the supervisor
instructs me to do within the bounds of this work. If quality is important to him, it is
important to me. As always, the emphasis is on takt time. He sets the pace of work and all
of us will have to follow that. In most cases, his focus is so centered on what the schedule
is requiring him to deliver, so depending on what that is, the priority and pace of work
can differ, and so can the attention to other activities.
The leadership sees opportunities in connecting the requirements of the company’s
strategies and the TQM effect on productivity and workload of line members in a high‐paced
manufacturing setting. This condition supports Bernardino et al.’s (2016) claim that TQM
methodology has more emphasis on operational effectiveness and not as much focus on strategic
positioning. According to practitioners, the approach needs more integration of appropriate
quality programs and methods necessary for the sustainment of TQM.
208
RQ3b: How does TQM sustainment affect the behavior of employees in their current role?
According to practitioners, the sustainment of TQM practices and concern for immediate
results causes unwanted anxiety for employees in manufacturing, which is stressful when the
scope and impact of changes is substantial enough to affect everyone in the organization. This
mirrors Bugdol’s (2020) claim related to the concerns over short‐term expectations and
overworking resources to satisfy quality requirements. In addition, sustainment of TQM requires
too much commitment from the operations team members and too much pressure to show
compliance to methodology as noted by Albuhisi and Abdallah (2018). One participant
elaborated,
P4: The existing quality assessments in my station are already time‐consuming. The
problem is when I am presented with many questionable components that do not
assembly easily, and then the extra quality checks are added to sort out these suspects. It
is just too much work for the whole shift, work becomes toxic, and it becomes very
frustrating. I feel disoriented to all these extra checks that I just do them. We really need
to have accountability for the quality of parts that we receive here. There seems to be no
consequence to those who produced these defects, other than me, who has to inspect
these. I sometimes finish my shift feeling as if I have not done anything productive. I
become stressed out and disappointed.
In most cases, the practitioners noted that the situation generates a strained obligation to
proceed without adequate knowledge, understanding, preparation, or training needed for the
activity. Based on observations, an impassive behavior has become apparent from practitioners
who felt trapped in this condition. Sustaining TQM creates a superficial pressure to achieve high
quality and reduce process failure, affecting the role and behavior of participants in upholding
209
engagement and trust while balancing quality and production expectations (Vouzas &
Katsogianni, 2018).
RQ4: What TQM activities affect performance in each value stream that make its
sustainability an issue?
Practitioners identified TQM activities that affect their performance in their value stream
as those activities that involve time‐consuming and excessive assessments or inspections of
systems, processes, and components. While practitioners fully understand the relevance of the
activities, they see tasks that include high frequency inspection checks such as audits on
processes, standard work, and quality as excessively repetitive due to unresolved recurrent
incidents. Some practitioners do not see this methodology as a mechanism or tool that would
solve recurring problems. Based on observations, the method of processing nonconforming
material, for instance, was too time‐consuming and resource‐intensive for involving too many
functional groups. Quality technicians claimed that data collection and data entry activities were
also labor‐intensive and time‐consuming, and required greater attention to details to ensure
integrity of the information. Quality inspectors said that daily assessments of process issues at
tollgates were added layers of inspections installed because of the inability of the practitioners to
sustain quality procedures. Practitioners noted that problem‐solving activities take too much time
and too many resources to mitigate root causes, including analyses that creep out of scope and
time to close issues. For some practitioners, there is no standard or disciplined approach to risk
analysis, such as identifying the root cause of potential problems and the potential cost or risk
associated with taking no action to prevent its occurrence. In addition, some process performance
analyses do not include effectiveness, compliance, efficiency indicators, and CI plans as
documented in process audit findings.
210
More observations revealed that the application of rigid requirements of TQM involves
the company’s compliance to its procedures, which is dependent on existing resources for
continuous training, monitoring, and audits that some management leadership have difficulty
providing. This condition is in alignment with the claim of Dahlgaard‐Park et al. (2018) that use
of the TQM methods, tools, and techniques requires dedicated and committed resources.
According to practitioners, the company does not have a strategic roadmap complemented with
suitable methods and techniques to ensure success with the added responsibilities. In an attempt
for the company to optimize costs, TQM practitioners multitask to cover other aspects of the
TQM process, leading to workload, sustainability, and performance issues. On the production
floor level, TQM activities such as 100 percent inspections are used as a transient resolve to
problems caused by defects that were generated due to delays in repairs of machines, tools,
fixtures, and equipment. One participant operating a machine claimed,
P16: The redundancy in these quality checks does not make any sense. I just changed the
inserts and the parts have been in specification for the last 24 pieces. Why are we still
inspecting every three parts? The frequency on the control plan does not support the
process to run effectively when it actually can, and it slows us down because of these
unwanted time‐consuming inspections every three parts. The frequency of quality
controls is so tight that it does not match up with the higher capability of our machine,
making this is a hindrance to our productivity.
According to practitioners, these activities include quality inspections for part features
and attributes that require constant attention due to process reliability issues or low process
capabilities, which could have been mitigated through proper training, knowledge transfer, and
preventive maintenance. According to participants, some of the company’s existing quality
211
system checks, which is time‐consuming and manually intensive, brings up the question of
whether the methodology contributes to the true systemic issue by providing a short‐term Band‐
Aid to a manufacturing problem.
RQ4a: What process‐enablers are affected by TQM sustainment activities?
According to practitioners, the company’s process‐enablers such as its information
system, policies and procedures, workflow designs, and technical resources provide the
framework for the functional drivers of its processes. Observations confirmed that the company’s
fast‐paced high volume manufacturing environment are managed by multi‐skilled resources
handling multiple responsibilities at the same time. Practitioners noted that sustaining quality
activities such as critical scan overwhelms the system due to the need of more serialized labels of
subcomponents for traceability purposes. They explained that the information system adapts by
adding more resources and equipment to the quality needs. This also includes the quality
management system’s handling of change management processes, upkeeps in accurate reporting,
maintenance of inventory after quality incidents, and reprocessing of finish goods that affects all
process‐enablers. Review of the company’s product non‐conformity report (PNR) with a
participant revealed,
AD5: The PNR process takes substantial time to prepare and complete because it utilizes
all of value stream members’ time to identify, contain, relocate inventory, and disposition
products after testing and validations. It takes an amount of time to fill the form, submit it
for approval, process the contents, and finally, put it to closure. The company’s PNR
disposition process involves a concentrated and onerous collaborative handover of
decisions between initiators, managers, and affected team members. Product disposition
is also complex to conduct without the timely capability to sample and test affected
212
products, making this process time‐consuming that could leave risks of unresolved and
unaccounted quality findings.
Practitioners noted that the expectation for instantaneous response and results to address
challenges in the PNR workflow was time‐consuming. This situation reinforced Bernardino et
al.’s (2016) claim that there are misperceptions between TQM sustainment and its long‐term
results because of its highly involved training requirements, longer deployment time, and
excessive focus on standardization using existing workforce.
RQ4b: What operational constraints are created when sustaining TQM practices?
Practitioners claimed that TQM practices create operational constraints mainly because
these are time‐consuming and labor‐intensive to perform. The company always seeks ways to
achieve its goals by reducing operating expenses, optimizing inventory, and increasing
throughput. Although manual in‐line inspections and audits help improve reliability of the
process, these create constraints on the company’s equipment capacity and slows down
production rate. The complex and time‐consuming process measurement management in the
company contributes to these effects because of intricate statistical techniques and checks
involved in reducing the process variation and use of preventive maintenance to improve quality
(Wei et al., 2019). The fundamental misunderstanding according to the support practitioners lies
in the analysis of real issues and TQM actions that are not cost‐effective and affect the
production intent to meet customer demand. The company has set‐up an internal quality
examination structure at every control point of each critical station in the line to ensure
conformance to product specifications, which mirrors what Aquilani et al. (2017) observed in
their investigation. These types of TQM practices in the company create cascading and
constraining effects that include limitation in utilities capacity, raw material flow, logistics and
213
transport challenges, and insufficient utilization of space according to practitioners. A participant
who experienced the issue explained,
P5: We tried bypassing the critical scan before and we got into real problems with the
customer missing his parts. We did it to make our work faster, but it did not do us any
good in the end. Quality held all the parts for inspections and had operators rework
everything. We made one‐step forward and took a hundred steps backward. These quality
scans are complex, but they help us in the end. Therefore, even if I complain about the
quality system being too awkward and cumbersome, I will not suggest taking them off.
Can you still find a better way to do this though? Love it or hate it, it is constraining our
ability to make production targets faster, and it is overwhelming IT and system support.
In some cases, the company’s reactions or responses to quality incidents that exacerbate
operational constraints include assigning more resources at the apparent problem immediately,
without understanding the real causes of the problem. Practitioners see the same repeating
pattern of making the same mistakes, responding to early warning signs, and looking for short‐
term, unsustainable solutions rather than thinking strategically. As a result, they often see efforts
to overcome constrained capacity fail, and end up wasting a lot of resources that translate to
higher costs and lower productivity.
The Conceptual Framework. The research findings aligned with each element in the
conceptual framework that contributed to the sustainment issues of TQM within the company.
Each input construct such as the TQM methodology, leadership style, organization culture, and
competitive strategies has fundamental components that influenced actors in how they sustain the
TQM system that eventually resulted in high costs of quality and low performance. According to
the company’s quality manual, management maintains strict observance to the policies and
214
guidelines of the quality management system in the company. Based on leadership interviews,
management has asserted that a sound sustainment of TQM requires firm adherence to
procedures from all practitioners to have a strong causal effect on cost of quality and
organizational performance. This echoes the claim from Amin et al. (2017) that TQM is a
strenuous management philosophy that requires full participants’ commitment to improve
product quality and processes; otherwise, a lackluster execution will lead to failure. Gözükara et
al. (2019) reinforced this concept, stating that each deviation from the TQM procedures affects
the level of quality and performance in manufacturing processes.
The company’s leadership style has been decisive and oriented toward realizing
production goals and achievement. According to the practitioners, leaders set the drumbeat for
operations and have high output expectations from each team member. As an efficient and solid
performer who sets the excellence bar high, this leadership style can overwork team members
(Campion, 2018). This type of leadership complements the market‐oriented culture of the
company that strives for market superiority and a competitive position. This management
attribute influences how employees engage, participate in TQM practices, and execute
compliance to overall standard procedures based on the company’s standard work audits. This
confirms Kumar and Sharma’s (2017) assertion on the impact of this leadership on TQM
sustainment, recognizing that when team involvement is fragmented by too many expectations, it
can jeopardize the correct application of TQM and cause performance issues downstream
(Bugdol, 2020; Hwang et al., 2020).
Based on interviews, the dominant attributes of the market‐oriented organizational
culture of the company are towards satisfying the needs of the customer and attaining market
dominance. Evidence from productivity reports shows the company’s strive for business
215
excellence by putting more strategic emphasis on efficiency by increasing throughput and
productivity. The competitive focus of the company culture influences the behaviors of their
employees in supporting its business management system such as TQM, and in terms of
harmonizing values and norms (Byrne et al., 2019). In line with the culture’s dominant attributes,
its highly competitive strategies and operational targets support the dynamics of its
organizational preferences. According to participants, the company regularly develops its core
processes and competitive priorities by evaluating cost and speed of delivery; this allows proper
implementation of efficient systems for allocating resources, personnel, and the work process.
The company’s productivity report shows the periodic benchmarking in analyzing the progress
made and the initiation of actions to eliminate gaps in any production parameters to cope with
demand changes. According to practitioners, the exceptional focus on competitiveness in a high‐
paced manufacturing setting creates conflicts in sustaining TQM practices due to issues in
relating the priorities of the company’s strategies and the impact on productivity and workload of
personnel. In addition to practitioners’ interviews and observations from the shop floor, evidence
of these cases are seen in the company’s standard work and process audits, with major quality
incidents cited in Critical‐to‐Quality forms posted in the cells. This supports Bernandino et al.’s
(2016) claim that TQM has more emphasis on process effectiveness and not as much emphasis
on strategic positioning, so it lacks the integration of the site’s operational objectives and
strategies.
The conceptual framework also shows the impact of TQM sustainability issues on the
output constructs such as cost of quality and external warranties, productivity and performance,
employees’ behavior, and its consequence on operational constraints and process‐enablers.
Kumar and Sharma (2017) specified that TQM sustainability issues result not only in high cost
216
of internal and external costs, but also contribute to performance issues that affect the overall
business targets. The TQM sustainability issue in the site is evident in the company’s warranty
and sales report that shows a 12‐month rolling average that displays a recurrent and oscillating
trend indicating instability in product quality and services despite indicating a positive trend. The
condition can also be seen examining the Quality Alerts that capture many workmanship issues,
especially relating to incomplete assemblies and supplier defects that continue to happen
consistently, on and off as reported. The Product Non‐Conformity Report reveals the challenges
of sustaining quality where a multitude of incidents show quality issues prevented in the past
recurring multiple times after solutions were in place for a number of months. The associated
internal cost of quality can be seen while reviewing the Site Scrap Summaries that show reject
cost percentage improvement in the first quarter but exhibited an inconsistent trend in the
succeeding quarter. This is supported by the First Pass Yield that shows irregularity in monthly
trend patterns, demonstrating very strong periods of good quality output and throughput, and in
various times, periods of high‐quality incidents and missed productivity targets.
In support of Andrade et al. (2017), TQM practitioners noted that they cautiously conduct
themselves to gain recognition and respect while observing the rules and regulations of the
workplace. However, challenges in sustaining TQM that create unpredictable operational
constraints and overwhelm process‐enablers place too much stress on practitioners’ workload,
which ultimately leads to behavioral issues. Binci et al., (2019) explained that the rigidity in the
TQM practice creates tougher knowledge‐conversion and concept‐understanding that can result
in a circle of confusing directions and interpretations of the method. According to the
practitioners, they are stuck in an impassive behavior when everything else they can do, cannot
fulfill operational targets. These misconceptions and misunderstandings create inconsistencies
217
with the way leadership sustains their intended strategies, particularly when the TQM application
slows down production line rates and impacts delivery targets. In the end, the resulting
vagueness of understanding formed by practitioners’ collaborations leads to contrasting
methodology and outcomes (Binci, 2019).
Anticipated Themes. According to interviews, the company has implemented and
executed lean and CI activities that have strategic emphasis on enhancing competitive advantage
and market superiority. According to leadership interviews, improvement opportunities are
identified, and initiatives are weighted and prioritized during the value stream mapping and
transformation plan development. Similar to what Tasleem et al. (2019) noted, the company uses
CI as an important tool to improve performance and quality of its processes to achieve delivery
targets and customer expectations. The management’s use of CI by TQM to develop its
capabilities, employees, and systems incrementally to eliminate nonconformities and improve
quality agrees with Tavana et al.’s (2020) assertion. However, according to practitioners, like
TQM, CI efforts face sustainment challenges because of too much focus on success factors and
less on addressing process failures, adding that most of its benefits are not seen in the short‐term
basis. This condition confirmed McLean et al. (2017) and Brindle’s (2020) findings and
supported the claim of Ahmad et al. (2017) that most CI participants perceive the approach as an
added workload to their existing responsibilities.
The company management team utilizes the concept of DC by using its ‘best practices’
models to cope with the dynamic changes in its business setting. According to leadership
interviews, the company uses an integrated management system that combines, transforms, and
restructures internal and external core competences to address varying business environments.
This is similar to Wollersheim and Heimeriks’ (2016) study that explained the importance of
218
creating patterns from existing practices and learnings to enable companies to adapt how they
function through changes in their industry. According to the practitioners, reconfiguring timely is
key to adapting and sustaining multiple processes that are subjected to regular changes, but faces
opportunities in the allocation of appropriate resources to deliver the needed initiatives. Similar
to sustainment of TQM, there is a challenge to include the capability to associate participant
knowledge with new functional capabilities so initiatives to adapt to changes can be
accomplished effectively (Kumar et al., 2020b).
Based on interviews, the company’s HRM helps in the implementation of corporate
objectives related to supporting employee initiatives and engagement at all levels in the
organization. According to the quality manual, the company’s HRM role supports training to
develop its employees’ knowledge, skills, and abilities, and creates incentives designed to
incentivize and motivate effort. This role agrees with the studies of Lee et al. (2019) and supports
Cho and Linderman’s (2019) claim that HRM upholds standard practices that form a workforce
that has essential company‐specific skills. Based on interviews, while HRM has an important
role of supporting TQM by supporting sound business strategies and a responsive organizational
climate, it needs to synergize with operations departments. Parallel to what Maleki‐
Minbashrazgah and Shabani (2019) noted, participants think that successfully building the
commitment needed from both HRM and operations management to support the company’s
process strategies is beneficial in any sustainability program created by the organization.
Archived documents showed that the company’s change management process
incorporates KM to aid in the development of existing business practices and processes such as
TQM. According to practitioners, knowledge sharing in the company has a significant role in
sustaining TQM practices by converting threats into opportunities for improvement; however,
219
there are gaps that affect the flow of communication between shifts and team members.
Practitioners do not have enough time to incorporate knowledge sharing in their regular routine,
creating a significant limitation to TQM sustainment initiatives. This supports Backlund and
Sundqvist’s (2018) claim that knowledge sharing for sustainment purposes would have to be
supported by a work setting and environment that allows practitioners to share openly and
discuss solutions to quality issues. While the company has a systematic process of charting,
organizing, and sharing of knowledge and experience of employees, retaining critical
information methodically is still an ongoing challenge. Practitioners agree that there is a positive
relationship between TQM sustainment and KM since both underline the importance of building
knowledge from experienced employees as key sources for supporting any business management
system. This understanding aligns with Abbas’ (2020) study that dynamic organizations take
TQM and KM as inter‐subjective constructs.
The Literature. The research findings have many similarities with the information taken
from literature. The company uses TQM as part of its business management strategy aimed to
improve its organizational performance and enhance customer satisfaction. The top‐level TQM
methodology used in the company to promote high‐quality products and services supports
studies made by Hwang et al. (2020), Kumar and Sharma (2017), Nasim (2018) and Qasrawi et
al. (2017). The company has acknowledged soft TQM attributes such as teamwork,
communication, involvement, commitment, engagement, and full participation as noted by
Albuhisi and Abdallah (2018) and McLean et al. (2017) as essential factors in TQM sustainment.
The practitioners have acknowledged the rigidity in TQM’s methodology and its requirement for
strict adherence to its approach, as claimed by Nizamidou and Vouzas (2020) and Villanueva
(2018). Furthermore, the company experienced misconstructions and misinterpretations of TQM,
220
which resulted in confusion and skepticism of its effectiveness on improving operational results
asserted by Sfakianaki (2019) in a study that affected the success of its long‐term sustainment.
Chiarini and Vagnoni’s (2017) claim that many processes using the TQM system do not follow
similar routes because the methodology does not have a precise roadmap or pattern, supports
many of the company’s confusing and complex guidelines, according to practitioners.
Based on leadership interviews, the market‐oriented culture of the company has a
dominant attribute that focuses more on competitiveness and market superiority. This strategic
formulation that is centered on business results affects the work prioritization for TQM frontline
practitioners and is in line with Sachdev and Agrawal’s (2017) study. In agreement with the
assertions of Aquilani et al. (2017) and Baidoun et al. (2018), the way management ranks its
operational priorities play a significant role in successful sustainment of TQM practices. The
company justifies a workable plan that optimizes its limited resources only on systems where
short‐term benefits are attainable, which are not always the case with quality investments that are
expensive and have long‐term payback, according to leadership. This management approach
confirms Bouranta et al. (2017) and Vouzas and Katsogianni’s (2018) studies that showed that
one of the major barriers to TQM sustainment is management’s lack of commitment to quality,
who consider quality management an extra cost. While quality initiatives are part of the
company’s long‐term strategies according to leadership interviews, there is a need to ensure
alignment of its missions to support production needs for speed and delivery in the short‐term
basis. This is in alignment with the contention of Li et al. (2018) that management should have
realistic expectations where they could be able to pursue immediate gains in the short‐term,
while understanding that the greater benefits with TQM are achieved long‐term.
221
As a key motivating factor in sustaining TQM practices, the company strives to improve
training and education to support employees, according to its HRM objectives. This mission is in
line with Mendes and Jesus’ (2018) study on improving employee engagement and
empowerment in the workplace. To promote long‐term sustainment of TQM practices in the
company, the TQM practitioners incorporate KM through proper dissemination and application
of quality data and related information. This supports the studies of Honarpour et al. (2017),
Marchiori and Mendes (2020), and Yurs et al. (2017) that showed integration of KM contributes
to the long‐term sustainment of TQM practices in the organization. Based on the practitioners’
account, the influence of company’s leadership style on their involvement, engagement, and
participation in quality assurance activities has a major impact on the sustainment process. This
statement supports Kumar and Sharma’s (2017) claim that leadership provides guidance that can
affect the sustainability of TQM in the manufacturing process. Sila (2018b) noted that TQM
practices have direct relationships with productivity and organizational performance, and those
issues with its sustainment result are inconsistent productivity and performance. This finding has
been confirmed to be true by the experiences of practitioners who have had to spend more time
reprocessing parts after experiencing compliance issues with quality controls.
Based on multiple observations, employees in the company behave cautiously to gain
respect, trust, and recognition while observing strict company regulations and policies at the
workplace. Similar to the conclusions of Aquilani et al. (2017), practitioners’ central virtues
characterize the enabling elements that help them overcome the resistance to change that can
successfully sustain the TQM programs effectively. In the interview, practitioners affirm that
given the right leadership, tools, guidance, and rational expectations, they will be able to
graciously perform and sustain any business management system effectively. Furthermore, they
222
surmise that the impracticality of many quality procedures results not only in performance
inconsistencies, but also behavioral issues. The practitioners’ conclusions align with the
disclosure of Gaiardelli et al. (2019) that the operational performance of the business includes
high‐level quality and process leanness in terms of equipment capability, flexibility, adaptability
to change, and overall costs.
The Problem. The general problem to be addressed is the sustainability issue of the
TQM system in the manufacturing industry, resulting in high external warranties, internal quality
costs, and low productivity. Based on the findings of the research, the water treatment company
in the southeastern United States experienced TQM sustainability issues that resulted in high
product warranty cost, field failure rates, and cost of quality. Data on the site’s warranty versus
sales report shows warranty claims continued to be high in in the current year despite a positive
trend, indicating some opportunities with the sustainment of quality practices. These external
quality costs are supported by the site’s Quality Alerts, which confirmed major quality related
outbreaks in the field related to manufacturing defects. High internal quality costs data can be
seen in the site’s scrap summaries that displayed the percentages of top scrap contributors’ year‐
to‐date above target. The site’s First Pass Yield and Product Non‐Conformity reports revealed
data on recurring defects and containment actions that affect performance and productivity.
Evidence collected from interviews, observations, and archived documents related to
quality activities in the company supported the experiences of TQM practitioners with the
methodology’s sustainment. Data from interviews confirmed the claims of Aamer et al. (2017)
and Maistry et al. (2017) on the complexity of TQM practices in the shop floor relating to lack of
operative control of manufacturing processes and lack of monitoring of process improvement.
The practitioners also experienced challenges to TQM sustainment that included complex and
223
time‐consuming process measurement techniques such as statistical and line‐tester data analysis
that Wei et al. (2019) outlined. Often times, practitioners see what Sachdev and Agrawal (2017)
noted as ambiguous data on process output and incorrect emphasis on solving the problem
instead of recurrence prevention. Evidence from the root‐cause countermeasure archives showed
that practitioners placed more concentration on quality inspection instead of prevention, and they
struggled to move from a detection‐based system to a prevention‐based system (Li et al., 2018).
Based on the company’s strategic transformation plan and in line with Sachdev and
Agrawal’s (2017) study, its strategy formulation is focused more on business results and market
superiority, which affects resource allocation and work prioritization for TQM practitioners.
Interviews confirmed that this focus affected the ranking of operational priorities in supporting
TQM sustainment activities, with limited resources in favor of other operational objectives tied
to production output, as noted by Baidoun et al. (2018) in their study. In agreement with the
assertion of Anthony et al. (2017), the company’s leadership understands that TQM projects
primarily focus on customer satisfaction and not on bottom line results; however, management
needs to see tangible improvements in business results to justify investments. Some leadership
interviews mirror what Haffar et al. (2019) confirmed, that sustainment of TQM practices is
labor intensive, complex, costly, and not practical in a short‐term strategy despite its long‐term
potential to achieve competitive advantages. The complexity of TQM and lack of short‐term
benefits causes the company’s leadership to examine the appropriateness of the methodology in
their processes and this complication results in management questioning some of its applications
(Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017). The practitioners see this condition cascading into their less
integrated leaders that are not fully involved in sustaining TQM (Kumar & Sharma, 2017) and in
turn affects their teamwork and engagement needed for successful practice (Aamer et al., 2017).
224
The company policies support training and education essential to the sustainment of their
business management system. The site’s leadership acknowledges these factors and their role in
an effective sustainment of the quality management system (Mendes & Jesus, 2018) and agrees
with Marchiori and Mendes’ (2020) findings that KM contributes to the long‐term sustainment
of TQM. According to leadership interviews, the company’s management totally supports KM
acquisition and application, even though the practitioners see some challenges of the role in
knowledge sharing of TQM practices and its benefits as noted by Qasrawi et al. (2017). The
participants in the supporting role favor the support of leadership in knowledge sharing to
develop a good quality culture and functioning quality management system to sustain any
strategic initiatives as noted by Iqbal and Asrar‐ul‐Haq (2017).
Summary of the findings.
The semi‐structured interviews of the participants from different roles revealed varied
evidence of TQM practices in the water treatment company. Based on archived documents and
interviews, the company’s TQM system maintains a vigorous management philosophy that
demands full commitment to its policies and guidelines to improve product quality and
processes. This philosophy is in alignment with what Al‐Ali et al. (2019) noted, that
uncommitted TQM sustainment activities will lead to failure, which turns into high quality costs
and low performance. The participants showed that the current TQM system in place is complex
and manually managed, causing poor participation from all members in all levels of the
organization because of its labor‐intensive, perceived non‐value‐added activities, and time‐
consuming practices. As company leadership explained, the organizational culture’s dominant
attribute is towards achievement of its strategic goals and competitiveness to attain market
superiority and deliver higher customer experiences. The organization’s centered focus on
225
immediate success and business results creates conflicts with TQM methodologies’ high cost and
time‐consuming sustainment processes that require additional activities (Georgiev & Ohtaki,
2019). Participants acknowledged that the sustainment of TQM practices is costly and
impractical in a short‐term strategy, even though the methodology has a long‐term potential to
help the company achieve competitive advantages.
Research findings showed that the company’s leadership style is oriented heavily on
making production and achieving goals and are not in favor of supporting complex and time‐
consuming process measurement systems in the manufacturing lines that slow down cycle time
and affect productivity. Some participants in the leading role question the suitability and
appropriateness of the complicated TQM practices as they set the pace for the team to gain high
levels in performance and proficiency at all times with minimal supervision. Interviews and
archived documents revealed that the company’s competitive strategies and operational targets
are geared towards supporting their goals of achieving market superiority and competitiveness in
the marketplace. Management maintained that the company’s strategic emphasis is towards
competitive advantage and dominance in the market, while its quality management system has a
customer‐focused process that aims for continual support of a company’s strategic goal and
objectives. Albuhisi and Abdallah (2018) noted that alignment of TQM practices could affect the
preset company’s strategies and operational target variables if there is no balance or coherence
between the two standards.
Evidence of TQM sustainability issues includes high cost of quality and warranty as
shown in the company’s sales and warranty reports, and other internal documents such as scrap
summaries and productivity reports. The participants identified underlying problems related to
the sustainment of TQM as the cause of inconsistency in their processes, and the symptoms of
226
this discrepancy include reprocessing of parts and overtime work, in some cases, over the
weekend. The inability of the practitioners to sustain TQM practices revealed contributors such
as complex methodology, concerns with the applicability of the techniques, lack of
communication, training, understanding, knowledge, and support. Research findings showed that
the impassive employee behavior reflects the practitioner’s response to the TQM sustainment
issue when these practices negatively affect achievement of their production goals. The
incoherence between TQM practices and production targets creates participant responses that
lead to behavioral concerns, most especially when neither production objectives nor quality are
achieved due to conflicts. The company’s quality management system in place not only
safeguards against nonconforming products and procedures, but also protects process equipment
in the manufacturing line.
Practitioners experienced operational constraints due to worn tools, unreliable equipment,
and poor process capability, which resulted in lack of observance to proper monitoring,
noncompliance to scheduled preventive maintenance, and inattentiveness to quality management
system. Research findings showed that it takes multifunctional teams from production, shipping,
supply chain, warranty administration, engineering, and product management to reprocess
suspect products through non‐standard work and change management processes. In agreement
with Wei et al. (2019), the sustainment issues with TQM programs could overload the
coordination of process‐enablers and contribute to the performance failures that can prevent the
company from achieving their planned goals. While TQM practices have positive relationships
with organizational performance and productivity (Sila, 2018a), and provide tools and methods
to reduce errors, waste, and inefficient procedures (Alkhaldi & Abdallah, 2019, 2020),
management needs to give full commitment to TQM’s quality standards (Pham, 2020).
227
The analysis of the data showed that the firmness of TQM methodology, orientation of
the organization culture, type of leadership style, and highly competitive strategies and
operational targets affected the sustainment of TQM in the site. Data from the study produced
relevant information that relates to all research questions and support the conceptual framework
initially outlined in the foundation of the research. The findings confirmed the answer to the first
research question that failure in sustaining the quality system in place results in high product
defects, leading to excessive reject costs and loss in productivity. Based on quality reports, the
TQM sustainment issue leads to loss of control and measurement of processes and products in
compliance to customer requirements. This supports Nasim’s (2018) claim that the sustainment
of TQM influences the operational productivity of organizations, which also affects other
dimensions of performance such as financial effectiveness and customer satisfaction. The
interviews provide the answer to the second research question, confirming that the TQM
methodology is not in complete coherence with the company’s strategic objectives that focus
more on business results because of contradictions with its complex and time‐consuming
activities and measurement processes. It takes more work and time for TQM initiatives to
produce benefits that influence performance, making it costly and impractical in the short term
(Qasrawi et al., 2017). This complication and suitability issue causes TQM practitioners to lose
engagement, involvement, and commitment, as described by Chiarini and Vagnoni (2017).
The answer to the third research question shows that while the organizational culture
acknowledges competitiveness as a combination of strategies and quality, it is sensitive to the
methodology’s timely results and benefits designed to influence performance. Li et al. (2018)
shared this same concern that when changes do start to take place in the business, the
sustainment of TQM programs becomes a challenge because management expects immediate
228
changes from a transformation that usually takes time to produce results. Panuwatwanich and
Nguyen (2017) also stressed the same findings that organizations dominated by market and
rational cultures do not support a favorable environment for the effective sustainment of TQM
compared to cultures controlled by adhocracy or the group‐type system. The practitioners raised
the awareness to the fourth research question by sharing that the methodology created constraints
and overwhelmed operational‐enablers through its high frequency, repetitive, and labor‐intensive
inspection checks. Some practitioners do not see this methodology as a mechanism or tool that
would solve recurring problems. They also revealed that the method of processing
nonconforming material, data collection, and daily assessments of process issues at quality
tollgates were added layers of inspections installed because of the inability of other practitioners
to sustain quality procedures.
The research findings aligned with each element in the conceptual framework that
contributed to the sustainment issues of TQM in the company. Each input construct such as the
TQM methodology, leadership style, organization culture, and competitive strategies has
fundamental components that influenced actors in how they sustain the TQM system, which
eventually resulted in high costs of quality and low performance. The results also confirmed the
presence of anticipated themes that covers CI, DC, HRM, and KM, and have many similarities
with the information taken from professional and academic peer‐reviewed literatures. Based on
the findings of the research, the water treatment company in the southeastern United States
experienced TQM sustainability issues that resulted in high product warranty costs, field failure
rates, and cost of quality. Even though findings showed that the company supported the
development and empowerment of teams to improve the quality of products and processes
(Tortorella et al., 2019), there is still an underlying tension and conflict between the concept of
229
manipulation, control, and empowerment (Banuro et al., 2017). Practitioners confirmed the
rigidity of the TQM approach and its requirement of firm observance to its procedures noted by
Gözükara et al. (2019), and the sustainment of the approach requires the organizational culture to
change, which may be a challenge for the company (Haffar et al., 2019). The TQM model
adapted by the company has resulted in different outcomes, because there is no distinct standard
that defines TQM and little understanding on what its vital features can do for the company’s
specific setting (Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017). There is a need for an in‐depth understanding of the
relationship between TQM and the company’s strategic goals to discern how and to what degree
investing in TQM practices contributes to realizing sustainable business objectives.
Application to Professional Practice
The study showed the importance of establishing coherence of TQM methodology and
the organization’s strategic objectives. There is a need for the quality methodology to be made
process‐based that does not focus on control and sanctions of practitioners; the approach should
have more emphasis on management of processes (Moccia, 2016). Maleki‐Minbashrazgah and
Shabani (2019) suggested that organizations could use DC as a course of action for advancing
quality management positions and improving competitive advantage by integrating techniques
that help them effectively adjust to dynamic changes in their environment. This can be reinforced
by implementation of knowledge management (KM), as suggested by practitioners to help
support TQM sustainability efforts. In alignment with Seo et al. (2016), the study revealed that
knowledge creation, accumulation, exploration, transaction, and management directly influences
quality management activities involving problem‐solving and project improvement initiatives
that lead to sustained learning. Practitioners noted that application of the TQM methods, policies,
and techniques involves committed and dedicated resources, and some organizations do not have
230
a strategic roadmap supplemented with suitable methods and systems to ensure success with
their operations (Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017). These are the research findings that could benefit or
improve the general business practice in the field on quality system sustainability. The study also
revealed potential application strategies that could address issues related to organizational
conflicts with TQM application, employee engagement, commitment, adaptability, and
knowledge sharing that affect the sustainability of the quality management system in the
manufacturing industry.
Improving General Business Practice
The results of the study showed the importance of establishing coherence of TQM
methodology and the organization’s strategic objectives. Based on the interviews and
participants’ feedback, the quality management system and the company’s defined set of
strategic initiatives need to improve fit and alignment with each other to create a productive
environment. The practitioners suggested that the development of TQM alignment to strategic
objectives should be viewed as a dynamic and ongoing process in the manufacturing
environment instead of a singular best approach. This perspective aligned with McAdam et al.’s
(2019, p.200) view that the dynamic alignment of the processes and systems are made by
attaining a “quasi” fit instead of an exact fit. The authors further noted that sustaining TQM in
the industry may require additional capabilities to reinforce what it takes to achieve it. The
findings in the research showed that adherence to the existing TQM system, even though it is
manual and operator‐dependent, helped in attaining a certain level of quality performance.
However, as research evidence suggests, the means that allowed the system’s responsiveness to
achieve high‐quality performance in the company, may not be the same approach needed to
231
sustain it. The findings provided observed support for practical guidance in sustaining TQM and
quality performance.
Participants surmised that there is a need for the quality methodology to be made process‐
based and less on being too operator‐dependent. This reinforced Moccia’s (2016) claims that
quality management should not focus on control and sanctions of practitioners but should have
more emphasis on management of processes. This development will require more investment in
advanced quality measurement equipment and justification should not only be based on long‐
term benefits, but also on the practicality of the equipment in supplementing production
objectives. This approach addressed Bernardino et al. (2016) and Bugdol’s (2020) concerns
where investment in quality creates anxiety for immediate results and causes unwanted
apprehension for operations that can ultimately affect commitment from leadership. Practitioners
suggested that operations needs to focus their transformation plans not just on speed and cycle
time improvements of operations, but also on providing deeper emphasis on improving process
capability. The Six Sigma application centers on its capability to reduce variation in processes
and understanding the trade‐off between the degree of variability reduction and the accruing
benefits is important for the sustainment of quality (Antony & Sony, 2019, 2020). Variation
reduction in the process is the foundational concept in manufacturing capability, efficiency,
productivity, and performance that assists in the long‐term sustainment of quality systems
(Hussain et al., 2019).
Putri et al. (2018) suggested that DC is the appropriate strategy to maintain the
sustainability of a business management system in a company. The company’s capability to
integrate, transform, and reorganize internal and external core competences to adapt to rapidly
fluctuating manufacturing environments creates patterns from existing practices and knowledge
232
to allow them to adapt how they operate through changes (Wollersheim & Heimeriks, 2016). The
authors further suggested that companies can incorporate DC in their exiting ‘best‐in‐class’
practices to help sustain quality systems in place. This is in line with Kumar et al.’s (2020b)
claim that the dimensions of DC and quality management capabilities have a positive impact on
performance; DC helps a company in sustaining its competitiveness and effectiveness in its
market’s dynamic environment. Laaksonen and Peltoniemi (2018) explained that DC includes
sensing, seizing, and reconfiguring to modify current information to produce new knowledge,
which supports the company’s adaptability to change (Su & Linderman, 2016) so they can
sustain a consistent quality performance. DC permits the company to detect and seize developing
process opportunities and convert these to new value‐creating strategies by transforming
ordinary capabilities (Laaksonen & Peltoniemi, 2018) to help adapt and align quality systems to
the evolving changes. Maleki‐Minbashrazgah and Shabani (2019) recommended DC as a course
of action for optimizing existing resources, advancing the quality management position, and
improving competitive advantage by integrating techniques that help the company effectively
adjust to dynamic changes in its environment.
Most practitioners suggested the creation of initiatives to support long‐term commitment
and motivation of employees to excel, most especially in quality and performance‐related
initiatives planned by the organization. Süßbauer et al. (2019) suggested using HRM as a
strategic management tool for the effective implementation of corporate objectives and
sustainability that requires engagement and empowerment by employees at all levels of the
organization. The role designs training to advance employees’ skills, knowledge, and abilities,
and constructs incentives intended to motivate effort (Baidoun et al., 2018; Lee et al., 2019),
which contributes to better quality and performance by increasing employee preference and
233
involvement in decision‐making. Ali et al. (2020b) together with Cho and Linderman (2019)
reinforced this concept that HRM promotes standard practices that form a workforce that has
important company‐specific skills and provides the opportunity to use those abilities successfully
through organizational design. The integration of effective HRM practices and sustainment of
TQM practices within the business management system supports the company's initiatives to
achieve total customer satisfaction and a high level of business performance (Alkhazali et al.,
2019). Based on leadership interviews, implementation of KM amongst practitioners will help
support TQM sustainability efforts. Calvo‐Mora et al. (2016) noted that KM and TQM share the
same components such as teamwork, training, empowerment, performance measurement,
leadership commitment, benchmarking, and a supportive organizational culture to be successful
in their implementation and sustainment. Seo et al. (2016) emphasized that knowledge creation,
accumulation, exploration, transaction, and management directly influence quality management
activities involving problem‐solving and project improvement initiatives that lead to sustained
learning.
Potential Application Strategies
Chiarini and Vagnoni (2017) noted that application of the TQM methods, policies, and
techniques involves committed and dedicated resources, and some organizations do not have a
strategic roadmap supplemented with suitable methods and systems to ensure success with their
operations. One potential application strategy to address this issue is to have leadership acquire
an in‐depth understanding of the significance of constructing a suitable organizational culture
with a focus on the TQM basic principles (Álvarez‐García et al., 2016; Haffar et al., 2019;
Nasim, 2018). Polese et al. (2019) suggested that leadership through the HRM has a key role in
enabling KM and sharing in TQM methodology, engaging in sustainability practices, enriching
234
job motivation, and subsequently enhancing performance effectiveness. The authors noted that it
is necessary for leadership to understand how the manufacturing elements and TQM fit together
to improve the cohesiveness of management control that may result in the successful sustainment
of TQM on the company’s processes. Arunachalam and Palanichamy (2017) claimed that
sustainment is achievable when manufacturing processes integrate quality management with pure
focus on the customers and productivity. Adapting the central purpose of TQM in meeting
customer requirements regardless of whether they are external or internal customers (Ratny et
al., 2018) meets the primary objective and sustainment of a quality management system.
Total participation is a significant factor in the sustainment of TQM because it motivates
employees to innovate and support the company in maintaining its long‐term vision and planning
(Amin et al., 2017; Dahlgaard et al., 2019; Psomas & Jaca, 2016). This includes employee
participation that provides high performance work configurations and incorporates CI efforts
with common business operations (Arunachalam & Palanichamy, 2017; Iqbal & Asrar‐ul‐Haq,
2018). Another potential application strategy is for leadership to facilitate employees’
engagement and involvement in helping restructure the organizational culture that supports the
practice of sharing the accountability and responsibility for providing high quality products and
services to customers (Alshourah, 2020, 2021; Boikanyo & Heyns, 2019). The envelopment
includes employees’ full commitment and a shared mission as motivation for attaining efficient
accomplishments in CI and TQM sustainment (Phan et al., 2019; Polese et al., 2019). This
strategy requires top management commitment that is extremely important for TQM sustainment
in the organization (Mehralian et al., 2016; Ratny et al., 2018; Tsironis, 2018), and supports
Deming’s system of profound knowledge that solicit active engagement and commitment to the
TQM process (Agrawal, 2019b; Sila & Walczak, 2017; Villanueva, 2018).
235
DC supports sustainment of new processes by quantifying new strategic designs and
initiatives to benefit a quick and timely resolution on concerns like resource allocation,
organizational structure changes, process development, and alliances (Putri et al., 2018). Another
potential application strategy would be to develop the ability to reconfigure the quality system
responses in a timely manner as processes evolve or are being developed to adapt to customers’
changing needs. Laaksonen and Peltoniemi (2018) asserted that this type of transformation
strengthens TQM practices to positively influence practitioners’ adaptation to change and
complements their overall performance to adjust to customers’ varying demands. The
organization needs to have a structured ability to renew their endowment of resources by
developing new resources and reinstating the mix of both internal and external resources
(Salvato & Vassolo, 2018) to have a reliable mechanism for process adaptation. Putri et al.
(2018) stressed that it is a strategic responsibility of management to develop DC to reconfigure
effectively whenever any changes occur and to keep up with the needs of re‐allocation of
resources and realignment of affected systems and processes.
KM is a structured process of configuring, sharing, and retaining of knowledge and
experience of employees to give the organization the capability to turn threats into opportunities
(Abbas, 2020) and adapt to dynamic changes in the business environment. This strategic
organizational resource, which has a significant and positive impact on all the dimensions of
TQM, is associated with business success where knowledge sharing supports creation of
innovation, process sustainability, and achievement of competitive advantages (Calvo‐Mora et
al., 2016). The potential application strategy would be to manage TQM and KM as inter‐
subjective constructs and highlight the importance of building knowledge from experienced
workers as strategic sources of TQM sustainment to achieve success based on research findings.
236
Management has recognized lessons learned and KM as essential and valuable elements of any
sustainment process, but do not have enough time to integrate this approach in their regular
routine (Backlund & Sundqvist, 2018), which causes significant limitation of any sustainability
program. For the application strategy to be successful, the organization needs to create an
inclusive work setting and environment that enables team members to share openly and discuss
solutions to opportunities, according to participants in the study. Integration of KM benefits the
sustainment of any quality management system because it evaluates vital points in quality
management applications that assist companies to be more strategically flexible to the dynamic
changes in their business environment (Gutierrez‐Gutierrez et al., 2018).
Summary of Application to Professional Practice
Evidence from the study showed the importance of establishing coherence of TQM
methodology and the organization’s strategic objectives. The practitioners suggested that the
development of TQM alignment to strategic objectives should be viewed as a dynamic and
ongoing process in the manufacturing environment instead of a singular best approach. The
perspective aligned with McAdam et al.’s (2019) view that the dynamic alignment of the
processes and systems are made by attaining a “quasi” fit instead of an exact fit. The authors
added that there is a need for the quality methodology to be made process‐based and less on
being too operator‐dependent. This reinforces Moccia’s (2016) claims that quality management
should not focus on control and sanctions of practitioners but should have more emphasis on the
management of processes. Putri et al. (2018) suggested that DC is the appropriate strategy to
maintain the sustainability of a business management system in a company. The authors
suggested that companies can incorporate DC in their exiting ‘best‐in‐class’ practices to help
sustain quality systems in place. This is in line with Kumar et al.’s (2020b) claim that the
237
dimensions of DC and quality management capabilities have a positive impact on performance;
DC helps a company in sustaining its competitiveness and effectiveness in its market’s dynamic
environment. Maleki‐Minbashrazgah and Shabani (2019) recommended DC as a course of action
for optimizing existing resources, advancing the quality management position, and improving
competitive advantage by integrating techniques that help the company effectively adjust to
dynamic changes in its environment.
The integration of effective HRM practices and sustainment of TQM practices within the
business management system supports the company's initiatives to achieve total customer
satisfaction and a high level of business performance (Alkhazali et al., 2019). Implementation of
KM amongst practitioners will help support TQM sustainability efforts. Seo et al. (2016)
emphasized that knowledge creation, accumulation, exploration, transaction, and management
directly influences quality management activities involving problem‐solving and project
improvement initiatives that lead to sustained learning. Chiarini and Vagnoni (2017) noted that
application of the TQM methods, policies, and techniques involves committed and dedicated
resources, and some organizations do not have a strategic roadmap supplemented with suitable
methods and systems to ensure success with their operations. One potential application strategy
to address this issue is to have leadership acquire an in‐depth understanding of the significance
of constructing a suitable organizational culture with a focus on the TQM basic principles
(Haffar et al., 2019; Nasim, 2018).
Total participation is a significant factor in the sustainment of TQM because it motivates
employees to innovate and support the company in maintaining its long‐term vision and planning
(Dahlgaard et al., 2019). Another potential application strategy is for leadership to facilitate
employees’ engagement and involvement in helping restructure the organizational culture that
238
supports the practice of sharing the accountability and responsibility for providing high quality
products and services to customers (Alshourah, 2020, 2021). This strategy requires top
management commitment that is extremely important for TQM sustainment in the organization
(Ratny et al., 2018; Tsironis, 2018), and supports Deming’s system of profound knowledge that
solicits active engagement and commitment to the TQM process (Agrawal, 2019b). DC supports
sustainment of new processes by quantifying new strategic designs and initiatives to benefit a
quick and timely resolution on concerns like resource allocation, organizational structure
changes, process development, and alliances (Putri et al., 2018). Another potential application
strategy would be to develop the ability to reconfigure the quality system responses as processes
evolve or are being developed to adapt to customers’ changing needs as suggested by research
participants. The organization needs to have a structured ability to renew their endowment of
resources by developing new resources and reinstating the mix of both internal and external
resources (Salvato & Vassolo, 2018) to have a reliable mechanism for process adaptation. KM is
a strategic organizational resource, which has a significant and positive impact on all the
dimensions of TQM and is associated with business success where knowledge sharing supports
creation of innovation, process sustainability, and achievement of competitive advantages
(Calvo‐Mora et al., 2016). The potential application strategy would be to manage TQM and KM
as inter‐subjective constructs and highlight the importance of building knowledge from
experienced workers as strategic sources of TQM sustainment to achieve success. According to
practitioners, for the application strategy to be successful, the organization needs to create an
inclusive work setting and environment that enables team members to share openly and discuss
solutions to opportunities.
239
Recommendations for Further Study
The single case study is limited to the understanding of TQM sustainability challenges in
the manufacturing industry and the findings will not be generalizable to other business groups or
sectors in the same context. A lack of generalization to a larger scale is a limitation for the use of
qualitative research (Du et al., 2020). The data derived from the study originated mainly from the
frontline level of manufacturing processes where TQM methodologies are implemented,
practiced, and sustained. The results may not be applicable to the businesses’ divisions or
segments level of the organization. The formative input and output constructs used in the study
might not cover all the underlying dimensions that affect the sustainability issue of TQM in other
forms of business. Further study is recommended to investigate a revised model as replication
research using different constructs or to utilize applicable data from other industries to examine
and compare the generalizability of the outcomes (Su & Linderman, 2016).
More research is also needed specifically on larger corporations with extensive horizontal
and vertical segments to fully understand the various challenges of quality management
sustainability on an extensive scale. Larger and more complex companies have multifaceted sub‐
cultures and diverse groups of employees with different real‐world knowledge, awareness,
experience, and understanding of their organization’s perceptions of quality management
sustainability and how systems co‐exist within their environment (Süßbauer et al., 2019). The
future study could focus on a broader field of prevailing conflicts between opposing objectives,
logics, interests, and missions within one multinational organization or within its line companies.
Such conflicts between TQM methodology and its sustainment between multiple participants
from three major departments and four functional roles could have different outcomes if taken on
a broader scope. This recommendation will encourage several concept designs and perspectives
240
to be considered and investigated that are pertinent to the sustainment of a quality management
system in the manufacturing industry.
Reflections
The impact of the research proposal centered more on cultivating responsibility and
accountability, and the actual field study with the participants enhanced one’s emotional
intelligence, which included thoughtful understanding and empathizing with other people’s
feelings. The data analysis process developed one’s critical thinking, which included listening,
questioning viewpoints, articulating, and clarifying beliefs and values while engaging with
participants. The dynamics of participating, engaging, empowering, and decision‐making that
were a part of completing the study, as well as embracing uncertainty, coping with changes, and
adapting to them, assisted one in becoming a well‐rounded and better person in general. The
personal and professional skills developed during the study helped in making one a better leader
and employee, as well as a more cognizant, accountable, and productive member of society.
Participants in the study conveyed the need of nurturing compassionate behaviors that are
consistent with what they believe to be most important when working effectively with their
teams. According to Erdvig (2020), when employees and their efforts are appreciated, their
engagement, satisfaction, and productivity increases, and they are inspired to sustain and
improve their valued performance. The biblical Christian principle of caring that is in line with
the most outstanding theme of the Bible, starts with God as the source of caring (Newbanks et
al., 2018). Brown (2018) noted that uniting with Christ enabled the self‐actualization of human
development, and salvation was the remuneration of a person’s union with Christ, where the
process of sanctification or redemptive development positively influenced one’s thinking and
241
emotional patterns. A biblical foundation stresses the intrinsic worth of all individuals and asserts
that the dignity and worth of the person is the core value of the profession (Kash, 2020).
Personal & Professional Growth
Conducting the research with the participants and support groups has opened a lot of
avenues for personal and professional growth. Carrying out the study took a tremendous amount
of time, effort, and understanding from the entire support system to achieve the level of
accomplishments it was designed to produce. Building the foundation of the research required
persistent courage and diligence in exploring, investigating, and examining existing theories,
concepts, and constructs that would form the framework of the study (Creswell & Poth, 2018).
The impact of constructing the research proposal on the personal side centered more on
responsibility and accountability for every action that would protect the participants and their
environment. The actual field study with the participants enhanced one’s emotional intelligence
that included thoughtful understanding and empathizing with other people’s feelings, which are
key to forming healthy, balanced, and satisfying relationships with them. The data analysis
process required critical thinking, which included listening, understanding, testing, questioning
viewpoints, articulating, and clarifying beliefs and values while engaging with participants.
Experience with the research has shown how successful it would be by being part of the
team. The significance of the support group, from the Dissertation Chair, Committee,
Administration, institutional resources, family, friends, and colleagues at work revealed how
essential teamwork is for any major endeavor. The dynamics of participating, engaging,
empowering, and decision‐making that were a part of completing the study, as well as embracing
uncertainty, coping with changes, and adapting to them, assisted one in becoming a well‐rounded
and better person in general (Robson & McCartan, 2016). Trust, commitment, and acceptance
242
developed the needed confidence that allowed one’s professional attributes to develop and
mature. The personal and professional skills developed during the study will help in making one
a better leader and employee, as well as a more cognizant, accountable, and productive member
of society. The result of the competitive challenge of the study was not only professionally
rewarding, but it also gave the researcher a moment of reflection to answer questions relating to
the personal betterment of oneself.
Biblical Perspective
The majority of the participants in the study conveyed the need of nurturing and
promoting compassionate behaviors that are consistent with what they believe to be most
important when working and responding effectively with their teams. Along with their desire for
respect, admiration, and integrity, they responded to appreciation articulated through recognition
of their good contributions because it confirmed that their colleagues and leaders valued their
work. According to Erdvig (2020), when employees and their efforts are appreciated, their
engagement, satisfaction, and productivity increases, and they are inspired to sustain and
improve their valued performance. Employees make choices based off their values, and biblical
perspectives help in the understanding of how this worth and these values are used to serve, care,
and interact with others in a moral way (Rajamohan, 2021). One concerned participant related,
P22: All employees are already doing the best they can to adapt to the needs of the
business, and with the Covid‐19 crisis affecting everyone, we have to cover each other to
keep things going. It is very important to acknowledge that everybody is already doing
the very best that he or she can. It is so hard to care about work when we are stretched
thin, but when I see others doing their best to help despite all these challenges, it makes
me feel I need to do my share too. Those who care unconditionally inspire me and make
243
me feel like we are on a mission where every ounce of our contribution counts, and every
bit of our efforts makes a difference for everyone. It may almost be biblical to say that I
feel I have worth and value as an employee and it motivates me to do more good things
for others. This situation helps me redeem myself from all the negativities and actually
helps me grow more as an ethical person, while improving my relationship with my co‐
workers and the Almighty.
The biblical Christian principle of caring that is in line with the most outstanding theme
of the Bible, starts with God as the source of caring (Newbanks et al., 2018). Brown (2018)
noted that uniting with Christ enabled the self‐actualization of human development, and
salvation was the remuneration of a person’s union with Christ, where the process of
sanctification or redemptive development positively influenced one’s thinking and emotional
patterns. In the course of interviews, some participants had the prevailing modality of integrating
biblical principles in actions that helped in the deeper understanding of the research problem
from their Christian biblical worldview. Consideration of participants’ worldview through
inclusion and building of interpersonal relationships at any level by leadership takes advantage
of values, judgments, and priorities to strengthen beneficial transformation and success (Curtis,
2018; Thomas et al., 2020). Accounts of the Bible show that God makes known his leadership
through his providence to achieve his objective according to his pleasing will, as God is the only
source to multicultural diverse leadership (Hah, 2019).
In the participants’ unique experiences, which are influenced by their personal life and
culture, self‐awareness of inherent worth was important because their values influenced the
organization and how the business operated. The capacity for rational thought or individuals’
intellectual development are existent because they are created in the image of God, so that they
244
can fulfill their main purpose of glorifying God (Brown, 2018). This same capacity induces
biblical inspiration and enhances one’s relationship with God (Van der Walt, 2017). A biblical
foundation stresses the intrinsic worth of all individuals and asserts that the dignity and worth of
the person is the core value of the profession (Kash, 2020). The author further noted that this
model is taken from the biblical implication that all individuals are created in the image of God.
Summary of Reflections
Constructing the foundation of the study required persistent courage and diligence in
exploring existing theories, concepts, and constructs that would form the framework of the study.
The effect of the research proposal on the personal side centered more on responsibility and
accountability and the actual field study with the participants enhanced one’s emotional
intelligence, which included thoughtful understanding and empathizing with other people’s
feelings. The data analysis process required critical thinking, which included listening,
understanding, testing, questioning viewpoints, articulating, and clarifying beliefs and values
while engaging with participants. Experience with the research has shown how successful it
would be by being part of the team and the significance of the support group revealed how
essential teamwork was for any major endeavor. The dynamics of participating, engaging,
empowering, and decision‐making that were a part of completing the study, as well as embracing
uncertainty, coping with changes, and adapting to them, assisted one in becoming a well‐rounded
and better person in general. The personal and professional skills developed during the study will
help in making one a better leader and employee, and a more cognizant, more accountable, and
more productive member of society. The result of the study was not only professionally
rewarding, but it also gave the researcher a moment of reflection to answer questions related to
the personal betterment of oneself.
245
Most participants in the study conveyed the need for nurturing and promoting
compassionate behaviors that were consistent with what they believed to be most important
when working and responding effectively with their teams. According to Erdvig (2020), when
employees and their efforts are appreciated, their engagement, satisfaction, and productivity
increases, and they are inspired to sustain and improve their valued performance. Employees
make choices based off their values, and biblical perspectives help in the understanding of how
this worth and these values are used to serve, care, and interact with others in a moral way
(Rajamohan, 2021). The biblical Christian principle of caring that is in line with the most
outstanding theme of the Bible, starts with God as the source of caring (Newbanks et al., 2018).
Brown (2018) noted that uniting with Christ enabled the self‐actualization of human
development, and salvation was the remuneration of a person’s union with Christ, where the
process of sanctification or redemptive development positively influenced one’s thinking and
emotional patterns. Consideration of participants’ worldview through inclusion and building of
interpersonal relationships at any level by leadership takes advantage of values, judgments, and
priorities to strengthen beneficial transformations and success (Curtis, 2018; Thomas et al.,
2020). Accounts of the Bible show that God makes known his leadership through his providence
to achieve his objective according to his pleasing will, as God is the only source to multicultural
diverse leadership (Hah, 2019). A biblical foundation stresses the intrinsic worth of all
individuals and asserts that the dignity and worth of the person is the core value of the profession
(Kash, 2020). The author further noted that this model is taken from the biblical implication that
all individuals are created in the image of God.
246
Summary of Section 3
The purpose of the research was to understand the sustainability issue of TQM in a water
treatment company in the southeastern United States, resulting in high product warranty costs,
field failure rates, and cost of quality. The study discussed the relationship of how the findings
correlated to each research question, conceptual framework, anticipated theme, literature
information, and the research problem. The semi‐structured interviews of the participants from
different roles revealed varied evidence of TQM sustainability in the water treatment company.
The findings confirmed that failure in sustaining the quality system in place resulted in high
product defects, leading to excessive reject costs and loss in productivity. This supported
Nasim’s (2018) claim that the sustainment of TQM influenced the operational productivity of
organizations, which also affected other dimensions of performance such as financial
effectiveness and customer satisfaction. The research findings aligned with each element in the
conceptual framework that contributed to the sustainment issues of TQM in the company. The
results also confirmed the presence of anticipated themes that cover CI, DC, HRM, and KM, and
have many similarities with the information taken from professional and academic peer‐reviewed
literatures.
Based on the findings of the research, the water treatment company in the southeastern
United States experienced TQM sustainability issues that resulted in high product warranty costs,
field failure rates, and cost of quality. Practitioners confirmed the rigidity of the TQM approach
and its requirement of firm observance to its procedures as noted by Gözükara et al. (2019), and
the sustainment of the approach requires the organizational culture to change, which may be a
challenge for the company (Haffar et al., 2019). The TQM model adapted by the company has
resulted in different outcomes, because there was no distinct standard that defined TQM and
247
little understanding on what its vital features could do for the company’s specific setting
(Chiarini & Vagnoni, 2017). The analysis of the data showed that the firmness of TQM
methodology, orientation of the organization culture, type of leadership style, and highly
competitive strategies and operational targets affected the sustainment of TQM in the site. Each
input construct such as the TQM methodology, leadership style, organization culture, and
competitive strategies has fundamental components that influenced actors in how they sustain the
TQM system, which eventually resulted in high costs of quality and low performance.
Practitioners confirmed the rigidity of the TQM approach and its requirement of firm
observance to its procedures noted by Gözükara et al. (2019), and the sustainment of the
approach requires the organizational culture to change, which may be a challenge for the
company (Haffar et al., 2019). Evidence from the study showed the importance of establishing
coherence of TQM methodology and the organization’s strategic objectives. The practitioners
suggested that the development of TQM alignment to strategic objectives should be viewed as a
dynamic and ongoing process in the manufacturing environment instead of a singular best
approach. The perspective aligned with McAdam et al.’s (2019) view that the dynamic alignment
of the processes and systems are made by attaining a “quasi” fit instead of an exact fit. The
authors added that there is a need for the quality methodology to be made process‐based and less
on being too operator‐dependent. This reinforces Moccia’s (2016) claims that quality
management should not focus on control and sanctions of practitioners but should have more
emphasis on the management of processes. There is a need for an in‐depth understanding of the
relationship between TQM and the company’s strategic goals to discern how and to what degree
investing in TQM practices contributes to realizing sustainable business objectives.
248
Chiarini and Vagnoni (2017) noted that application of the TQM methods, policies, and
techniques involves dedicated resources, and some organizations do not have a strategic roadmap
supplemented with suitable methods and systems to ensure success with their operations. One
potential application strategy to address this issue is to have leadership acquire an in‐depth
understanding of the significance of constructing a suitable organizational culture with a focus
on the TQM basic principles (Haffar et al., 2019; Nasim, 2018). Leadership also need to
facilitate employees’ engagement and involvement in helping restructure the organizational
culture that supports the practice of sharing the accountability and responsibility for providing
high quality products and services to customers (Alshourah, 2020, 2021). The authors also noted
that management should develop the ability to reconfigure the quality system responses as
processes evolve or are being developed to adapt to customers’ changing needs as suggested by
research participants. Managing TQM and KM as inter‐subjective constructs highlights the
significance of building knowledge from experienced workers as strategic sources of sustainment
to achieve success.
The single case study is limited to the understanding of TQM sustainability challenges in
the manufacturing industry and the findings will not be generalizable to other business groups or
sectors in the same context. A lack of generalization to a larger scale is a limitation for the use of
qualitative research (Du et al., 2020). The results may not be applicable to the businesses’
divisions or segments level of the organization. Further study is recommended to investigate a
revised model as replication research using different constructs or to utilize applicable data from
other industries to examine and compare the generalizability of the outcomes (Su & Linderman,
2016). The future study could focus on a broader field of prevailing conflicts between opposing
objectives, logics, interests, and missions within one multinational organization or within its line
249
companies. This recommendation will encourage several concept designs and perspectives to be
considered and investigated that are pertinent to the sustainment of a quality management system
in the manufacturing industry.
Experience with the research has shown how successful it would be by being part of the
team and the significance of the support group revealed how essential teamwork was for any
major endeavor. The dynamics of participating, engaging, empowering, and decision‐making
that were a part of completing the study, as well as embracing uncertainty, coping with changes,
and adapting to them, assisted the researcher in becoming a well‐rounded person in general.
Most participants in the study conveyed the need for nurturing and promoting compassionate
behaviors that were consistent with what they believed to be most important when working and
responding effectively with their teams. Employees make choices based off their values, and
biblical perspectives help in the understanding of how this worth and these values are used to
serve, care, and interact with others in a moral way (Rajamohan, 2021). The biblical Christian
principle of caring that is in line with the most outstanding theme of the Bible, starts with God as
the source of caring (Newbanks et al., 2018). Consideration of participants’ worldview through
inclusion and building of interpersonal relationships at any level by leadership takes advantage
of values, judgments, and priorities to strengthen beneficial transformations and success (Curtis,
2018; Thomas et al., 2020). A biblical foundation stresses the intrinsic worth of all individuals
and asserts that the dignity and worth of the person is the core value of the profession (Kash,
2020).
Summary and Study Conclusions
The manufacturing industry has applied the TQM approach to their processes for decades
but experienced problems in translating and aligning TQM concepts with their existing
250
organizational structure (Muruganantham et al., 2018; Wei et al., 2019). The purpose of the
study was to understand the sustainability issue of the TQM system in a water‐treatment
company in the southeastern United States, which has resulted in high cost of quality and low
performance. A flexible design single case study was used to discover, explore, and recognize
the challenges of sustaining the TQM system in manufacturing processes to provide a complete
picture of the phenomenon in its natural setting. The study incorporated triangulating multiple
qualitative methods by combining observations and interviews with documentary analysis
(Natow, 2020) and used a purposeful sampling strategy to collect information‐rich perspectives
that had relevance to the phenomenon and research problems under investigation (Ames et al.,
2019). The study employed a sample size of 50 participants who were permanent employees of
the company for the interview and quality‐related documents to gather pertinent information on
the TQM sustainability issue. Data collection included evidence from interviews, observations,
and archived documents, and was recorded using field notes, observation, and interview
protocols. The interpretation process was done by creating the codes and developing the themes
from the codes, and then organizing the themes into greater units of constructs to make sense of
the collected data (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The reliability and validity of the findings involved
careful transcription and frequent verification of the data that was collected during the
investigative process, and its trustworthiness was maximized to create defensible results
(Cypress, 2017). The study authenticated the contributing and resulting constructs to the TQM
sustainability issue by understanding their level of influence and impact on the site.
The research findings aligned with each element in the conceptual framework that
contributed to the sustainment issues of TQM in the company. The results confirmed the
presence of anticipated themes that cover CI, DC, HRM, and KM, and have many similarities
251
with the information taken from professional and academic peer‐reviewed literatures. Based on
the findings of the research, the water treatment company in the southeastern United States
experienced TQM sustainability issues, which resulted in high product warranty costs, field
failure rates, and cost of quality. Practitioners confirmed the rigidity of the TQM approach and
its requirement of firm observance to its procedures as noted by Gözükara et al. (2019), and the
sustainment of the approach requires the organizational culture to change, which may be a
challenge for the company (Haffar et al., 2019). The analysis of the data showed that the
firmness of TQM methodology, orientation of the organizational culture, type of leadership style,
and highly competitive strategies and operational targets affected the sustainment of TQM in the
site. Each input construct such as the TQM methodology, leadership style, organizational culture,
and competitive strategy has fundamental components that influenced actors in how they sustain
the TQM system, which eventually resulted in high costs of quality and low performance.
There is a need for an in‐depth understanding of the relationship between TQM and the
company’s strategic goals to discern how and to what degree investing in TQM practices
contributes to realizing sustainable business objectives. One potential application strategy to
improve TQM sustainability is to have leadership acquire an in‐depth understanding of the
significance of constructing a suitable organizational culture with a focus on the TQM basic
principles (Haffar et al., 2019; Nasim, 2018). Leadership also needs to facilitate employees’
engagement and involvement in helping restructure the organizational culture that supports the
practice of sharing the accountability and responsibility for providing high quality products and
service to customers (Alshourah, 2020, 2021). The author also noted that management should
develop the ability to reconfigure the quality system responses as processes evolve or are being
developed to adapt to customers’ changing needs as suggested by research participants.
252
Managing TQM and KM as inter‐subjective constructs highlights the significance of building
knowledge from experienced workers as strategic sources of sustainment to achieve success.
Most participants in the study conveyed the need for nurturing and promoting
compassionate behaviors that were consistent with what they believed to be most important
when working effectively with their teams. Employees make choices based off of their values,
and their biblical perspectives help in the understanding of how this worth and these values are
used to serve, care, and interact with others in a moral way (Rajamohan, 2021). Consideration of
participants’ worldview through inclusion and building of interpersonal relationships at any level
by leadership takes advantage of values, judgments, and priorities to strengthen beneficial
transformations and success (Curtis, 2018; Thomas et al., 2020). A biblical foundation stresses
the intrinsic worth of all individuals and asserts that the dignity and worth of the person is the
core value of the profession (Kash, 2020). The single case study is limited to the understanding
of TQM sustainability challenges in the manufacturing industry and the findings would not be
generalizable to other business groups or sectors in the same context. Further study is
recommended to investigate a revised model as replication research using different constructs or
to utilize applicable data from other industries to examine and compare the generalizability of the
outcomes (Su & Linderman, 2016). The future study could focus on a broader field of prevailing
conflicts between opposing objectives, logics, interests, and missions within one multinational
organization or within its line companies.
253
References
Aamer, A. M., Al‐Awlaqi, M. A., & Alkibsi, S. M. (2017). TQM implementation in a least
developed country: An exploratory study of Yemen. TQM Journal, 29(3), 467‐487.
https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐11‐2015‐0141
Abbas, J. (2020). Impact of total quality management on corporate sustainability through the
mediating effect of knowledge management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 244,
118806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118806
Abdallah, A. B., Dahiyat, S. E., & Matsui, Y. (2019). Lean management and innovation
performance: Evidence from international manufacturing companies. Management
Research Review, 42(2), 239‐262. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR‐10‐2017‐0363
Abkhezr, P., McMahon, M., Campbell, M., & Glasheen, K. (2020). Exploring the boundary
between narrative research and narrative intervention: Implications of participating in
narrative inquiry for young people with refugee backgrounds. Narrative Inquiry: NI,
30(2), 316‐342. https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.18031.abk
Abu, F., Gholami, H., Mat Saman, M. Z., Zakuan, N., & Streimikiene, D. (2019). The
implementation of lean manufacturing in the furniture industry: A review and analysis on
the motives, barriers, challenges, and the applications. Journal of Cleaner Production,
234, 660‐680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.279
Abolhassani, A., Layfield, K., & Gopalakrishnan, B. (2016). Lean and US manufacturing
industry: Popularity of practices and implementation barriers. International Journal of
Productivity and Performance Management, 65(7), 875‐897. https://doi.org/10.1108/
IJPPM‐10‐2014‐0157
254
Addis, S. (2019). An exploration of quality management practices in the manufacturing industry
of Ethiopia. The TQM Journal, 32(1), 127‐142. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐01‐2019‐
0031
Agrawal, N. (2019a). A framework for Crosby’s quality principles using ISM and MICMAC
approaches. TQM Journal, 32(2), 305‐330. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐03‐2019‐0085
Agrawal, N. M. (2019b). Modeling Deming’s quality principles to improve performance using
interpretive structural modeling and MICMAC analysis. The International Journal of
Quality & Reliability Management, 36(7), 1159‐1180. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐
07‐2018‐0204
Ahmad, M. F., Yan, T. L., Wei, C. S., Aizat Ahmad, A. N., Raja Mohd Rasi, Raja Zuraidah,
Abdul Rahman, N. A., Muhd Nor, N. H., Hassan, M. F., & Hashim, F. A. (2017).
Continuous improvement and its barriers in electrical and electronic industry. MATEC
Web of Conferences, 135, 45. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201713500045
Aladwan, S. A., & Forrester, P. (2016). The leadership criterion: Challenges in pursuing
excellence in the Jordanian public sector. TQM Journal, 28(2), 295‐316.
https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐08‐2014‐0064
Al‐Ali, A. H., Al‐Ahliyya, & Abu‐Rumman, A. (2019). The role of total quality management in
the face of challenges: A study in Lafarge Jordan. Academy of Strategic Management
Journal, 18(1), 1‐16.
Alam, M. K. (2020; 2021). A systematic qualitative case study: Questions, data collection,
NVivo analysis and saturation. Qualitative Research in Organizations and
Management, 16(1), 1‐31. https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM‐09‐2019‐1825
255
Al‐Aomar, R., & Hussain, M. (2018). An assessment of adopting lean techniques in the construct
of hotel supply chain. Tourism Management (1982), 69, 553‐565. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.tourman.2018.06.030
Albliwi, S. A., Antony, J., Arshed, N., & Ghadge, A. (2017). Implementation of lean six sigma
in Saudi Arabian organizations: Findings from a survey. The International Journal of
Quality & Reliability Management, 34(4), 508‐529. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐09‐
2015‐0138
Ali, A. A., Mahmood, A., Ikram, A., & Ahmad, A. (2020b). Configuring the drivers and carriers
of process innovation in manufacturing organizations. Journal of Open Innovation,
6(154), 154. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6040154
Ali, G. A., Hilman, H., & Gorondutse, A. H. (2020a). Effect of entrepreneurial orientation,
market orientation and total quality management on performance. Benchmarking: An
International Journal, 27(4), 1503‐1531. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ‐08‐2019‐0391
Albuhisi, A. M., & Abdallah, A. B. (2018). The impact of soft TQM on financial performance.
The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 35(7), 1360‐1379.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐03‐2017‐0036
Alkhaldi, R. Z., & Abdallah, A. B. (2019; 2020). Lean management and operational performance
in health care: Implications for business performance in private hospitals. International
Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 69(1), 1‐21.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM‐09‐2018‐0342
Alkhazali, Z., Aldabbagh, I., & Abu‐Rumman, A. (2019). TQM potential moderating role to the
relationship between HRM practices, KM strategies and organizational performance: The
case of Jordanian banks. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 18(3), 1‐16.
256
Al‐Moghrabi, D., Colonio‐Salazar, F. B., Johal, A., & Fleming, P. S. (2020). Development of
‘My retainers’ mobile application: Triangulation of two qualitative methods. Journal of
Dentistry, 94, 103281‐103281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103281
Al‐Saffar, Nasser Abdul Ghani, & Obeidat, A. M. (2020). The effect of total quality management
practices on employee performance: The moderating role of knowledge sharing.
Management Science Letters, 10(1), 77‐90. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl. 2019.8.014
Alshourah, S. (2020; 2021). Total quality management practices and their effects on the quality
performance of Jordanian private hospitals. Management Science Letters, 11(1), 67‐76.
https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2020.8.029
Álvarez‐García, J., Del Río‐Rama, María de la Cruz, Saraiva, M., & Ramos‐Pires, A. (2016).
Dependency relationships between critical factors of quality and employee
satisfaction. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 27(5‐6), 595‐612.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2015.1021243
Alvarez Santos, J., Miguel‐Dávila, J., & Nieto Antolín, M. (2018). The innovation strategies for
managing a specific paradox: Exploration/exploitation. Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, 29(11‐12), 1362‐1380. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2016.
1260447.
Ames, H., Glenton, C., & Lewin, S. (2019). Purposive sampling in a qualitative evidence
synthesis: A worked example from a synthesis on parental perceptions of vaccination
communication. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19(1), 26‐
26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874‐019‐0665‐4
Amin, M., Aldakhil, A. M., Wu, C., Rezaei, S., & Cobanoglu, C. (2017). The structural
relationship between TQM, employee satisfaction and hotel performance. International
257
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(4), 1256‐1278.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM‐11‐2015‐0659
Andrade, J., Mendes, L., & Lourenço, L. (2017). Perceived psychological empowerment and
total quality management‐based quality management systems: An exploratory
research. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 28(1‐2), 76‐87.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2015.1050166
Andrade Arteaga, C., Rodríguez‐Rodríguez, R., Alfaro‐Saiz, J., & Verdecho, M. (2020). An
ANP‐balanced scorecard methodology to quantify the impact of TQM elements on
organizational strategic sustainable development: Application to an oil firm.
Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 12(15), 6207. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12156207
Antony, J., Ghadge, A., Ashby, S. A., & Cudney, E. A. (2018). Lean six sigma journey in a UK
higher education institute: A case study. The International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, 35(2), 510‐526. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐01‐2017‐0005
Antony, J., Snee, R., & Hoerl, R. (2017). Lean six sigma: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. The
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 34(7), 1073‐1093.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐03‐2016‐0035
Antony, J., & Sony, M. (2019; 2020). An empirical study into the limitations and emerging
trends of six sigma in manufacturing and service organizations. International Journal of
Quality & Reliability Management, 37(3), 470‐493. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐07‐
2019‐0230
Aquilani, B., Silvestri, C., & Ruggieri, A. (2016). Sustainability, TQM and value co‐creation
processes: The role of critical success factors. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 8(10),
995. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8100995
258
Aquilani, B., Silvestri, C., Ruggieri, A., & Gatti, C. (2017). A systematic literature review on
total quality management critical success factors and the identification of new avenues of
research. TQM Journal, 29(1), 184‐213. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐01‐2016‐0003
Asif, M. (2019). Lean six sigma institutionalization and knowledge creation: Towards
developing theory. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 1‐18.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2019.1640598
Arunachalam, T., & Palanichamy, Y. (2017). Does the soft aspects of TQM influence job
satisfaction and commitment? An empirical analysis. The TQM Journal, 29(2), 385‐402.
https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐03‐2016‐0023
Azadi, H., Barati, A. A., Rafiaani, P., & Lebailly, P. (2017). Evolution of land use‐change
modeling: Routes of different schools of knowledge. Landscape and Ecological
Engineering, 13(2), 319‐332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355‐016‐0311‐9
Azzari, C. N., & Baker, S. M. (2020). Ten lessons for qualitative transformative service
researchers. The Journal of Services Marketing, 34(1), 100‐110. https://doi.org/10.1108/
JSM‐12‐2018‐0351
Backlund, F., & Sundqvist, E. (2018). Continuous improvement: Challenges for the project‐
based organization. The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,
35(7), 1306‐1320. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐12‐2016‐0229
Baidoun, S. D., Salem, M. Z., & Omran, O. A. (2018). Assessment of TQM implementation
level in Palestinian healthcare organizations: The case of Gaza strip hospitals. TQM
Journal, 30(2), 98‐115. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐03‐2017‐0034
259
Bajjou, M. S., & Chafi, A. (2018). Lean construction implementation in the Moroccan
construction industry. Journal of Engineering, Design, and Technology, 16(4), 533‐556.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT‐02‐2018‐0031
Bakotić, D., & Rogošić, A. (2017). Employee involvement as a key determinant of core quality
management practices. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 28(11‐
12), 1209‐1226. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2015.1094369
Banuro, F. Y., Ntiri‐Ampomah, A., & Banuro, J. K. (2017). Contradictions in TQM
implementation. The TQM Journal, 29(4), 564‐578. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐11‐
2016‐0103
Bastug, M., Ertem, I. S., & Keskin, H. K. (2017). A phenomenological research study on writer’s
block: Causes, processes, and results. Education & Training (London), 59(6), 605‐618.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ET‐11‐2016‐0169
Baxter, S., Muir, D., Brereton, L., Allmark, C., Barber, R., Harris, L., Hodges, B., Khan, S., &
Baird, W. (2016). Evaluating public involvement in research design and grant
development: Using a qualitative document analysis method to analyze an award scheme
for researchers. Research Involvement and Engagement, 2(1), 13‐13. https://doi.org/
10.1186/s40900‐016‐0027‐x
Bekker, S., & Clark, A. M. (2018). Improving qualitative research findings presentations:
Insights from genre theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1),
160940691878633. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918786335
Bendermacher, G. W. G., oude Egbrink, M. G. A, Wolfhagen, I. H. A. P, & Dolmans, D. H. J.
M. (2017). Unravelling quality culture in higher education: A realist review. Higher
Education, 73(1), 39‐60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734‐015‐9979‐2
260
Benzaquen, J., & Charles, V. (2020). A stratified bootstrapping approach to assessing the success
of TQM implementation in Peruvian companies. Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence, 1‐24. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2020.1816165
Bernardino, L. L., Teixeira, F., Jesus, A. R. d., Barbosa, A., Lordelo, M., & Lepikson, H. A.
(2016). After 20 years, what has remained of TQM? International Journal of Productivity
and Performance Management, 65(3), 378‐400. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM‐11‐2014‐
0182
Betancourt, M. (2020). The impassive gaze. Short Film Studies, 10(2), 145‐148. https://doi.org/
10.1386/sfs_00005_1
Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F. E., & De Sanctis, I. (2017). Lean practices implementation and
their relationships with operational responsiveness and company performance: An Italian
study. International Journal of Production Research, 55(3), 769‐794. https://doi.org/
10.1080/00207543.2016.1211346
Binci, D., Belisari, S., & Appolloni, A. (2019). BPM and change management. Business Process
Management Journal, 26(1), 1‐23. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ‐06‐2018‐0158
Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking: A tool to
enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health Research,
26(13), 1802‐1811. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316654870
Bispo, M. D. S. (2017). Educating qualitative researchers in management: Toward performative
judgements. Revista De Administraçao De Empresas, 57(2),
158. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034‐759020170205
Boikanyo, D. H., & Heyns, M. M. (2019). The effect of work engagement on total quality
management practices in a petrochemical organization. South African Journal of
261
Economic and Management Sciences, 22(1), e1‐e13. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.
v22i1.2334
Bouncken, R. B., Qiu, Y., Sinkovics, N., & Kürsten, W. (2021). Qualitative research: Extending
the range with flexible pattern matching. Review of Managerial Science, 15(2), 251‐
273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846‐021‐00451‐2
Bouranta, N., Psomas, E. L., & Pantouvakis, A. (2017). Identifying the critical determinants of
TQM and their impact on company performance. TQM Journal, 29(1), 147‐166.
https://doi.org/10.1108/tqm‐11‐2015‐0142
Brear, M. (2019). Process and outcomes of a recursive, dialogic member checking approach: A
project ethnography. Qualitative Health Research, 29(7), 944‐957. https://doi.org/
10.1177/1049732318812448
Brindle, M. E. (2020). The challenge of achieving continuous quality improvement in Canadian
pediatric care. Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ), 192(4), E79‐E80.
https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.200008
Brown, C. T. (2018). Naturalistic or biblical worldview of human development. Journal of
Alternative Medicine Research, 10(2), 117‐123.
Bugdol, M. (2020). The problem of fear in TQM – causes, consequences and reduction methods
– a literature review. TQM Journal, 32(6), 1217‐1239. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐02‐
2019‐0047
Bungay, V., Oliffe, J., & Atchison, C. (2016). Addressing underrepresentation in sex work
research: Reflections on designing a purposeful sampling strategy. Qualitative Health
Research, 26(7), 966‐978. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315613042
262
Burgette, L. F., Escarce, J. J., Paddock, S. M., Ridgely, M. S., Wilder, W. G., Yanagihara, D., &
Damberg, C. L. (2018; 2019). Sample selection in the face of design constraints: Use of
clustering to define sample strata for qualitative research. Health Services Research,
54(2), 509‐517. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475‐6773.13100
Byrne, J., Dwyer, T., & Doyle, D. (2019). Understanding the layers of a market‐oriented
organizational culture. The Irish Journal of Management, 37(1), 16‐30. https://doi.org/
10.2478/ijm‐2018‐0002
Calvo‐Mora, A., Navarro‐García, A., Rey‐Moreno, M., & Periañez‐Cristobal, R. (2016).
Excellence management practices, knowledge management and key business results in
large organizations and SMEs: A multi‐group analysis. European Management Journal,
34(6), 661‐673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2016.06.005
Campion, L. (2018). Leadership styles: Considering context and climate. Techtrends, 62(4), 412‐
413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528‐018‐0305‐6
Carmona‐Marquez, F. J., Leal‐Millan, A. G., Vazquez‐Sanchez, A. E., Leal‐Rodriguez, A. L., &
Eldridge, S. (2016). TQM and business success: Do all the TQM drivers have the same
relevance? An empirical study in Spanish firms. The International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, 33(3), 361‐379. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐04‐2014‐0050
Carvalho, A. M., Sampaio, P., Rebentisch, E., Carvalho, J. Á., & Saraiva, P. (2019). Operational
excellence, organizational culture and agility: The missing link? Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 30(13‐14), 1495‐1514. https://doi.org/10.1080/
14783363.2017.1374833
263
Čaušević, S., & Avdagić‐Golub, E. (2019). The challenges and opportunities of introducing six
sigma at customer support telecommunication company. TEM Journal, 8(4), 1307‐1312.
https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM84‐29
Chaple, A. P., Narkhede, B. E., Akarte, M. M., & Raut, R. (2018). Modeling the lean barriers for
successful lean implementation: TISM approach. International Journal of Lean Six
Sigma, 12(1), 98‐119. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS‐10‐2016‐0063
Chen, C., Anchecta, K., Lee, Y., & Dahlgaard, J. J. (2016). A stepwise ISO‐based TQM
implementation approach using ISO 9001:2015. Management and Production
Engineering Review, 7(4), 65. https://doi.org/10.1515/mper‐2016‐0037
Chiarini, A., & Vagnoni, E. (2017). TQM implementation for the healthcare sector. Leadership
in Health Services (2007), 30(3), 210‐216. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHS‐02‐2017‐0004
Cherrafi, A., Elfezazi, S., Garza‐Reyes, J. A., Benhida, K., & Mokhlis, A. (2017). Barriers in
green lean implementation: A combined systematic literature review and interpretive
structural modelling approach. Production Planning & Control, 28(10), 829‐842.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2017.1324184
Cho, Y. S., & Linderman, K. (2019). Metacognition‐based process improvement practices.
International Journal of Production Economics, 211, 132‐144. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijpe.2019.01.030
Chugani, N., Kumar, V., Garza‐Reyes, J. A., Rocha‐Lona, L., & Upadhyay, A. (2017).
Investigating the green impact of lean, six sigma and lean six sigma: A systematic
literature review. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 8(1), 7‐32.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS‐11‐2015‐0043
264
Coetzee, R., van Dyk, L., & van der Merwe, Karl Robert. (2019). Towards addressing respect for
people during lean implementation. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 10(3), 830‐
854. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS‐07‐2017‐0081
Collingridge, D. S., & Gantt, E. E. (2019). Republished: The quality of qualitative
research. American Journal of Medical Quality, 34(5), 439‐445. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1062860619873187
Condit, C. M., Shen, L., Edwards, K. L., Bowen, D. J., Korngiebel, D. M., & Johnson, C. O.
(2016). Participants' role expectations in genetics research and re‐consent: Revising the
theory and methods of mental models research relating to roles. Journal of Health
Communication, 21(sup2), 16‐24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2016.1193914
Constantinou, C. S., Georgiou, M., & Perdikogianni, M. (2017). A comparative method for
themes saturation (CoMeTS) in qualitative interviews. Qualitative Research: QR, 17(5),
571‐588. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794116686650
Creswell, J., & Poth, C. (2018). Qualitative inquiry & research design (4th). Sage
Curtis, S. (2018). Worldviews in Myanmar: A missiological perspective. Mission Studies, 35(1),
57‐83. https://doi.org/10.1163/15733831‐12341547
Cypress, B. S. (2017). Rigor or reliability and validity in qualitative research: Perspectives,
strategies, reconceptualization, and recommendations. Dimensions of Critical Care
Nursing, 36(4), 253‐263. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCC.0000000000000253
Dahlgaard, J. J., Reyes, L., Chen, C., & Dahlgaard‐Park, S. M. (2019). Evolution and future of
total quality management: Management control and organizational learning. Total
Quality Management & Business Excellence: QMOD Conference Best Selected
Papers, 30(sup1), S1‐S16. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2019.1665776
265
Dahlgaard‐Park, S. M., Reyes, L., & Chen, C. (2018). The evolution and convergence of total
quality management and management theories. Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence: 20th QMOD Conference Selected Best Papers, 29(9‐10), 1108‐1128.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2018.1486556
Dalkin, S., Forster, N., Hodgson, P., Lhussier, M., & Carr, S. M. (2020; 2021). Using computer
assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS; NVivo) to assist in the complex
process of realist theory generation, refinement and testing. International Journal of
Social Research Methodology, 24(1), 123‐134. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.
2020.1803528
Devotta, K., Woodhall‐Melnik, J., Pedersen, C., Wendaferew, A., Dowbor, T. P., Guilcher, S. J.,
Hamilton‐Wright, S., Ferentzy, P., Hwang, S. W., & Matheson, F. I. (2016). Enriching
qualitative research by engaging peer interviewers: A case study. Qualitative Research:
QR, 16(6), 661‐680. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794115626244
Dilawo, R. S., & Salimi, Z. (2019). Understanding TQM implementation barriers involving
construction companies in a difficult environment. The International Journal of Quality
& Reliability Management, 36(7), 1137‐1158. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijqrm‐05‐2017‐
0096
Dörfler, V., & Stierand, M. (2020). Bracketing: A phenomenological theory applied through
transpersonal reflexivity. Journal of Organizational Change Management, ahead‐of‐print
(ahead‐of‐print). https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM‐12‐2019‐0393
Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Childe, S. J., Papadopoulos, T., Hazen, B. T., & Roubaud, D.
(2018). Examining top management commitment to TQM diffusion using institutional
266
and upper echelon theories. International Journal of Production Research, 56(8), 2988‐
3006. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2017.1394590
Du, J., Bruhn, A., & Whiting, B. (2020). Observations of supervisors and an actuarial research
student on the qualitative research process. Accounting and Finance (Parkville), 60(3),
2339‐2360. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.12377
Durana, P., Kral, P., Stehel, V., Lazaroiu, G., & Sroka, W. (2019). Quality culture of
manufacturing enterprises: A possible way to adaptation to industry 4.0. Social Sciences
(Basel), 8(4), 124. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8040124
Edison, H., Smørsgård, N. M., Wang, X., & Abrahamsson, P. (2018). Lean internal startups for
software product innovation in large companies: Enablers and inhibitors. The Journal of
Systems and Software, 135, 69‐87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2017.09.034
El‐Akruti, K., Kiridena, S., & Dwight, R. (2018). Contextualist‐retroductive case study design
for strategic asset management research. Production Planning & Control: Rethinking
Research Methods in Operations and Supply Chain Management, 29(16), 1332‐1342.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2018.1535145
Engebretsen, M. (2020). From decoding a graph to processing a multimodal message: Interacting
with data visualisation in the news media. Nordicom Review, 41(1), 33‐50.
https://doi.org/10.2478/nor‐2020‐0004
Erdvig, R. C. S. (2020). A model for biblical worldview development in evangelical Christian
emerging adults. Journal of Research on Christian Education, 29(3), 285‐306. https://
doi.org/10.1080/10656219.2020.1816517
Ershadi, M. J., Najafi, N., & Soleimani, P. (2019). Measuring the impact of soft and hard total
quality management factors on customer behavior based on the role of innovation and
267
continuous improvement. TQM Journal, 31(6), 1093‐1115. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐
11‐2018‐0182
Farquhar, J., Michels, N., & Robson, J. (2020). Triangulation in industrial qualitative case study
research: Widening the scope. Industrial Marketing Management, 87, 160‐
170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.02.001
Fisher, M. P., & Hamer, M. K. (2020). Qualitative methods in health policy and systems
research: A framework for study planning. Qualitative Health Research, 30(12), 1899‐
1912. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732320921143
FitzPatrick, B. (2019). Validity in qualitative health education research. Currents in Pharmacy
Teaching and Learning, 11(2), 211‐217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2018.11.014
Fleet, D., Burton, A., Reeves, A., & DasGupta, M. P. (2016). A case for taking the dual role of
counsellor‐researcher in qualitative research. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 13(4),
328‐346. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2016.1205694
Flynn, S. V., & Korcuska, J. S. (2018). Grounded theory research design: An investigation into
practices and procedures. Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, 9(2), 102‐116.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21501378.2017.1403849
Franco, P., & Yang, Y. (2021). Exiting fieldwork “with grace”: Reflections on the unintended
consequences of participant observation and researcher‐participant relationships.
Qualitative Market Research, ahead‐of‐print (ahead‐of‐print). https://doi.org/10.1108/
QMR‐07‐2020‐0094
Fredriksson, M., & Isaksson, R. (2018). Making sense of quality philosophies. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 29(11‐12), 1452‐1465 https://doi.org/10.1080/
14783363.2016.1266245
268
Gaiardelli, P., Resta, B., & Dotti, S. (2019). Exploring the role of human factors in lean
management. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 10(1), 339‐366.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ijlss‐08‐2017‐0094
García‐Alcaraz, J. L., Montalvo, F. J. F., Avelar‐Sosa, L., Pérez de la Parte, María Mercedes,
Blanco‐Fernández, J., & Jiménez‐Macías, E. (2019;2020). The importance of access to
information and knowledge coordination on quality and economic benefits obtained from
six sigma. Wireless Networks, 26(8), 5713. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11276‐019‐02180‐7
Gentles, S. J., & Vilches, S. L. (2017). Calling for a shared understanding of sampling
terminology in qualitative research: Proposed clarifications derived from critical analysis
of a methods overview by McCrae and Purcell. International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, 16(1), 160940691772567. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917725678
Georgiev, S., & Ohtaki, S. (2019). Critical success factors for TQM implementation among
manufacturing SMEs. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 27(2), 473‐498.
https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ‐01‐2019‐0037
Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M. P., & Hultink, E. J. (2017). The circular economy –
A new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 757‐768.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048
Ghorbani, S., Mirshah Jafari, S. E., & Sharifian, F. (2018). Learning to be: Teachers’
competences and practical solutions: A step towards sustainable development. Journal of
Teacher Education for Sustainability, 20(1), 20‐45. https://doi.org/10.2478/jtes‐2018‐
0002
Gilmore, S., Frederick, L. K., Santillan, L., & Locke, J. (2019). The games they play:
Observations of children with autism spectrum disorder on the school playground.
269
Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice, 23(6), 1343‐1353.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361318811987
Gözükara, İ., Çolakoğlu, N., & Şimşek, Ö. F. (2019). Development culture and TQM in Turkish
healthcare: Importance of employee empowerment and top management leadership. Total
Quality Management & Business Excellence, 30(11‐12), 1302‐1318. https://doi.org/
10.1080/14783363.2017.1366266
Green, K. W., Inman, R. A., Sower, V. E., & Zelbst, P. J. (2019). Impact of JIT, TQM and green
supply chain practices on environmental sustainability. Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management, 30(1), 26‐47. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmtm‐01‐2018‐0015
Gregory, K. (2019). Lessons of a failed study: Lone research, media analysis, and the limitations
of bracketing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 160940691984245.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919842450
Gregory, S., Wells, K., Forsyth, K., Latto, C., Szyra, H., Saunders, S., Ritchie, C. W., & Milne,
R. (2018). Research participants as collaborators: Background, experience and policies
from the PREVENT dementia and EPAD programme. Dementia (London, England),
17(8), 1045‐1054. https://doi.org/10.1177/1471301218789307
Gutierrez‐Gutierrez, L. J., Barrales‐Molina, V., & Kaynak, H. (2018). The role of human
resource‐related quality management practices in new product development: A dynamic
capability perspective. International Journal of Operations & Production Management,
38(1), 43‐66. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM‐07‐2016‐0387
Jaeger, M., & Adair, D. (2016). Perception of TQM benefits, practices and obstacles: The case of
project managers and quality management representatives in Kuwait. TQM Journal,
28(2), 317‐336. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐10‐2014‐0091
270
Jiménez‐Jiménez, D., Martínez‐Costa, M., & Para‐Gonzalez, L. (2019). Implications of TQM in
firm’s innovation capability. The International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, 37(2), 279‐304. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐09‐2018‐0233
Jusoh, A., Mardani, A., Omar, R., Štreimikienė, D., Khalifah, Z., & Sharifara, A. (2018).
Application of mcdm approach to evaluate the critical success factors of total quality
management in the hospitality industry. Journal of Business Economics and
Management, 19(2), 399‐416. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2018.5538
Haffar, M., Al‐Karaghouli, W., Djebarni, R., & Gbadamosi, G. (2019). Organizational culture
and TQM implementation: Investigating the mediating influences of multidimensional
employee readiness for change. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence,
30(11‐12), 1367‐1388. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2017.1369352
Hah, S. M. (2019). Intercultural missional leadership: Theological foundation and biblical
narratives. Hervormde Teologiese Studies, 75(1), e1‐e9. https://doi.org/10.4102/
hts.v75i1.5211
Hahlweg, P., Härter, M., Nestoriuc, Y., & Scholl, I. (2017). How are decisions made in cancer
care? A qualitative study using participant observation of current practice. BMJ
Open, 7(9), e016360‐e016360. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen‐2017‐016360
Hailu, H., Mengstu, S., & Hailu, T. (2018). An integrated continuous improvement model of
TPM, TPS and TQM for boosting profitability of manufacturing industries: An
innovative model & guideline. Management Science Letters, 8(1), 33‐50.
https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2017.11.002
Hallam, C., & Contreras, C. (2016). Integrating lean and green management. Management
Decision, 54(9), 2157‐2187. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD‐04‐2016‐0259
271
He, Z., Deng, Y., Zhang, M., Zu, X., & Antony, J. (2017). An empirical investigation of the
relationship between six sigma practices and organizational innovation. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 28(5‐6), 459‐480. https://doi.org/10.1080/
14783363.2015.1092866
Henao, R., Sarache, W., & Gómez, I. (2019). Lean manufacturing and sustainable performance:
Trends and future challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production, 208, 99‐116.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.116
Henderson, H. (2018). Difficult questions of difficult questions: The role of the researcher and
transcription styles. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 31(2),
143‐157. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2017.1379615
Hilman, H., Ali, G. A., & Gorondutse, A. H. (2019). The relationship between TQM and SMEs’
performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,
69(1), 61‐84. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM‐02‐2019‐0059
Honarpour, A., Jusoh, A., & Long, C. S. (2017). Knowledge management and total quality
management: A reciprocal relationship. The International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, 34(1), 91‐102. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijqrm‐03‐2014‐0040
Houghton, C., Murphy, K., Meehan, B., Thomas, J., Brooker, D., & Casey, D. (2017). From
screening to synthesis: Using NVivo to enhance transparency in qualitative evidence
synthesis. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 26(5‐6), 873‐882. https://doi.org/10.1111/
jocn.13443
Hudnurkar, M., Ambekar, S., & Bhattacharya, S. (2019). Empirical analysis of six sigma project
capability deficiency and its impact on project success. TQM Journal, 31(3), 340‐358.
https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐06‐2018‐0078
272
Hussain, K., He, Z., Ahmad, N., Iqbal, M., & Taskheer mumtaz, S. M. (2019). Green, lean, six
sigma barriers at a glance: A case from the construction sector of Pakistan. Building and
Environment, 161, 106225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106225
Hwang, G., Yoon, H. J., & Choi, M. (2020). Soft TQM practices and employee outcomes: A
mediational analysis. The Quality Management Journal, 27(3), 147‐158.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10686967.2020.1767007
Iqbal, A., & Asrar‐ul‐Haq, M. (2017). An empirical investigation on TQM practices and
knowledge sharing mediation in software industry. TQM Journal, 29(5), 725‐743.
https://doi.org/10.1108/tqm‐03‐2017‐0038
Iqbal, A., & Asrar‐ul‐Haq, M. (2018). Establishing relationship between TQM practices and
employee performance: The mediating role of change readiness. International Journal of
Production Economics, 203, 62‐68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.05.034
Iivari, N. (2018). Using member checking in interpretive research practice. Information
Technology & People (West Linn, Or.), 31(1), 111‐133. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP‐07‐
2016‐0168
Jaeger, M., & Adair, D. (2016). Perception of TQM benefits, practices and obstacles: The case of
project managers and quality management representatives in Kuwait. TQM Journal,
28(2), 317‐336. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐10‐2014‐0091
Jalilvand, M. R., Khazaei Pool, J., Balouei Jamkhaneh, H., & Tabaeeian, R. A. (2018). Total
quality management, corporate social responsibility and entrepreneurial orientation in the
hotel industry. Social Responsibility Journal, 14(3), 601‐618. https://doi.org/10.1108/
SRJ‐04‐2017‐0068
273
Jiménez‐Jiménez, D., Martínez‐Costa, M., & Para‐Gonzalez, L. (2019). Implications of TQM in
firm’s innovation capability. The International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, 37(2), 279‐304. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐09‐2018‐0233
Jung, D., & Lee, W. (2016). Crossing the management fashion border: The adoption of business
process reengineering services by management consultants offering total quality
management services in the United States, 1992–2004. Journal of Management &
Organization, 22(5), 702‐719. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2015.58
Kasch, A. P. (2020). Social justice through the lens of the cross: A case for a biblical foundation
of social work. Social Work and Christianity, 47(2), 28‐46. https://doi.org/10.34043/
swc.v47i2.66
Kaur, M., Singh, K., & Singh, D. (2020). Identification of barriers to synergistic implementation
of TQM‐SCM. The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 38(1),
363‐388. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐05‐2019‐0141
Keikelame, M. J., & Swartz, L. (2019). Decolonizing research methodologies: Lessons from a
qualitative research project, Cape Town, South Africa. Global Health Action, 12(1),
1561175. https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2018.1561175
Kelly, K. (2017). A different type of lighting research – A qualitative methodology. Lighting
Research & Technology (London, England: 2001), 49(8), 933‐942. https://doi.org/
10.1177/1477153516659901
Kelly, M., Dowling, M., & Millar, M. (2018). The search for understanding: The role of
paradigms. Nurse Researcher, 25(4), 9‐13. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.2018.e1499
274
Kennedy, B. (2019). A 21st century appreciation for: Quality, excellence and complex human
adaptive systems. The TQM Journal, 32(1), 2‐20. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐06‐2019‐
0169
Khaba, S., & Bhar, C. (2018). Lean awareness and potential for lean implementation in the
Indian coal mining industry: An empirical study. The International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, 35(6), 1215‐1231. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐02‐2017‐
0024
Khurshid, M. A., Amin, M., & Ismail, W. K. W. (2018). Total quality and socially responsible
management (TQSR‐M): An integrated conceptual framework. Benchmarking: An
International Journal, 25(8), 2566‐2588. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ‐04‐2017‐0084
Kindsiko, E., & Poltimäe, H. (2019). The poor and embarrassing cousin to the gentrified
quantitative academics: What determines the sample size in qualitative interview‐based
organization studies? Forum, Qualitative Social Research, 20(3). https://doi.org/
10.17169/fqs‐20.3.3200
Kristoffersen, M. (2019). Thoughts of creation and the discipline of nursing. Nursing Open, 6(2),
566‐573. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.239
Kumar, P., Ramanan, T. R., & Keelath, M. S. (2020b). The mediating role of quality
management capability on the dynamic capability ‐ new product development
performance relationship: An empirical study among new product development units in
the electronics sector. The Quality Management Journal, 27(2), 80‐94.
https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10686967.2020.1722047
275
Kumar, S., Luthra, S., Govindan, K., Kumar, N., & Haleem, A. (2016). Barriers in green lean six
sigma product development process: An ISM approach. Production Planning & Control,
27(7‐8), 604‐620. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2016.1165307
Kumar, V., & Sharma, R. R. K. (2017). Relating management problem‐solving styles of leaders
to TQM focus: An empirical study. TQM Journal, 29(2), 218‐239. https://doi.org/
10.1108/TQM‐01‐2016‐0002
Kumar, V., & Sharma, R. R. K. (2018). Leadership styles and their relationship with TQM focus
for Indian firms. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,
67(6), 1063‐1088. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM‐03‐2017‐0071
Kumar, V., Verma, P., Mangla, S. K., Mishra, A., Chowdhary, D., Sung, C. H., & Lai, K. K.
(2020a). Barriers to total quality management for sustainability in Indian
organizations. The International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, 37(6/7), 1007‐1031. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐10‐2019‐0312
Kurilova‐Palisaitiene, J., Sundin, E., Poksinska, B., Logistik‐ och kvalitetsutveckling,
Linköpings universitet, Industriell Produktion, Tekniska fakulteten, & Institutionen för
ekonomisk och industriell utveckling. (2018). Remanufacturing challenges and possible
lean improvements. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 3225‐3236. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.023
Laaksonen, O., & Peltoniemi, M. (2018). The essence of dynamic capabilities and their
measurement. International Journal of Management Reviews: IJMR, 20(2), 184‐205.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12122
276
Lee, J. E., Batt, R., & Moynihan, L. M. (2019). Strategic dilemmas: How managers use HR
practices to meet multiple goals. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 57(3), 513‐539.
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjir.12433
Leger, J. M., & Phillips, C. A. (2017). Exerting capacity: Bedside RNs talk about patient
safety. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 39(5), 660‐673. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0193945916664707
Levant, R. F., & McCurdy, E. R. (2018). Toward diversifying research participants:
Measurement invariance of the male role norms inventory‐short form (MRNI‐SF) across
recruitment method. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 19(4), 531‐539. https://doi.org/
10.1037/men0000138
Li, N., Laux, C., & Antony, J. (2018). Designing for six sigma in a private organization in China
under TQM implementation: A case study. Quality Engineering, 30(3), 405‐418.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08982112.2018.1475674
Lock, I., & Seele, P. (2018). Gauging the rigor of qualitative case studies in comparative
lobbying research: A framework and guideline for research and analysis. Journal of
Public Affairs, 18(4), e1832‐n/a. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1832
Mackieson, P., Shlonsky, A., & Connolly, M. (2019). Increasing rigor and reducing bias in
qualitative research: A document analysis of parliamentary debates using applied
thematic analysis. Qualitative Social Work: QSW: Research and Practice, 18(6), 965‐
980. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325018786996
Maher, C., Hadfield, M., Hutchings, M., & de Eyto, A. (2018). Ensuring rigor in qualitative data
analysis: A design research approach to coding combining NVivo with traditional
277
material methods. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1),
160940691878636. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918786362
Maistry, K., Hurreeram, D. K., & Ramessur, V. (2017). Total quality management and
innovation: Relationships and effects on performance of agricultural R&D organizations.
The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 34(3), 418‐437.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐04‐2015‐0061
Malek, J. (2019). The appropriate role of a clinical ethics Consultant’s religious worldview in
consultative work: Nearly none. HEC Forum, 31(2), 91‐102. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10730‐018‐9363‐6
Malek, J., & Desai, T. N. (2019). Interpretive structural modelling based analysis of sustainable
manufacturing enablers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 238, 117996.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117996
Maleki‐Minbashrazgah, M., & Shabani, A. (2019). Eco‐capability role in healthcare facility’s
performance: Natural‐resource‐based view and dynamic capabilities paradigm.
Management of Environmental Quality, 30(1), 137‐156. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ‐
07‐2017‐0073
Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Guassora, A. D. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview
studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753‐
1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444
Manankil‐Rankin, L. (2016). Moving from field text to research text in narrative inquiry: A
study exemplar. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 48(3‐4), 62‐69. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0844562116684728
278
Marchiori, D., & Mendes, L. (2020). Knowledge management and total quality management:
Foundations, intellectual structures, insights regarding evolution of the literature. Total
Quality Management & Business Excellence, 31(9‐10), 1135‐1169.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2018.1468247
Marodin, G. A., Frank, A. G., Tortorella, G. L., & Saurin, T. A. (2016). Contextual factors and
lean production implementation in the Brazilian automotive supply chain. Supply Chain
Management, 21(4), 417‐432. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM‐05‐2015‐0170
McAdam, R., Miller, K., & McSorley, C. (2019). Towards a contingency theory perspective of
quality management in enabling strategic alignment. International Journal of Production
Economics, 207, 195‐209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.07.003
McLean, R. S., Antony, J., & Dahlgaard, J. J. (2017). Failure of continuous improvement
initiatives in manufacturing environments: A systematic review of the evidence. Total
Quality Management & Business Excellence, 28(3‐4), 219‐237. https://doi.org/
10.1080/14783363.2015.1063414
McWhorter, M. R. (2019). Balancing value bracketing with the integration of moral values in
psychotherapy: Evaluation of a clinical practice from the perspective of catholic moral
theology. The Linacre Quarterly, 86(2‐3), 207‐224. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0024363919856810
Mehralian, G., Nazari, J. A., Rasekh, H. R., & Hosseini, S. (2016). TOPSIS approach to
prioritize critical success factors of TQM. TQM Journal, 28(2), 235‐249.
https://doi.org/10.1108/tqm‐03‐2014‐0028
279
Mendes, L., & Jesus, J. (2018). Influence of total quality‐based human issues on organizational
commitment. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 29(3‐4), 260‐286.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2016.1180953
Metaxas, I. N., & Koulouriotis, D. E. (2019). Business excellence measurement: A literature
analysis (1990‐2016). Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 30(11‐
12), 1189‐1218. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2017.1356201
Miao, C., Qian, S., & Humphrey, R. H. (2019). The challenges of lean management research and
practice in the field of entrepreneurship: The roles of I‐O psychology theories and I‐O
psychologists. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 12(3), 260‐263. https://doi.org/
10.1017/iop.2019.46
Moccia, S. (2016). The role of value and virtues in TQM: An overview of literature. The TQM
Journal, 28(2), 216‐234. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐03‐2014‐0031
Modranský, R., Jakabová, S., Hanák, M., & Oláh, A. (2020). Lean and agile project management
and the challenges for its implementation in SMEs in Czech Republic. Technium Social
Sciences Journal, 9, 413‐440. https://doi.org/10.47577/tssj.v9i1.1145
Mohajan, H. K. (2018). Qualitative research methodology in social sciences and related subjects.
Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 7(1), 23‐48. https://doi.org/
10.26458/jedep.v7i1.571
Moon, M. D. (2019). Triangulation: A method to increase validity, reliability, and legitimation in
clinical research. Journal of Emergency Nursing, 45(1), 103‐105. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jen.2018.11.004
280
Moser, A., & Korstjens, I. (2017; 2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3:
Sampling, data collection and analysis. The European Journal of General Practice,
24(1), 9‐18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375091
Morgan, S. J., Pullon, S. R. H., Macdonald, L. M., McKinlay, E. M., & Gray, B. V. (2017). Case
study observational research: A framework for conducting case study research where
observation data are the focus. Qualitative Health Research, 27(7), 1060‐1068.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316649160
Muruganantham, G., Vinodh, S., Arun, C. S., & Ramesh, K. (2018). Application of interpretive
structural modelling for analysing barriers to total quality management practices
implementation in the automotive sector. Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence, 29(5‐6), 524‐545. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2016.1213627
Muskat, B., Muskat, M., & Zehrer, A. (2018). Qualitative interpretive mobile ethnography.
Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 29(1), 98‐107.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2017.1396482
Naidu, T., & Prose, N. (2018). Re‐envisioning member checking and communicating results as
accountability practice in qualitative research: A South African community‐based
organization example. Forum, Qualitative Social Research, 19(3). https://doi.org/
10.17169/fqs‐19.3.3153
Nasim, K. (2018). Role of internal and external organizational factors in TQM implementation:
A systematic literature review and theoretical framework. The International Journal of
Quality & Reliability Management, 35(5), 1014‐1033. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐
10‐2016‐0180
281
Natow, R. S. (2020). The use of triangulation in qualitative studies employing elite interviews.
Qualitative Research: QR, 20(2), 160‐173. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794119830077
Newbanks, R. S., Rieg, L. S., & Schaefer, B. (2018). What is caring in nursing? Sorting out
humanistic and Christian perspectives. Journal of Christian Nursing, 35(3), 160‐
167. https://doi.org/10.1097/CNJ.0000000000000441
Newham, J., Schierhout, G., Bailie, R., & Ward, P. R. (2016). 'There’s only one enabler; come
up, help us': Staff perspectives of barriers and enablers to continuous quality
improvement in aboriginal primary health‐care settings in South Australia. Australian
Journal of Primary Health, 22(3), 244‐254. https://doi.org/10.1071/PY14098
Nizamidou, C., & Vouzas, F. (2020). The contribution of preoccupation with failure to TQM,
crisis management and HR aiming to overcome crises. TQM Journal, 32(6), 1077‐
1098. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐11‐2019‐0265
Ngozwana, N. (2018). Ethical dilemmas in qualitative research methodology: Researcher’s
reflections. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 4(1), 19‐
28. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.4.1.19
Nguyen, H., Skitmore, M., Gray, M., Zhang, X., & Olanipekun, A. O. (2017). Will green
building development take off? An exploratory study of barriers to green building in
Vietnam. Resources, Conservation, and Recycling, 127, 8‐20. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.resconrec.2017.08.012
Northcote, J., & Phillips, T. (2019). Getting up close and personal: Using peer research assistants
for participant observation in a youth alcohol project. Qualitative Research
Journal, 19(2), 132‐145. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ‐D‐18‐00046
282
O’Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: Debates and
practical guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 16094069189922.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919899220
Olabode, O. E., Adeola, O., & Assadinia, S. (2018). The effect of export market‐oriented culture
on export performance: Evidence from a sub‐Saharan African economy. International
Marketing Review, 35(4), 637‐660. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR‐08‐2016‐0167
Oliveira, G. S., Corrêa, J. E., Balestrassi, P. P., Martins, R. A., & Turrioni, J. B. (2019).
Investigation of TQM implementation: Empirical study in Brazilian ISO 9001‐registered
SMEs. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 30(5‐6), 641‐659.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2017.1328273
Paddock, K., Brown Wilson, C., Walshe, C., & Todd, C. (2019). Care home life and identity: A
qualitative case study. The Gerontologist, 59(4), 655‐664. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/
gny090
Pantouvakis, A., & Psomas, E. (2016). Exploring total quality management applications under
uncertainty: A research agenda for the shipping industry. Maritime Economics &
Logistics, 18(4), 496‐512. https://doi.org/10.1057/mel.2015.6
Panuwatwanich, K., & Nguyen, T. T. (2017). Influence of organizational culture on total quality
management implementation and firm performance: Evidence from the Vietnamese
construction industry. Management and Production Engineering Review, 8(1), 5‐15.
https://doi.org/10.1515/mper‐2017‐0001
Parvadavardini, S., Vivek, N., & Devadasan, S. R. (2016). Impact of quality management
practices on quality performance and financial performance: Evidence from Indian
283
manufacturing companies. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 27(5‐6),
507‐530. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2015.1015411
Patel, K., Auton, M. F., Carter, B., Watkins, C. L., Hackett, M., Leathley, M. J., Thornton, T., &
Lightbody, C. E. (2016). Parallel‐serial memoing: A novel approach to analyzing
qualitative data. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1745‐1752. https://doi.org/
10.1177/1049732315614579
Patyal, V. S., Ambekar, S., & Prakash, A. (2019). Organizational culture and total quality
management practices in Indian construction industry. International Journal of
Productivity and Performance Management, 895‐913. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijppm‐10‐
2018‐0368
Patyal, V. S., & Koilakuntla, M. (2017). The impact of quality management practices on
performance: An empirical study. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 24(2), 511‐
535. https://doi.org/10.1108/bij‐11‐2015‐0109
Paul, G. (2017). Revisiting bias in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917748992
Pearce, A., Pons, D., & Neitzert, T. (2018). Implementing lean—Outcomes from SME case
studies. Operations Research Perspectives, 5, 94‐104. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.orp.2018.02.002
Pham, T. M. D. (2020). On the relationship between total quality management practices and firm
performance in Vietnam: The mediating role of non‐financial performance. Management
Science Letters, 10(8), 1743‐1754. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2020.1.005
Phan, A. C., Nguyen, H. T., Nguyen, H. A., & Matsui, Y. (2019). Effect of total quality
management practices and JIT production practices on flexibility performance: Empirical
284
evidence from international manufacturing plants. Sustainability (Basel,
Switzerland), 11(11), 3093. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113093
Phillips, M., & Lu, J. (2018). A quick look at NVivo. Journal of Electronic Resources
Librarianship, 30(2), 104‐106. https://doi.org/10.1080/1941126X.2018.1465535
Polese, F., Vesci, M., Troisi, O., & Grimaldi, M. (2019). Reconceptualizing TQM in service
ecosystems: An integrated framework. International Journal of Quality and Service
Sciences, 11(1), 104‐126. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQSS‐10‐2017‐0087
Prashar, A. (2017). Adopting PDCA (plan‐do‐check‐act) cycle for energy optimization in
energy‐intensive SMEs. Journal of Cleaner Production, 145, 277‐293.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.068
Probst, B. (2016). Both/and: Researcher as participant in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative
Research Journal, 16(2), 149‐158. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ‐06‐2015‐0038
Psomas, E. L., & Jaca, C. (2016). The impact of total quality management on service company
performance: Evidence from Spain. International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, 33(3), 380‐398. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐07‐2014‐0090
Putri, F., Irwansyah, & Aprilia, M. P. (2018). Dynamic capabilities strategy for sustainability
development in print media management. E3S Web of Conferences, 74, 8013.
https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20187408013
Qasrawi, B. T., Almahamid, S. M., & Qasrawi, S. T. (2017). The impact of TQM practices and
KM processes on organizational performance: An empirical investigation. The
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 34(7), 1034‐1055.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐11‐2015‐0160
285
Råheim, M., Magnussen, L. H., Sekse, R. J. T., Lunde, Å., Jacobsen, T., & Blystad, A. (2016).
Researcher‐researched relationship in qualitative research: Shifts in positions and
researcher vulnerability. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well‐
being, 11(1), 30996‐12. https://doi.org/10.3402/qhw.v11.30996
Rajamohan, S. (2021). Enhancing personhood in the care of older adults with dementia: A
biblical perspective. Journal of Christian Nursing, 38(1), E1‐E4. https://doi.org/10.1097/
CNJ.0000000000000801
Ratny, S., Arshad, A. M., & Gaoliang, T. (2018). Studying the relationship of "soft" and "hard"
TQM elements with service quality in service firms. The Journal of Developing
Areas, 52(4), 213‐226. https://doi.org/10.1353/jda.2018.0061
Ravitch, S. M., & Mittenfelner Carl, C. N. (2016). Qualitative research: Bridging the
conceptual, theoretical, and methodological. Sage
Razzaq, S., Shujahat, M., Hussain, S., Nawaz, F., Wang, M., Ali, M., & Tehseen, S. (2019).
Knowledge management, organizational commitment and knowledge‐worker
performance: The neglected role of knowledge management in the public sector. Business
Process Management Journal, 25(5), 923‐947. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ‐03‐2018‐
0079
Resta, B., Dotti, S., Gaiardelli, P., Boffelli, A. (2017). How lean manufacturing affects the
creation of sustainable value: An integrated model. International Journal of Automation
Technology, 11(4), 542‐551. https://doi.org/10.20965/ijat.2017.p0542
Ridder, H. (2017). The theory contribution of case study research designs. Business Research
(Gottingen), 10(2), 281‐305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685‐017‐0045‐z
286
Robins, C. S., & Eisen, K. (2017). Strategies for the effective use of NVivo in a large‐scale
study: Qualitative analysis and the repeal of Don’t ask, Don’t tell. Qualitative
Inquiry, 23(10), 768‐778. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417731089
Robson, C. & McCartan, K. (2016). Real world research (4th). John Wiley & Sons
Røddesnes, S., Faber, H. C., & Jensen, M. R. (2019). NVivo courses in the library. Nordic
Journal of Information Literacy in Higher Education, 11(1), 27‐38. https://doi.org/
10.15845/noril.v11i1.2762
Rooshenas, L., Paramasivan, S., Jepson, M., & Donovan, J. L. (2019). Intensive triangulation of
qualitative research and quantitative data to improve recruitment to randomized trials:
The QuinteT approach. Qualitative Health Research, 29(5), 672‐679. https://doi.org/
10.1177/1049732319828693
Rose, J., & Johnson, C. W. (2020). Contextualizing reliability and validity in qualitative
research: Toward more rigorous and trustworthy qualitative social science in leisure
research. Journal of Leisure Research, 51(4), 432‐451. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00222216.2020.1722042
Rossolatos, G. (2019). Negative brand meaning co‐creation in social media brand communities:
A laddering approach using NVivo. Psychology & Marketing, 36(12), 1249‐1266.
https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21273
Sabet, E., Adams, E., & Yazdani, B. (2016). Quality management in heavy‐duty manufacturing
industry: TQM vs. six sigma. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 27(1‐2),
215‐225. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2014.972626
287
Sachdev, A., & Agrawal, J. (2017). Application of policy deployment and daily management in
service sector. International Journal of Quality Innovation, 3(1), 1‐17. https://doi.org/
10.1186/s40887‐017‐0017‐6
Sahoo, S. (2018). An empirical exploration of TQM, TPM and their integration from Indian
manufacturing industry. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management,
29(7), 1188‐1210. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmtm‐03‐2018‐0075
Saleh, R. A., Sweis, R. J., & Mahmoud Saleh, F. I. (2018). Investigating the impact of hard total
quality management practices on operational performance in manufacturing
organizations: Evidence from Jordan. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 25(7),
2040‐2064. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ‐05‐2016‐0074
San Miguel, E., Heras‐Saizarbitoria, I., & Tarí, J. J. (2016). TQM and market orientation in care
home services. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 33(8), 1076‐
1098. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐05‐2014‐0055
Salvato, C., & Vassolo, R. (2018). The sources of dynamism in dynamic capabilities. Strategic
Management Journal, 39(6), 1728‐1752. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2703
Sarkissian, H., & Phelan, M. (2019). Moral objectivism and a punishing god. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 80, 1‐7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.08.012
Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., Burroughs, H., &
Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and
operationalization. Quality & Quantity, 52(4), 1893‐1907. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11135‐017‐0574‐8
Scheffelaar, A., Bos, N., Triemstra, M., de Jong, M., Luijkx, K., & van Dulmen, S. (2020).
Qualitative instruments involving clients as co‐researchers to assess and improve the
288
quality of care relationships in long‐term care: An evaluation of instruments to enhance
client participation in quality research. BMJ Open, 10(2), e033034‐e033034.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen‐2019‐033034
Scheffelaar, A., Hendriks, M., Bos, N., Luijkx, K., & van Dulmen, S. (2018). Protocol for a
participatory study for developing qualitative instruments measuring the quality of long‐
term care relationships. BMJ Open, 8(11), e022895‐e022895. https://doi.org/10.1136/
bmjopen‐2018‐022895
Schoemaker, P. J. H., Heaton, S., & Teece, D. (2018). Innovation, dynamic capabilities, and
leadership. California Management Review, 61(1), 15‐42. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0008125618790246
Seo, Y., Lee, C., & Moon, H. (2016). An organizational learning perspective of knowledge
creation and the activities of the quality circle. Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence, 27(3‐4), 432‐446. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2015.1009367
Setia, M. S. (2017). Methodology series module 10: Qualitative health research. Indian Journal
of Dermatology, 62(4), 367‐370. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijd.IJD_290_17
Sfakianaki, E. (2019). A measurement instrument for implementing total quality management in
Greek primary and secondary education. International Journal of Educational
Management, 33(5), 1065‐1081. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijem‐08‐2018‐0245
Shafiq, M., Lasrado, F., & Hafeez, K. (2019). The effect of TQM on organizational performance:
Empirical evidence from the textile sector of a developing country using SEM. Total
Quality Management & Business Excellence, 30(1‐2), 31‐52. https://doi.org/10.1080/
14783363.2017.1283211
289
Shamsi, M. A., & Alam, A. (2018). Exploring lean six sigma implementation barriers in
information technology industry. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 9(4), 523‐
542. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS‐06‐2017‐0054
Shaw, D., & Satalkar, P. (2018). Researchers' interpretations of research integrity: A qualitative
study. Accountability in Research, 25(2), 79‐93. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.
2017.1413940
Sim, J., Saunders, B., Waterfield, J., & Kingstone, T. (2018). Can sample size in qualitative
research be determined a priori? International Journal of Social Research
Methodology, 21(5), 619‐634. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1454643
Simmert, B., Simmert, B., Ebel, P. A., Ebel, P. A., Peters, C., Peters, C., Bittner, E. A. C.,
Bittner, E. A. C., Leimeister, J. M., & Leimeister, J. M. (2019). Conquering the challenge
of continuous business model improvement: Design of a repeatable process. Business &
Information Systems Engineering, 61(4), 451‐468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599‐018‐
0556‐y
Simonÿ, C., Specht, K., Andersen, I. C., Johansen, K. K., Nielsen, C., & Agerskov, H. (2018). A
ricoeur‐inspired approach to interpret participant observations and interviews. Global
Qualitative Nursing Research, 5, 2333393618807395‐2333393618807395.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2333393618807395
Sims, T., & Wan, H. (2017). Constraint identification techniques for lean manufacturing
systems. Robotics and Computer‐Integrated Manufacturing, 43, 50‐58.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2015.12.005
290
Sinha, N., Garg, A. K., Dhingra, S., & Dhall, N. (2016). Mapping the linkage between
organizational culture and TQM. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 23(1), 208‐
235. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ‐12‐2014‐0112
Sinha, N., & Dhall, N. (2018; 2020). Mediating effect of TQM on relationship between
organizational culture and performance: Evidence from Indian SMEs. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 31(15‐16), 1841‐1865. https://doi.org/10.1080/
14783363.2018.1511372
Shokri, A., Waring, T. S., & Nabhani, F. (2016). Investigating the readiness of people in
manufacturing SMEs to embark on lean six sigma projects: An empirical study in the
German manufacturing sector. International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, 36(8), 850‐878. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM‐11‐2014‐0530
Sila, I. (2018a). Country and sector effects on the relationships among TQM practices and key
performance measures. International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, 67(8), 1371‐1393. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM‐11‐2017‐0297
Sila, I. (2018b). Linking quality with social and financial performance: A contextual, ethics‐
based approach. Production and Operations Management, 27(6), 1102‐1123.
https://doi.org/ 10.1111/poms.12857
Sila, I. (2020). Investigating changes in TQM's effects on corporate social performance and
financial performance over time. Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence, 31(1‐2), 210‐229. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2018.1458609
Sila, I., & Walczak, S. (2017). Universal versus contextual effects on TQM: A triangulation
study using neural networks. Production Planning & Control, 28(5), 367‐386.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2017.1296598
291
Sinha, N., Garg, A. K., Dhingra, S., & Dhall, N. (2016). Mapping the linkage between
organizational culture and TQM. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 23(1), 208‐
235. https://doi.org/10.1108/bij‐12‐2014‐0112
Sreedharan, R., Sunder, V., & Raju, R. (2018). Critical success factors of TQM, six sigma, lean
and lean six sigma. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 25(9), 3479‐3504.
https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ‐08‐2017‐0223
Stahlke, S. (2018). Expanding on notions of ethical risks to qualitative researchers. International
Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1), 160940691878730. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1609406918787309
Steffensen, D. S., Ellen, B. P., Wang, G., & Ferris, G. R. (2019). Putting the “Management” back
in human resource management: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of
Management, 45(6), 2387‐2418. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318816179
Stelson, P., Hille, J., Eseonu, C., & Doolen, T. (2017). What drives continuous improvement
project success in healthcare? International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance,
30(1), 43‐57. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHCQA‐03‐2016‐0035
Su, H., & Linderman, K. (2016). An empirical investigation in sustaining high‐quality
performance. Decision Sciences, 47(5), 787‐819. https://doi.org/10.1111/deci.12210
Süßbauer, E., Maas‐Deipenbrock, R. M., Friedrich, S., Kreß‐Ludwig, M., Langen, N., & Muster,
V. (2019). Employee roles in sustainability transformation processes: A move away from
expertise and towards experience‐driven sustainability management. Gaia (Heidelberg,
Germany), 28(1), 210‐217. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.28.S1.7
292
Sunder M, V. (2016). Constructs of quality in higher education services. International Journal of
Productivity and Performance Management, 65(8), 1091‐1111. https://doi.org/10.1108/
IJPPM‐05‐2015‐0079
Sunder M, V., & Prashar, A. (2020). Empirical examination of critical failure factors of
continuous improvement deployments: Stage‐wise results and a contingency theory
perspective. International Journal of Production Research, 58(16), 4894‐4915.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1727044
Talapatra, S., & Uddin, M. K. (2019). Prioritizing the barriers of TQM implementation from the
perspective of garment sector in developing countries. Benchmarking: An International
Journal, 26(7), 2205‐2224. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ‐01‐2019‐0023
Talib, F., Asjad, M., Attri, R., Siddiquee, A. N., & Khan, Z. A. (2019). Ranking model of total
quality management enablers in healthcare establishments using the best‐worst method.
TQM Journal, 31(5), 790‐814. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐04‐2019‐0118
Tanlaka, E. F., Ewashen, C., & King‐Shier, K. (2019). Postpositivist critical multiplism: Its value
for nursing research. Nursing Open, 6(3), 740‐744. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.306
Tasleem, M., Khan, N., & Nisar, A. (2019). Impact of technology management on corporate
sustainability performance. The International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, 36(9), 1574‐1599. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐01‐2018‐0017
Tavana, M., Shaabani, A., & Valaei, N. (2020). An integrated fuzzy framework for analyzing
barriers to the implementation of continuous improvement in manufacturing. The
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 38(1), 116‐146.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM‐06‐2019‐0196
293
Thomas, A., Kuper, A., Chin‐Yee, B., & Park, M. (2020). What is “shared” in shared decision‐
making? Philosophical perspectives, epistemic justice, and implications for health
professions education. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 26(2), 409‐
418. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13370
Thomas, S. P. (2020). Resolving tensions in phenomenological research interviewing. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 77(1), 484‐491. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14597
Tobi, H., & Kampen, J. K. (2018). Research design: The methodology for interdisciplinary
research framework. Quality & Quantity, 52(3), 1209‐1225.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135‐017‐0513‐8
Toke, L. K., & Kalpande, S. D. (2020). Total quality management in small and medium
enterprises: An overview in Indian context. The Quality Management Journal, 27(3),
159‐175. https://doi.org/10.1080/10686967.2020.1767008
Tortorella, G., Giglio, R., Fogliatto, F. S., & Sawhney, R. (2019). Mediating role of learning
organization on the relationship between total quality management and operational
performance in Brazilian manufacturers. Journal of Manufacturing Technology
Management, 524‐541. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmtm‐05‐2019‐0200
Tsironis, L. K. (2018). Quality improvement calls data mining: The case of the seven new
quality tools. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 25(1), 47‐75.
https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ‐06‐2016‐0093
Turner‐Bowker, D. M., Lamoureux, R. E., Stokes, J., Litcher‐Kelly, L., Galipeau, N., Yaworsky,
A., Solomon, J., & Shields, A. L. (2018). Informing a priori sample size estimation in
qualitative concept elicitation interview studies for clinical outcome assessment
294
instrument development. Value in Health, 21(7), 839‐842. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jval.2017.11.014
Ufua, D. E., Papadopoulos, T., & Midgley, G. (2018). Systemic lean intervention: Enhancing
lean with community operational research. European Journal of Operational Research,
268(3), 1134‐1148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.08.004
Ullah, F., Thaheem, M. J., Siddiqui, S. Q., & Khurshid, M. B. (2017). Influence of six sigma on
project success in construction industry of Pakistan. TQM Journal, 29(2), 276‐309.
https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐11‐2015‐0136
Van der Walt, B. J. (2017). Sharing an integral christian worldview with a younger generation:
Why and how should it be done and received? In Die Skriflig : Tydskrif Van Die
Gereformeerde Teologiese Vereniging, 51(1), 1‐11. https://doi.org/10.4102/
ids.v51i1.2245
Varpio, L., Ajjawi, R., Monrouxe, L. V., O'Brien, B. C., & Rees, C. E. (2017). Shedding the
cobra effect: Problematising thematic emergence, triangulation, saturation and member
checking. Medical Education, 51(1), 40‐50. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13124
Vasileiou, K., Barnett, J., Thorpe, S., & Young, T. (2018). Characterizing and justifying sample
size sufficiency in interview‐based studies: Systematic analysis of qualitative health
research over a 15‐year period. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 148‐
148. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874‐018‐0594‐7
Vennedey, V., Danner, M., Evers, Silvia M. A. A, Fauser, S., Stock, S., Dirksen, C. D., &
Hiligsmann, M. (2016). Using qualitative research to facilitate the interpretation of
quantitative results from a discrete choice experiment: Insights from a survey in elderly
295
ophthalmologic patients. Patient Preference and Adherence, 10, 993‐1002.
https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S101584
Villanueva, I.T. (2018). Utilization of information technology of Negros Oriental State
University towards total quality management. Indian Journal of Commerce and
Management Studies, IX (3), 49‐64. https://doi.org/10.18843/ijcms/v9i3/06
Vendrame Takao, M. R., Woldt, J., & da Silva, I. B. (2017). Six sigma methodology advantages
for small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises: A case study in the plumbing industry in the
United States. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 9(10), 186781401773324.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1687814017733248
Van Schoten, S., de Blok, S., Spreeuwenberg, P., Groenewegen, P., & Wagner, C. (2016). The
EFQM model as a framework for total quality management in healthcare: Results of a
longitudinal quantitative study. International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, 36(8), 901‐922. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM‐03‐2015‐0139
Vouzas, F., & Katsogianni, T. (2018). TQM implementation in 3PL organizations vs
organizations with in‐house logistics department. TQM Journal, 30(6), 749‐763.
https://doi.org/10.1108/tqm‐10‐2017‐0115
Watts, F. M., & Finkenstaedt‐Quinn, S. A. (2021). The current state of methods for establishing
reliability in qualitative chemistry education research articles. Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1039/D1RP00007A
Wei, J., Chang, Y. W., Zhang, X., Wu, H., & Tang, Y. (2019). Performance measurement
systems, TQM and multi‐level firm performance: A person‐organization fit
perspective. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 30(15‐16), 1578‐
1595. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2017.1384311
296
Wesely, J. K. (2018). Co‐constituting narrative: The role of researcher identity bids in qualitative
interviews with women ex‐offenders. Criminal Justice Studies, 31(3), 213‐
229. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2018.1437036
Wilkins, C. H., Mapes, B. M., Jerome, R. N., Villalta‐Gil, V., Pulley, J. M., & Harris, P. A.
(2019). Understanding what information is valued by research participants, and
why. Health Affairs (Project Hope), 38(3), 399‐407. https://doi.org/10.1377/
hlthaff.2018.05046
Wollersheim, J., & Heimeriks, K. H. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and their characteristic
qualities: Insights from a lab experiment. Organization Science (Providence, R.I.), 27(2),
233‐248. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2016.1053
Wood, A. E., & Mattson, C. A. (2019). Quantifying the effects of various factors on the utility of
design ethnography in the developing world. Research in Engineering Design, 30(3),
317‐338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163‐018‐00304‐2
Woods, M., Paulus, T., Atkins, D. P., & Macklin, R. (2016). Advancing qualitative research
using qualitative data analysis software (QDAS)? Reviewing potential versus practice in
published studies using ATLAS.ti and NVivo, 1994–2013. Social Science Computer
Review, 34(5), 597‐617. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439315596311
Wu, Y. P., Thompson, D., Aroian, K. J., McQuaid, E. L., & Deatrick, J. A. (2016). Commentary:
Writing and evaluating qualitative research reports. Journal of Pediatric Psychology,
41(5), 493‐505. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsw032
Yang, H., & Van Gorp, B. (2019). Framing the Asian infrastructure investment bank: A
qualitative analysis of the political debate and media coverage on a China‐led multilateral
297
institution. Pacific Review, 32(4), 603‐634. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2018.
1512647
Yardley, L. (2017). Demonstrating the validity of qualitative research. The Journal of Positive
Psychology, 12(3), 295‐296. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262624
Yin, R. (2018). Case study research and applications (6th). Sage
Yusr, M. M. (2016). Innovation capability and its role in enhancing the relationship between
TQM practices and innovation performance. Journal of Open Innovation, 2(1), 1‐15.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40852‐016‐0031‐2
Yusr, M. M., Mokhtar, S. S. M., Othman, A. R., & Sulaiman, Y. (2017). Does interaction
between TQM practices and knowledge management processes enhance the innovation
performance? The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 34(7),
955‐974. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijqrm‐09‐2014‐0138
Zamani, B., & Babaei, E. (2021). A critical review of grounded theory research in urban
planning and design. Planning, Practice & Research, 36(1), 77‐90. https://doi.org/
10.1080/02697459.2020.1830240
Zapf, A., Stark, M., Gerke, O., Ehret, C., Benda, N., Bossuyt, P., Deeks, J., Reitsma, J., Alonzo,
T., & Friede, T. (2020). Adaptive trial designs in diagnostic accuracy research. Statistics
in Medicine, 39(5), 591‐601. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.8430
Zwain, A. A. A., Lim, K. T., & Othman, S. N. (2017). TQM and academic performance in Iraqi
HEIs: Associations and mediating effect of KM. The TQM Journal, 29(2), 357‐368.
https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM‐08‐2013‐0
298
Appendix A: Interview Guide for Participants with Leading Roles
Interview Guide for Participants with Leading Roles
Date:
Place: Time: Interviewer:
Interview Protocol Project: Sustainability Issue of the Total Quality Management (TQM)
System in the Manufacturing Industry
Interviewee (Participant):
Years with Company: Position of Interviewee:
Brief of the Project:
The aim of the project is to understand the sustainability issue of the TQM system in the
company that results in high product warranty cost, field failure rates, and cost of quality.
Interview Question 1: How are quality management practices integrated into the company’s
strategic goals?
Interview Question 2: How does management measure the effects of quality management
practices in their processes, and in what way does management respond to the results of this
measurement?
299
Interview Question 3: How are quality‐related initiatives designed to support productivity
goals and targets?
Interview Question 4: Why is it important to align quality related projects with the company’s
operational objectives?
Interview Question 5: How are quality initiatives aligned to the company’s core practices and
values?
Interview Question 6: In what way is employee performance tied to quality management
practices?
Interview Question 7: How does the company implement system thinking and sustainability
practices to support specific quality practices either through lean and continuous improvement
activities?
300
Appendix B: Interview Guide for Participants with Practicing Roles
Interview Guide for Participants with Practicing Roles
Date:
Place: Time: Interviewer:
Interview Protocol Project: Sustainability Issue of the Total Quality Management (TQM)
System in the Manufacturing Industry
Interviewee (Participant):
Years with Company: Position of Interviewee:
Brief of the Project:
The aim of the project is to understand the sustainability issue of the TQM system in the
company that results in high product warranty cost, field failure rates, and cost of quality.
Interview Question 1: How do TQM activities affect your job performance?
Interview Question 2: Can you explain the benefits and challenges of sustaining TQM
practices in your job?
Interview Question 3: How is the sustainment of TQM activities practical to your job?
301
Interview Question 4: How does the quality of support you receive influence the way you
sustain TQM practices?
Interview Question 5: How do your leaders support and recognize you in sustaining TQM
practices?
Interview Question 6: In what way do you feel engaged or empowered to improve TQM
activities?
Interview Question 7: Is there a specific TQM activity that prevents you from achieving your
target? If so, why is this practice an issue?
302
Appendix C: Interview Guide for Participants with Supporting Roles
Interview Guide for Participants with Supporting Roles
Date:
Place: Time: Interviewer:
Interview Protocol Project: Sustainability Issue of the Total Quality Management (TQM)
System in the Manufacturing Industry
Interviewee (Participant):
Years with Company: Position of Interviewee:
Brief of the Project:
The aim of the project is to understand the sustainability issue of the TQM system in the
company that results in high product warranty cost, field failure rates, and cost of quality.
Interview Question 1: How do you address recurring quality findings reported from the
production floor?
Interview Question 2: Why is it important to support the associates in the sustainment of TQM
practices?
Interview Question 3: How do your current training and skills help you respond appropriately
to the quality needs of manufacturing?
303
Interview Question 4: Why is proper guidance and information important in addressing quality
problems?
Interview Question 5: How would you describe your workload in supporting quality‐related
activities?
Interview Question 6: How are priorities defined when supporting the quality needs of
operations?
Interview Question 7: How do you determine the appropriateness of your responses to a
specific quality issue that needs to be addressed without creating constraints in operation?
304
Appendix D: Interview Guide for Participants with Receiving Roles
Interview Guide for Participants with Receiving Roles
Date:
Place: Time: Interviewer:
Interview Protocol Project: Sustainability Issue of the Total Quality Management (TQM)
System in the Manufacturing Industry
Interviewee (Participant):
Years with Company: Position of Interviewee:
Brief of the Project:
The aim of the project is to understand the sustainability issue of the TQM system in the
company that results in high product warranty cost, field failure rates, and cost of quality.
Interview Question 1: How do you handle recurring customer complaints related to quality?
Interview Question 2: How are these quality issues affecting warranty returns and sales?
Interview Question 3: How do quality related problems continue to be a challenge with your
job?
305
Interview Question 4: Why are these quality issues reaching the customers?
Interview Question 5: How does the company’s customer orientation affect the way you serve
clients?
Interview Question 6: How do the customer support structures in the company help you do
your job?
Interview Question 7: Is there a specific quality issue that stands out from the rest? How does
this specific quality issue affect your job performance?
306
Appendix E: Observation Protocol
Observation Form Department: Date:
Shift: Standard Operating Procedure – Manufacturing Process Participant:
Descriptive Notes Reflective Notes
Station 1
Station 2
Station 3
Station 4
Layout of Cell Additional Notes:
307
Appendix F: Pearson Correlation Coefficient
File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient
Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 20 0.779827Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 09 0.602863Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 31 0.450831Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 22 0.370965Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 24 0.660884Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 05 0.52234Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 24 0.410084Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 36 0.328298
Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 49 0.769578Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 28 0.602627Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 18 0.450568Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 23 0.370767Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 38 0.660353Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 02 0.522275Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 41 0.40997Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 27 0.328147
Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 05 0.76187Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 29 0.602137Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 05 0.450107Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 32 0.369943Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 08 0.660176Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 35 0.522269Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 14 0.409959Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 30 0.32812
Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 17 0.761813Files\\Participant 03Files\\Participant 02 0.601815Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 08 0.449917Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 11 0.369771Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 10 0.660065Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 02 0.522172Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 14 0.409834Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 25 0.327709
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 17 0.758343Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 08 0.601813Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 25 0.449454Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 05 0.369538Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 14 0.659441Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 26 0.522064Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 13 0.409781Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 04 0.327657
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 18 0.753221Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 11 0.60105Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 09 0.448637Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 27 0.369522Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 04 0.659397Files\\Participant 11Files\\Participant 07 0.521772Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 17 0.409375Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 10 0.327495
Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 18 0.750558Files\\Participant 12Files\\Participant 09 0.600903Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 19 0.44854Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 27 0.369433Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 01 0.659305Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 23 0.521294Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 18 0.409228Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 05 0.327042
Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 17 0.745764Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 24 0.600145Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 16 0.447947Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 10 0.369077Files\\Participant 07Files\\Participant 05 0.658685Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 29 0.521047Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 15 0.409196Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 15 0.326276
Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 16 0.742889Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 11 0.599807Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 01 0.447261Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 19 0.369051Files\\Participant 07Files\\Participant 03 0.657587Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 22 0.521036Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 26 0.409133Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 28 0.326239
Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 17 0.741014Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 28 0.599229Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 07 0.447141Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 36 0.368943Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 32 0.657072Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 09 0.520999Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 15 0.408844Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 37 0.326113
Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 46 0.736119Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 02 0.598922Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 21 0.447056Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 04 0.368928Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 10 0.656688Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 17 0.520957Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 23 0.408758Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 11 0.326
Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 16 0.735561Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 31 0.597906Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 18 0.446992Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 16 0.368789Files\\Participant 05Files\\Participant 01 0.656675Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 18 0.520787Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 10 0.408248Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 10 0.325918
Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 41 0.734484Files\\Participant 13Files\\Participant 02 0.596615Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 19 0.446534Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 24 0.368571Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 12 0.65663Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 04 0.518194Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 13 0.40824Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 01 0.325788
Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 16 0.734219Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 09 0.596253Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 19 0.446477Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 29 0.368472Files\\Participant 09Files\\Participant 08 0.656577Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 20 0.517891Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 35 0.40804Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 02 0.324224
Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 04 0.733477Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 18 0.594918Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 12 0.446188Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 25 0.368451Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 13 0.654989Files\\Participant 11Files\\Participant 09 0.516935Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 26 0.408038Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 39 0.324203
Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 19 0.73332Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 06 0.594526Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 23 0.445598Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 22 0.368057Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 14 0.654772Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 09 0.515811Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 12 0.407738Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 03 0.323458
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 19 0.732582Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 01 0.59397Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 16 0.445534Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 25 0.367977Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 06 0.65475Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 12 0.514168Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 25 0.407287Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 10 0.322487
Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 19 0.732164Files\\Participant 08Files\\Participant 03 0.593963Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 04 0.445284Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 09 0.367348Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 13 0.654529Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 21 0.513665Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 16 0.407061Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 11 0.322208
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 03 0.732121Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 14 0.59387Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 01 0.444619Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 32 0.367052Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 02 0.654037Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 03 0.512247Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 13 0.407042Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 01 0.32189
Files\\Participant 12Files\\Participant 04 0.731168Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 11 0.593815Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 34 0.44412Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 23 0.366771Files\\Participant 09Files\\Participant 05 0.653794Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 18 0.511895Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 17 0.40687Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 37 0.321596
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 05 0.730558Files\\Participant 10Files\\Participant 02 0.593787Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 21 0.443576Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 03 0.366254Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 21 0.653575Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 13 0.511638Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 32 0.406479Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 13 0.321539
Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 04 0.727351Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 35 0.593102Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 03 0.443457Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 02 0.366156Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 35 0.653524Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 04 0.510949Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 26 0.40618Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 07 0.321255
Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 44 0.725627Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 39 0.592972Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 20 0.443405Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 07 0.366103Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 46 0.653136Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 29 0.510079Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 07 0.405514Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 24 0.32042
Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 18 0.724577Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 15 0.592666Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 24 0.443268Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 10 0.366029Files\\Participant 12Files\\Participant 06 0.652147Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 16 0.509842Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 04 0.405505Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 37 0.320154
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 16 0.724157Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 28 0.592212Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 05 0.442902Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 03 0.366009Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 23 0.651632Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 16 0.508544Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 25 0.405497Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 36 0.320099
Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 05 0.72368Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 29 0.592153Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 26 0.442036Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 43 0.365931Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 34 0.651139Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 31 0.508533Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 07 0.405461Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 06 0.319994
Files\\Participant 13Files\\Participant 05 0.72218Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 07 0.591511Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 28 0.441683Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 24 0.365686Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 14 0.64984Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 10 0.508502Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 09 0.405391Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 23 0.319917
Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 16 0.721002Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 34 0.59067Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 14 0.441275Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 41 0.365468Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 09 0.649444Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 01 0.508368Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 21 0.405029Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 06 0.319724
Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 44 0.720941Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 09 0.590459Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 18 0.441179Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 14 0.365215Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 25 0.649113Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 07 0.507466Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 35 0.404526Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 14 0.319356
Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 04 0.72066Files\\Participant 13Files\\Participant 11 0.589962Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 07 0.441067Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 36 0.365158Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 13 0.648871Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 04 0.50739Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 19 0.402778Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 12 0.319303
Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 16 0.720543Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 04 0.589863Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 21 0.441033Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 30 0.365098Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 10 0.648072Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 19 0.507288Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 25 0.402596Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 08 0.319227
Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 20 0.718998Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 47 0.589731Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 40 0.441026Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 04 0.365004Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 12 0.648039Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 29 0.507206Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 29 0.40247Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 30 0.319134
Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 19 0.718386Files\\Participant 11Files\\Participant 05 0.589461Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 04 0.440926Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 09 0.364919Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 08 0.647901Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 31 0.505281Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 18 0.402224Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 24 0.31896
Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 05 0.717848Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 31 0.589104Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 26 0.440411Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 39 0.364667Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 07 0.647605Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 08 0.505055Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 38 0.401869Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 02 0.318841
Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 18 0.717319Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 15 0.588387Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 33 0.440214Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 04 0.364496Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 02 0.647478Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 30 0.504277Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 07 0.401279Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 37 0.318789
Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 46 0.716958Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 11 0.587448Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 18 0.440178Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 27 0.364489Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 07 0.6472Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 20 0.504162Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 40 0.401097Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 42 0.317958
Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 03 0.716529Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 15 0.587359Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 41 0.440106Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 24 0.364088Files\\Participant 12Files\\Participant 10 0.646145Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 29 0.503909Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 23 0.401086Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 01 0.317863
Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 44 0.716506Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 09 0.586794Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 13 0.439805Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 34 0.363885Files\\Participant 08Files\\Participant 05 0.6457Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 19 0.503326Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 26 0.40068Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 37 0.317135
Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 12 0.714956Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 07 0.586397Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 33 0.439242Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 28 0.363319Files\\Participant 09Files\\Participant 07 0.645478Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 16 0.502895Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 28 0.400655Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 14 0.317075
Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 48 0.714891Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 32 0.585899Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 08 0.439134Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 13 0.363182Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 21 0.64467Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 17 0.502651Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 36 0.400546Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 12 0.316599
Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 18 0.714827Files\\Participant 11Files\\Participant 06 0.585284Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 34 0.438519Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 05 0.363181Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 42 0.644515Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 10 0.502313Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 12 0.400252Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 06 0.316569
Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 45 0.714814Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 02 0.584892Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 17 0.438441Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 14 0.36306Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 06 0.643713Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 31 0.500409Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 36 0.400096Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 40 0.315176
Files\\Participant 05Files\\Participant 03 0.712631Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 17 0.583485Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 17 0.438384Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 06 0.362151Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 09 0.643467Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 07 0.498542Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 10 0.399991Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 30 0.314521
Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 03 0.712592Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 11 0.583333Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 31 0.43831Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 42 0.361133Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 03 0.643393Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 15 0.497565Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 09 0.399954Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 37 0.313981
Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 25 0.712555Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 21 0.583291Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 18 0.438302Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 01 0.361132Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 07 0.643093Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 04 0.497509Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 29 0.399723Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 01 0.313874
Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 04 0.711438Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 32 0.582248Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 29 0.438256Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 06 0.36111Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 41 0.643008Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 13 0.497224Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 31 0.399597Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 01 0.313818
Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 18 0.711285Files\\Participant 10Files\\Participant 01 0.5818Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 32 0.43775Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 06 0.360927Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 06 0.642452Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 03 0.496571Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 35 0.399411Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 07 0.313564
Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 19 0.710105Files\\Participant 06Files\\Participant 02 0.581785Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 21 0.437619Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 23 0.360815Files\\Participant 09Files\\Participant 03 0.641665Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 22 0.496029Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 12 0.399149Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 34 0.313499
Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 17 0.709978Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 15 0.581482Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 19 0.437428Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 14 0.360812Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 21 0.640975Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 17 0.494577Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 40 0.398629Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 11 0.312911
Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 05 0.709755Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 02 0.581393Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 08 0.436421Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 10 0.360721Files\\Participant 13Files\\Participant 10 0.640809Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 20 0.494049Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 16 0.398584Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 02 0.3129
Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 13 0.709745Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 08 0.580782Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 25 0.436301Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 20 0.360605Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 28 0.64046Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 21 0.493623Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 05 0.39843Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 27 0.312449
Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 04 0.70952Files\\Participant 12Files\\Participant 07 0.580453Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 09 0.436046Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 21 0.36002Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 44 0.640106Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 26 0.492805Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 20 0.398303Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 12 0.312429
Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 16 0.709102Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 17 0.580195Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 17 0.435434Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 09 0.35963Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 04 0.639941Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 19 0.491435Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 06 0.398213Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 27 0.312391
Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 44 0.709066Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 03 0.580125Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 29 0.434859Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 23 0.359617Files\\Participant 13Files\\Participant 01 0.639428Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 30 0.490431Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 16 0.397851Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 13 0.311409
Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 20 0.708838Files\\Participant 08Files\\Participant 01 0.580122Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 31 0.434699Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 13 0.359503Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 03 0.638985Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 15 0.489181Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 26 0.397752Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 02 0.311348
Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 40 0.708421Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 10 0.579637Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 08 0.434682Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 18 0.3586Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 08 0.638266Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 17 0.488957Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 13 0.397435Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 02 0.311261
Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 20 0.708402Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 30 0.578326Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 23 0.434656Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 01 0.358336Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 01 0.638213Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 04 0.488915Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 03 0.397117Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 02 0.311088
Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 45 0.707803Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 32 0.577954Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 09 0.434564Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 14 0.357997Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 08 0.637472Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 20 0.488586Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 33 0.397006Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 08 0.310544
Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 40 0.707294Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 16 0.577871Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 22 0.43443Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 12 0.357965Files\\Participant 13Files\\Participant 03 0.637023Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 03 0.488399Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 24 0.397Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 07 0.310256
Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 03 0.705258Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 28 0.577656Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 18 0.433754Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 38 0.357807Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 04 0.636939Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 08 0.487627Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 23 0.396417Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 06 0.30895
Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 20 0.704812Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 11 0.577485Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 06 0.433457Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 27 0.357412Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 12 0.636569Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 35 0.48745Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 17 0.396411Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 42 0.308742
Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 07 0.704704Files\\Participant 10Files\\Participant 09 0.577483Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 43 0.433447Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 41 0.357283Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 16 0.636491Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 05 0.487325Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 34 0.396117Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 01 0.308094
Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 05 0.704025Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 18 0.576421Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 01 0.432428Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 37 0.357117Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 09 0.635779Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 17 0.485818Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 11 0.395965Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 16 0.307889
Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 13 0.702984Files\\Participant 05Files\\Participant 02 0.576071Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 22 0.431604Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 08 0.356591Files\\Participant 12Files\\Participant 11 0.635676Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 05 0.485146Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 36 0.395925Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 27 0.306816
Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 20 0.702633Files\\Participant 11Files\\Participant 10 0.57557Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 11 0.431081Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 16 0.356573Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 09 0.635438Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 06 0.483652Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 04 0.395797Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 30 0.306759
Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 03 0.702082Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 11 0.575425Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 26 0.43034Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 34 0.356513Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 04 0.635203Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 30 0.482726Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 22 0.395781Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 28 0.306419
Files\\Participant 12Files\\Participant 05 0.701109Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 09 0.574948Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 05 0.430146Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 19 0.35642Files\\Participant 13Files\\Participant 08 0.634995Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 31 0.482539Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 16 0.395685Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 28 0.30512
Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 22 0.699923Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 11 0.573654Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 07 0.429726Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 32 0.356408Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 14 0.634755Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 06 0.482142Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 19 0.395605Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 08 0.304976
Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 12 0.699455Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 08 0.57339Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 21 0.429618Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 01 0.3557Files\\Participant 12Files\\Participant 01 0.634215Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 32 0.481779Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 05 0.3955Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 15 0.304803
Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 47 0.698213Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 39 0.572988Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 10 0.429045Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 12 0.355447Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 45 0.633887Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 05 0.481227Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 37 0.395483Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 22 0.304394
Files\\Participant 05Files\\Participant 04 0.697781Files\\Participant 10Files\\Participant 05 0.572973Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 03 0.429012Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 16 0.355422Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 28 0.633731Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 12 0.480689Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 32 0.395448Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 11 0.304273
Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 06 0.697627Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 10 0.572792Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 05 0.428855Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 27 0.35485Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 06 0.633183Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 21 0.480202Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 20 0.395442Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 24 0.302922
Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 38 0.696154Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 02 0.571135Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 21 0.42833Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 18 0.354475Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 13 0.632847Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 20 0.479644Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 14 0.395387Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 06 0.302191
Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 05 0.696099Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 11 0.570186Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 11 0.42801Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 03 0.35383Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 13 0.632622Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 22 0.478095Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 23 0.395212Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 02 0.302131
308
File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient File
A
File
B Pearson
correlation
coefficient
Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 04 0.693998Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 17 0.569939Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 40 0.42794Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 01 0.353805Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 05 0.632294Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 31 0.477764Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 17 0.395177Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 12 0.301195
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 07 0.693479Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 07 0.569824Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 25 0.427712Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 38 0.353804Files\\Participant 08Files\\Participant 06 0.632107Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 17 0.47674Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 09 0.395016Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 23 0.301072
Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 19 0.693394Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 01 0.569791Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 04 0.427573Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 36 0.353155Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 15 0.631838Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 19 0.476506Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 19 0.394639Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 10 0.300958
Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 22 0.693025Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 01 0.569787Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 16 0.427181Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 16 0.353118Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 12 0.631424Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 29 0.476435Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 25 0.394257Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 23 0.300941
Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 17 0.692969Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 33 0.569739Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 03 0.426943Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 22 0.353107Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 01 0.631384Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 06 0.476195Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 29 0.393334Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 04 0.300817
Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 38 0.692389Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 05 0.569524Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 18 0.426823Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 12 0.352289Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 10 0.630982Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 07 0.475677Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 06 0.393243Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 42 0.300582
Files\\Participant 13Files\\Participant 12 0.692114Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 06 0.569045Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 22 0.426498Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 25 0.35202Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 46 0.630733Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 28 0.474364Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 23 0.392354Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 06 0.30041
Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 17 0.69189Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 25 0.568735Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 34 0.426279Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 38 0.351235Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 07 0.63028Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 21 0.474313Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 40 0.391757Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 02 0.299624
Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 12 0.691464Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 05 0.56745Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 09 0.426224Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 42 0.351216Files\\Participant 08Files\\Participant 07 0.629879Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 03 0.474048Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 22 0.389534Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 24 0.299554
Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 18 0.690996Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 14 0.566553Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 35 0.426037Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 06 0.350943Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 21 0.629784Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 19 0.473514Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 02 0.389322Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 15 0.29911
Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 12 0.690986Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 12 0.565907Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 09 0.425484Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 24 0.350788Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 33 0.62943Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 21 0.473296Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 22 0.389257Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 14 0.298607
Files\\Participant 04Files\\Participant 03 0.690253Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 11 0.565367Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 25 0.42547Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 37 0.350765Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 15 0.628683Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 26 0.473051Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 12 0.389165Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 14 0.298315
Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 33 0.689102Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 03 0.564802Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 26 0.425403Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 28 0.348747Files\\Participant 12Files\\Participant 03 0.628091Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 29 0.472327Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 29 0.388971Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 11 0.29815
Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 14 0.687245Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 28 0.564645Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 05 0.425092Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 24 0.348586Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 10 0.628009Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 17 0.472033Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 16 0.388845Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 11 0.297409
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 12 0.686784Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 02 0.564436Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 32 0.424747Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 11 0.347485Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 12 0.627971Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 02 0.471417Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 04 0.388635Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 15 0.296828
Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 06 0.686761Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 10 0.564243Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 08 0.424584Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 07 0.347416Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 13 0.62782Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 40 0.471277Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 24 0.387997Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 06 0.296812
Files\\Participant 06Files\\Participant 04 0.686679Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 18 0.563699Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 23 0.424436Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 30 0.347272Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 08 0.627683Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 12 0.471148Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 21 0.387398Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 30 0.296619
Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 01 0.686577Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 11 0.563428Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 07 0.424264Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 15 0.347114Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 07 0.627539Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 25 0.47105Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 10 0.38705Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 13 0.296463
Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 08 0.685203Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 03 0.56218Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 25 0.424116Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 34 0.346947Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 02 0.627269Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 34 0.47032Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 10 0.386533Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 27 0.296018
Files\\Participant 13Files\\Participant 04 0.685063Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 33 0.562054Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 08 0.423762Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 14 0.346927Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 09 0.626922Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 15 0.469727Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 27 0.386349Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 01 0.294936
Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 04 0.683686Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 21 0.560135Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 12 0.423176Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 31 0.346643Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 14 0.626813Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 20 0.469636Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 30 0.385641Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 02 0.294423
Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 12 0.683163Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 23 0.558927Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 03 0.423149Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 36 0.345919Files\\Participant 13Files\\Participant 09 0.625802Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 20 0.469524Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 20 0.385591Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 01 0.29442
Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 07 0.682672Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 20 0.5588Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 18 0.422752Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 16 0.345726Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 14 0.625685Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 33 0.469337Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 07 0.385522Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 36 0.294079
Files\\Participant 13Files\\Participant 06 0.68261Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 10 0.55836Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 33 0.422473Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 25 0.345428Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 05 0.625681Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 17 0.469184Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 08 0.385484Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 38 0.29396
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 09 0.682507Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 31 0.558339Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 22 0.4222Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 09 0.345027Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 10 0.624782Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 24 0.46851Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 09 0.384812Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 30 0.293825
Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 03 0.682361Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 10 0.557594Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 29 0.421935Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 23 0.344694Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 23 0.624571Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 17 0.467428Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 24 0.384718Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 43 0.292403
Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 06 0.681568Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 33 0.557475Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 20 0.421774Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 08 0.344332Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 39 0.62387Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 13 0.467328Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 26 0.384436Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 10 0.291696
Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 40 0.681404Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 08 0.557183Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 04 0.42167Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 39 0.344141Files\\Participant 06Files\\Participant 03 0.623664Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 14 0.466904Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 13 0.384018Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 27 0.291072
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 13 0.680692Files\\Participant 08Files\\Participant 02 0.556985Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 01 0.421623Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 36 0.344096Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 19 0.623598Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 24 0.466676Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 13 0.383516Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 36 0.291041
Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 28 0.680377Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 06 0.556695Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 07 0.421122Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 04 0.343909Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 32 0.622173Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 24 0.466448Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 20 0.383213Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 28 0.290342
Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 06 0.679679Files\\Participant 10Files\\Participant 03 0.556327Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 18 0.421038Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 25 0.343817Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 14 0.621754Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 10 0.466429Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 39 0.383049Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 15 0.290041
Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 26 0.679468Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 08 0.556271Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 12 0.420568Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 07 0.343538Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 11 0.621458Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 09 0.466042Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 39 0.382895Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 23 0.289167
Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 03 0.67938Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 11 0.556126Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 26 0.420032Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 23 0.343114Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 02 0.620634Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 25 0.465309Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 08 0.382523Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 27 0.286832
Files\\Participant 16Files\\Participant 13 0.67917Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 28 0.554932Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 13 0.41992Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 26 0.34236Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 39 0.619323Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 35 0.46493Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 31 0.382111Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 14 0.286405
Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 21 0.679042Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 13 0.553033Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 26 0.419805Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 03 0.342235Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 31 0.618861Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 21 0.46462Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 02 0.382007Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 06 0.285789
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 04 0.678332Files\\Participant 09Files\\Participant 02 0.551458Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 19 0.419485Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 22 0.342228Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 45 0.618691Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 19 0.464587Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 05 0.381892Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 11 0.285672
Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 22 0.677835Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 19 0.551376Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 28 0.419464Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 22 0.342132Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 29 0.618585Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 34 0.464584Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 03 0.381554Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 11 0.284724
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 01 0.67694Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 20 0.549641Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 22 0.419095Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 22 0.342045Files\\Participant 02Files\\Participant 01 0.617975Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 05 0.464402Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 21 0.38151Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 27 0.283774
Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 24 0.676465Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 22 0.548644Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 37 0.418211Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 14 0.341809Files\\Participant 09Files\\Participant 06 0.617674Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 30 0.46437Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 10 0.381283Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 04 0.281821
Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 16 0.676439Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 22 0.548135Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 18 0.418144Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 21 0.341711Files\\Participant 09Files\\Participant 01 0.617357Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 33 0.464315Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 28 0.380552Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 27 0.280501
Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 09 0.675513Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 08 0.548027Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 06 0.417796Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 31 0.341305Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 19 0.617327Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 23 0.462531Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 01 0.380196Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 41 0.280098
Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 13 0.674972Files\\Participant 11Files\\Participant 08 0.547024Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 15 0.417755Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 24 0.340911Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 15 0.616182Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 35 0.462369Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 04 0.380142Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 30 0.279308
Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 03 0.674765Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 04 0.546894Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 32 0.417532Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 11 0.340436Files\\Participant 06Files\\Participant 01 0.61605Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 35 0.462234Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 32 0.379786Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 10 0.275297
Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 44 0.674456Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 15 0.545062Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 15 0.417528Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 42 0.34035Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 15 0.615809Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 29 0.461995Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 43 0.379728Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 01 0.273427
Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 23 0.674254Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 33 0.544737Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 13 0.41715Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 16 0.340314Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 05 0.61574Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 05 0.45988Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 12 0.379649Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 12 0.273044
Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 08 0.673919Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 17 0.543063Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 13 0.416555Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 01 0.339852Files\\Participant 10Files\\Participant 08 0.615274Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 28 0.459657Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 41 0.379229Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 04 0.272682
Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 01 0.673777Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 29 0.542628Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 43 0.41625Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 10 0.339186Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 29 0.614276Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 05 0.45947Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 07 0.37915Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 11 0.27247
Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 03 0.673733Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 38 0.542363Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 09 0.416184Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 26 0.338973Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 15 0.614221Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 03 0.45919Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 08 0.379015Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 01 0.271833
Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 13 0.673381Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 15 0.542266Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 35 0.415862Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 08 0.338948Files\\Participant 07Files\\Participant 04 0.613454Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 16 0.459185Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 35 0.378124Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 23 0.269739
Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 17 0.672919Files\\Participant 10Files\\Participant 07 0.54174Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 19 0.415564Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 26 0.338633Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 01 0.613404Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 05 0.458291Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 03 0.377617Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 02 0.269223
Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 01 0.672735Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 19 0.540949Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 10 0.415117Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 29 0.338467Files\\Participant 11Files\\Participant 01 0.61338Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 26 0.458267Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 24 0.377206Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 02 0.268688
Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 17 0.6727Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 30 0.54028Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 20 0.415039Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 07 0.338256Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 08 0.613359Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 32 0.457912Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 34 0.376999Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 39 0.268633
Files\\Participant 03Files\\Participant 01 0.672217Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 09 0.539859Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 18 0.414892Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 39 0.337976Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 13 0.613178Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 19 0.457842Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 06 0.376976Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 02 0.266534
Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 08 0.672193Files\\Participant 07Files\\Participant 02 0.539772Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 18 0.414711Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 23 0.337841Files\\Participant 12Files\\Participant 08 0.612354Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 35 0.457707Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 12 0.376973Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 15 0.266165
Files\\Participant 18Files\\Participant 01 0.671795Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 12 0.539024Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 01 0.414442Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 38 0.337627Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 08 0.611719Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 21 0.457667Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 05 0.376918Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 11 0.264293
Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 09 0.671645Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 10 0.538946Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 17 0.414336Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 06 0.337581Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 11 0.611551Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 22 0.457218Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 38 0.376706Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 02 0.263179
Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 19 0.669226Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 26 0.537413Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 26 0.414138Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 02 0.336837Files\\Participant 09Files\\Participant 04 0.611394Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 25 0.456984Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 03 0.376669Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 01 0.263115
Files\\Participant 10Files\\Participant 04 0.668857Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 19 0.537336Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 09 0.413891Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 03 0.336504Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 14 0.611234Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 30 0.456765Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 24 0.37646Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 15 0.262519
Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 14 0.668533Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 16 0.537117Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 14 0.41381Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 16 0.336366Files\\Participant 12Files\\Participant 02 0.610931Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 09 0.455998Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 25 0.376427Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 04 0.25972
Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 45 0.668244Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 10 0.535341Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 08 0.413558Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 06 0.335842Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 12 0.610688Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 07 0.455939Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 34 0.376088Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 01 0.257453
Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 01 0.666906Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 05 0.535291Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 22 0.413501Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 03 0.335163Files\\Participant 22Files\\Participant 02 0.610196Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 10 0.455616Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 17 0.37574Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 02 0.255389
Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 15 0.66663Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 36 0.534229Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 43 0.413164Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 13 0.335001Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 07 0.610182Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 08 0.455355Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 37 0.375727Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 11 0.254879
Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 05 0.666455Files\\Participant 11Files\\Participant 02 0.533822Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 16 0.413063Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 16 0.334744Files\\Participant 14Files\\Participant 04 0.610171Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 18 0.4551Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 22 0.375643Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 02 0.254622
Files\\Participant 17Files\\Participant 12 0.666161Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 30 0.533667Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 10 0.412645Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 13 0.333938Files\\Participant 11Files\\Participant 03 0.609813Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 09 0.455003Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 15 0.375336Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 42 0.249049
Files\\Participant 04Files\\Participant 01 0.665998Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 13 0.533498Files\\Participant 31Files\\Participant 25 0.412468Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 15 0.333243Files\\Participant 19Files\\Participant 02 0.609148Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 33 0.454578Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 21 0.375314Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 27 0.247588
Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 05 0.665908Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 15 0.530806Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 30 0.412405Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 24 0.332569Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 13 0.609107Files\\Participant 39Files\\Participant 33 0.454014Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 43 0.375312Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 30 0.246825
Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 16 0.665469Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 10 0.529892Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 23 0.412243Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 34 0.331818Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 48 0.609019Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 20 0.453848Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 12 0.375101Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 11 0.24316
Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 18 0.664538Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 07 0.528878Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 32 0.412186Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 21 0.331686Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 20 0.608927Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 21 0.453456Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 03 0.374831Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 27 0.242786
Files\\Participant 08Files\\Participant 04 0.664291Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 31 0.528519Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 24 0.412124Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 14 0.331608Files\\Participant 07Files\\Participant 01 0.608453Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 32 0.452988Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 25 0.374493Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 27 0.241782
Files\\Participant 11Files\\Participant 04 0.663416Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 33 0.527816Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 03 0.411916Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 36 0.331533Files\\Participant 15Files\\Participant 06 0.608339Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 17 0.452829Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 35 0.374333Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 02 0.240683
Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 05 0.663321Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 06 0.527808Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 08 0.411766Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 22 0.330872Files\\Participant 10Files\\Participant 06 0.607551Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 18 0.452827Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 15 0.373963Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 11 0.239771
Files\\Participant 20Files\\Participant 08 0.6632Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 09 0.526904Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 02 0.411733Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 28 0.330513Files\\Participant 07Files\\Participant 06 0.607484Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 20 0.452746Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 13 0.373754Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 27 0.235924
Files\\Participant 49Files\\Participant 47 0.663178Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 33 0.526246Files\\Participant 35Files\\Participant 11 0.41103Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 14 0.330284Files\\Participant 25Files\\Participant 15 0.606822Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 17 0.452678Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 20 0.3737Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 11 0.234145
Files\\Participant 06Files\\Participant 05 0.663053Files\\Participant 50Files\\Participant 20 0.52617Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 37 0.410843Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 14 0.32993Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 38 0.606819Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 20 0.452665Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 21 0.373343Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 27 0.234124
Files\\Participant 04Files\\Participant 02 0.662516Files\\Participant 28Files\\Participant 18 0.524735Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 31 0.410582Files\\Participant 48Files\\Participant 06 0.329326Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 15 0.606802Files\\Participant 29Files\\Participant 09 0.451904Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 31 0.373031Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 02 0.229976
Files\\Participant 26Files\\Participant 22 0.661419Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 33 0.522754Files\\Participant 47Files\\Participant 41 0.410555Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 09 0.328749Files\\Participant 37Files\\Participant 34 0.605778Files\\Participant 36Files\\Participant 26 0.451719Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 07 0.372872Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 11 0.226558
Files\\Participant 24Files\\Participant 06 0.661337Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 07 0.522589Files\\Participant 44Files\\Participant 19 0.41044Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 14 0.328671Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 10 0.605407Files\\Participant 43Files\\Participant 20 0.451672Files\\Participant 32Files\\Participant 24 0.37277Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 11 0.22256
Files\\Participant 27Files\\Participant 14 0.661045Files\\Participant 33Files\\Participant 25 0.522376Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 15 0.410184Files\\Participant 42Files\\Participant 14 0.328562Files\\Participant 23Files\\Participant 02 0.605352Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 15 0.451417Files\\Participant 40Files\\Participant 37 0.372156Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 27 0.222129
Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 07 0.603031Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 12 0.45122Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 14 0.371471Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 27 0.212236Files\\Participant 13Files\\Participant 07 0.604018Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 03 0.451273Files\\Participant 30Files\\Participant 05 0.372025Files\\Participant 46Files\\Participant 27 0.219514
Files\\Participant 41Files\\Participant 26 0.45105 Files\\Participant 21Files\\Participant 07 0.603031Files\\Participant 38Files\\Participant 12 0.45122Files\\Participant 34Files\\Participant 14 0.371471Files\\Participant 45Files\\Participant 27 0.212236