tqm-literature review by ahire et al 1995

7/28/2019 TQM-Literature Review by Ahire Et Al 1995

1/30

PRODUCTION ND OPERATIONSMANAGEMENTVol.4,No.3,Sum m er 1995Primed in U.S.A.

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: A LITERATUREREVIEW AND AN AGENDA FORFUTURE RESEARCH*SANJAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHARDepartmentof Management,Haworth College f Business,WesternMichigan University, Kalamazoo,Michigan 49009, USA

Total quality management (TQM) is a revolutionary approach to effect ive management. Theresearch in TQM has emerged from practical needs of organizations embracing this philosophy,and the literature is mostly conceptual and practitioner-oriented. There is a lack of sound theoreticalframework classifying past effor ts and guiding future research. To f ill the void, a study of thepublished TQM literature is undertaken. A review, classi fication, and analysis of the research inTQM spanning the last two decades is presented. A total of 226 TQM-related articles are identifiedfrom 44 refereed management journals published from 1970 to 1993. These articles are thenclassified and analyzed using the following two-dimensional scheme: ( 1) article orientation (con-ceptual, case study, empirical, analytical, simulation, and overview) and (2) article focus usingthe Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award criteria. The analysis of the literature presentspertinent developments in each of the seven criteria. In addition, it provides future researchdirections as well as a ready reference of the TQM literature. The suggestions for research shouldguide future developments in the TQM field and help transform it into a formal discipline.(QUALITY MANAGEMENT; THE MALCOLM BALDRIGE NATIONAL QUALITYAWARD, CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT)

1. Introduction [Industry leaders] believe business and academia have a shared responsibility to

learn, to teach, and to practice total quality management [TQM]. If the United Statesexpects to improve its global competitive performance, business and academic leadersmust close ranks behind an agenda that stresses the importance and value of TQM(Robinson et al. 199 1) . [Academicians] enthusiastically welcome [this] invitation [byindustry] to collaborate with academia in teaching and research about total quality man-agement ( Singhal and Hayes 1992 ) .This unprecedented exchange between the chairmen of American Express, Ford Motors,IBM, Motorola, Proctor & Gamble, and Xerox and two academic leaders from the Pro-duction and Operations Management Society sums up the current state of affairs in thepractice, research, and teaching of TQM in the United States. With the exception of Japan,the situation appears to be very similar in many other industrial nations. We need adetailed synthesis of the literature to better understand the evolution of current TQMphilosophy.

* Received August 1993; revisions received June and December 1994, accepted January 1995.2771059-1478/95/0403/277$1.25

Copyright 0 1995, Production and Operations Mana gemen t Society


2/30

278 SANJAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHARTQM is an integrative management philosophy aimed at continuously improving thequality of products and processes to achieve customer satisfaction. Simply stated, it is

the building of quality into products and processes and making quality a concern andresponsibility for everyone in the organization. TQM is based on the premise that customers(both internal and external) are the focus of all activities of an organization, and allimprovements in quality must be directed toward customer satisfaction. Unfortunately,many adherents of TQM embrace this philosophy without understanding either its impacton short- and long-term management practices in their organizations or the extent ofthe commitment required at all levels. In fact, TQM applications have preceded the theo-retical framework, just as they did for quality circles (Griffin 1988). The TQM literatureis replete with practitioner-oriented do-everything-right articles and case studies. Onlyrecently have researchers used empirical studies to examine TQM implementation indetail (Garvin 1986; Lascelles and Dale 1989b; Modarress and Ansari 1989; Harber,Marriott, and Indrus 199 lb; Ebrahimpour and Withers 1992; Benson, Saraph, andSchroeder 199 1; Schroeder, Sakakibara, Flynn, and Flynn 1992; Harber, Burgess, andBarclay 1993a; Kowalski and Walley 1993; Longenecker and Scazzero 1993). The TQMfield has yet to develop a theoretical and empirical base, and it lacks a systematic analysisof current body of literature to help identify an agenda for future research. In the onlypublished TQM literature review, Flynn ( 1992) does not provide a holistic framework tosynthesize the emerging field; neither does she establish a research agenda. Hence, weneed a systematic synthesis of published research. Such a literature review will helpresearchers and practitioners understand the development of the field, and it will guidefuture development by identifying gaps between the actual and potential needs of theusers of the TQM philosophy and its current status. Our main objective is to provide asynthesis of TQM articles published between 1970 and 1993.

2. Scope of StudyWe set out to identify research published in refereed journals. We limited our searchfor TQM articles to refereed journals because of the rigorous professional peer reviewthese papers undergo prior to publication. Because most of the researchers in this fieldbefore the 1.970s focused mainly on quality control, our search was further restricted toarticles published since 1970. Only after 1970 did TQM start receiving acceptance as ageneral management philosophy rather than being considered a narrow discipline relatedto engineering and quality control. We followed this four-step procedure to identify

relevant TQM research papers as follows:1. We compiled a list of important keywords (Table 1) . Even though the nine keywordsrepresent a limited set, they provide for an adequate search to identify the salient articlesin the area of TQM .

TABLE 1Key Words

Continuous quality improvementQuality managementTotal qualityTotal quality controlTotal quality managementTQCTQMWorld class manufacturingZero defects


3/30

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW 2792. Our primary emphasis for the search was to identify articles with a management

focus. Therefore, using the keywords, we searched four computerized databases (ABI-INFORM, WILSON-DISK, INFOTRAC, and ERIC) to identify TQM articles.

3. All three authors reviewed each article identified in step 2, first independently andthen jointly. Article screening began with the identification of literature focused on anintegrated view of managing and improving the quality of products and processes by anorganization. For example, several articles were solely devoted to leadership, organizationalbehavior, or quality control but were written outside the context of TQM; therefore, theycould not be classified as TQM articles and were eliminated from further consideration.Thus, we only considered articles that examined one or more aspects of TQM and main-tained a broader TQM perspective. We provide a list of the journals in which these articlesappeared (Table 2).

4. We scrutinized bibliographies of the articles passing step 3 to identify any otherrelevant articles we may have missed in our computerized search. Again, for newly iden-tified articles, we repeated step 3. Additionally, we searched for relevant TQM articles injournals we found during the cross-reference that were not included in the databases.This four-step procedure ensured a thorough, though not comprehensive coverage ofthe field. Even though our intention was to exhaustively review the TQM literature, fivefactors prevented us from achieving this goal. First, we limited the search to nine keywords:TQM is an emerging field that borrows from many diverse disciplines-other combinationof keywords may have resulted in a different set of articles. Second, we focused the searchon refereed academic journals and excluded articles published in practitioner publications(e.g., Business Week), books and monographs (we provide an illustrative list of TQMbooks and monographs in Appendix A), and treatment of the subject in production oroperations management textbooks (Tillery and Rutledge 199 1). Furthermore, articleswithout a TQM focus, although appearing in specialized journals focusing on quality (e.g.,Technometrics, Journal of Quality Technology) were also excluded. Third, we focusedour review on the field of management and eliminated some discipline-specific articles(e.g., health care, information systems) and those in specialized journals (e.g., TotalQuality Environmental Management). Fourth, we limited our review to articles in English.Fifth, we excluded TQM literature published after 1993. Even with these limitations, weidentified 226 TQM articles to examine. To synthesize the seemingly diverse knowledge,we needed a coherent scheme for classifying these articles. We used a two-dimensionalclassification based on the articles orientation, its focus.

3. Classification by OrientationOur initial analysis of the articles showed us that they were written with one of the

following orientations: overview, conceptual, case study, empirical, analytical, or simu-lation. Because TQM is an integrative approach to managing quality of products andprocesses, some articles present a holistic treatment of all its aspects; these we classifiedas Overview. Conceptual articles include topics such as prescriptive models and methodsfor implementing TQM and opinions of researchers on various aspects of TQM. Whenthe article presented a detailed study of a few organizations (less than IO), we classifiedit as a Case Study. On the other hand, we classified an article based on a field study ofa large number of organizations as Empirical. If the focus of the article was on analyticalmodeling of various aspects of TQM (e.g., cost models), we classified it as Analytical.Finally, we classified articles with simulated experiments as Simulation.

We summarize the results of this classification in Table 3, and give a detailed breakdownof each articles orientation in Appendix B. Authors of 27 overview articles deal withgeneral aspects Of TQM . For example, Garvin ( 199 1) examines the various aspects of theBaldrige criteria, providing insight into the overall process assessing an applicant orga-


4/30

280 SAN JAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHAR

TABLE 2Journals Included in the TQM Literature Search

Academy of Management JournalAcademy of Management ReviewAdministrative Scien ce QuarterlyAdvanced Management JournalAustralian Journal of ManagementBusiness HorizonsCalifornia Management ReviewComputer and Industrial EngineeringComputers and Operations ResearchColumbia Journal of World BusinessDecision SciencesEuropean Journal of Operational ResearchHarvard Busin ess ReviewIEEE Transactions of Engineering ManagementIEEE Transactions on ReliabilityIIE TransactionsIndustrial EngineeringIndustrial ManagementInterfacesInternational Journal of Operations and Production ManagementInternational Journal of Purchasing and Materials ManagementInternational Journal of Production ResearchInternational Journal of Quality and Reliability ManagementInternational Journal of TechnoIogy ManagementJournal of Business StrategyJournal of Manufacturing and Operations ManagementJournal of MarketingJourn al of Marketing Rese archJournal of Operations ManagementJournal of Operations Research SocietyJournal of Quality TechnologyJournal of Sma ll Busine ss ManagementLong-Range PlanningManagement ReviewManagement ScienceNaval Research LogisticsOmegaProduction and Inventory Management JournalProduction and Operations ManagementPublic Utilities FortnightlySAM Advanced Management JournalSloan Management ReviewTechnometrics

nization and discussing each of the seven areas of the Baldrige Award in depth. Overviewarticles range from insights into the Baldrige criteria (Garvin 199 1; Easton 1993)) com-parison of Japanese versus U.S. quality practices (Ebrahimpour 1985; Handfield 1989;


5/30

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW 281TABLE 3

Frequency ofReviewed Articles by Orientation and FocusArticles Reviewed* Article Foci?

Orientation Frequency FOCUS L I& A SQP HRM MP Q QOR CFS TotalConceptual 107Case study 56Empirical 29Analytical 6Simulation 1

PrimarySecondaryPrimarySecondaryPrimalySecondaryPrimarySecondaryPrimarySecondary

Tota l 199 PrimarySecondary

17 20 13 26 52 6 19 153I1 5 5 20 10 7 13 7115 9 14 22 34 9 9 112II 8 7 11 7 8 9 615 1 2 11 19 0 4 42

5 2 2 6 0 3 3 210 1 1 1 4 0 1 80 0 0 0 1 I 0 20 0 1 0 1 0 0 21 1 0 0 0 0 1 3

37 31 31 60 I10 15 33 31728 16 14 37 18 19 26 158

* We clas sified additional 27 articles a s Overview; therefore, we reviewed 226 articles in total for this literature survey.t L, leadership; I&A, information and analysis; SQ P, strategic quality planning; HRM, human resource management; MPO,

management of process quality; Q O R , quality and operational results; CFS, customer focus and satisfactio n.

Flynn 1992), comparison of the quality approaches proposed by the TQM gurus (Ka-thawala 1989)) linkages of TQM to an organizations strategic position (Madu and Kuei1993; Zairi 1993), practices of TQM in American firms (Kano 1993; Price and Chen1993), coverage of TQM in production or operations management textbooks (Tillery,Rutledge, and Inman 1993), and philosophical discussions of TQM (Robinson et al.199 1; Cole 1992; Singhal and Hayes 1992 ) .We can see that the major emphasis in published TQM research has been on conceptualarticles ( 107), followed by case studies (56 articles). This is consistent with the fact thatTQM has been recognized only recently by industries as a powerful competitive strategy(Madu and Kuei 1993 ). TQM is a long-term, on-going program with real payoffs accruingyears after its implementation (Krantz 1989; Erickson 1992). Therefore, the broad data-base necessary for empirical testing TQM theories is only beginning to be generated. Thisis reflected in empirical research being the topic of fewer (29) relatively recent articles.Least attention has been focused on the analytical modeling of the TQM process, withonly 6 of the 226 articles falling into this category (Table 3). One reason could be thecomplex interactions of technical and human processes at work at both micro- andmacro-levels of management.

4. Classification by FocusIn our initial stages of research, we considered three possible frameworks for categorizingthe existing TQM literature: International Organization for Standardization (ISO 9000-9004) standards, American National Standards Institute/American Society for QualityControl (ANSI/ASQC Q90 through 494) standards, and the Baldrige Award standard.The ISO and the ANSI/ASQC standards take the form of conformance instruments forexisting quality systems and are not as broad as the Baldrige Award standard to act as a

framework for the TQM field. For example, the Baldrige Award process addresses com-petitive factors such as customer and market focus, results orientation, and continuousimprovement either not addressed in the IS0 and ANSI/ASQC standards or addresseddifferently (see Reimann and Hertz 1993 in Appendix A). Therefore, we decided to usethe Baldrige Award standard as our basis for categorizing the literature.The Baldrige Award standard offers two possible frameworks for classifying TQM lit-erature: the 10 core values and concepts underpinning the Award, and the 7 award criteria.


6/30

282 SAN JAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHAREven though the core values and concepts constitute the underlying basis for integratingan organizations operational performance requirements with its customers needs andexpectations, they are not delineated objectively in the Baldrige Award standard. There-fore, interpreting the core values and concepts could lead to a biased categorization ofthe TQM literature. Nevertheless, the 10 core values and concepts are embodied in the 7criteria in the award framework: ( 1) leadership, (2) information and analysis, (3) strategicquality planning, (4) human resource development and management, (5 ) managementof process quality, (6) quality and operational results, and (7) customer focus and sat-isfaction. Furthermore, a total of 28 subcategories in the 7 award criteria permitted usto make an objective categorization of the existing TQM literature (Figure 1). Thus, wechose the award criteria framework to classify the literature we reviewed. The BaldrigeAward criteria were also used in A Report of The Quality Leadership Steering Committeeand Working Councils ( 1992) to examine the scope of TQM research. (This reference iscited in Appendix A.)With the exception of overview articles, each paper has a primary focus on one ormore aspects of TQM as defined by the Baldrige criteria. In addition to a primary focuson one or more of these seven areas, an author may deal with the remaining areas ofTQM at a less comprehensive level as secondary focus (Table 3). To ensure high-classi-fication reliability, each article was carefully reviewed by the three authors, first inde-pendently and then jointly, and a majority rule was used to finally classify the articles.Interestingly, after some initial disagreements, the authors started identifying the primaryand secondary foci of an article with increasing consistency and agreement. In AppendixB, we list the 226 TQM articles with their primary and secondary foci identified with theletter P or s.We present our analysis of the published research arranged by focus in the followingsection. We emphasize articles with a primary focus in respective areas to help researchersand practitioners easily identify relevant literature. While all reviewed articles contribute

Adapted from the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Criteria (1993)FIGURE 1. TQM Literature Review Framework.


7/30

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW 283uniquely to a particular field, for simplicity and clarity only a few pertinent articlesillustrating important developments in each area are cited. This analysis underpinnedour suggestions for future research in TQM .4.1 Leadership

Senior management acts as a driver of TQM implementation, establishing values, goals,and systems to satisfy customers needs and expectations and improve organizationalperformance. According to the Baldrige criteria, this category examines top managementsleadership and involvement in creating and sustaining a customer focus, while maintainingclear and visible quality values. We identified 37 articles with a leadership focus(Table 3).

The critical leadership role of top management was illustrated in several diverse or-ganizations including Philips, U.K. (Ham and Williams 1986)) Xerox, Inc., u .s .; (Ken-nedy 1989), and Dow-Corning Pty Ltd., Epping, Australia (Chapman, Clarke, and Sloan199 1). The authors concluded that senior executives must provide a vision of customerorientation, clear and visible quality values, and high performance expectations. Theyemphasized the importance of executive leadership while developing and sustaining thequality function, the quality mission, goals, and plans. Also, these authors asserted thatthrough their constant personal involvement, senior executives must reinforce qualityvalues in their organizations (Juran 198 la, 198 1b, 1993; Tregoe 1983; Longenecker andScazzero 1993 ) .The specific leadership roles needed by top management to improve an organizationsquality performance were delineated as ( 1) designer, (2) teacher, and (3 ) steward (Senge199 1). As a designer of an organizations vision, the top leader must define governingideas and set policies, strategies, and structures that translate these ideas into businessdecisions. Lascelles and Dale ( 1989b, 1990) found a paucity of recognition of this topmanagement role in the u .K. and stress the critical need for a change from the traditionaltransactional (reactive) style to a transformational (proactive) style of leadership. Stalk,Evans, and Schulman ( 1992) further underlined the importance of the designer role bydescribing CEOS as champions of their organizations: only as such could they ( 1) focusthe entire companys attention on developing capabilities to serve customers, (2) identifyand authorize the infrastructural investments on which strategic capabilities depend, and(3) insulate individual managers from any short-term penalties caused by long-termimprovements.As a teacher, the top leader must help employees realize their perceptions of the or-ganizations strategies and operations and orient them toward this vision. Ebrahimpour( 1985) recommended training and development for top management in enhancing qualityconsciousness and conveying commitment to quality. In other words, to be effectiveteachers, top executives must educate themselves.As a steward, the top leader must be committed to serving the organization, ratherthan assuming power. Top managements role as a steward for sustaining a quality culturein organizations was reflected in three case studies: Asahi, Japan Breweries Ltd. (Nakajoand Kono 1989)) Australian computer Manufacturers (Hames 199 I), and the Australianbanking industry (Dawson and Patrickson 199 1). From another perspective, Garvin( 1984) concluded from a survey that Japanese manufacturers produce better productswith more consistent quality using the principle of anything worth doing in the area ofquality is worth overdoing conveyed by top managers. Confirming the notion, Ebra-himpour ( 1985) observes a general lack of concern for quality in traditional Americancompanies because of lack of commitment by the top management.4.2 Information and Analysis

Fundamental to TQM is collecting relevant information from all phases of an organi-zations operations and using it to monitor and improve quality. With a view to improving


8/30

284 SANJA Y L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHARoperational and competitive performance, the Baldrige Award assesseshe scope, validity,analysis, management, and use of data and information. It places a major emphasis onthe adequacy, accuracy, and timeliness of key information relating operational perfor-mance with internal and external customer satisfaction. It recognizes the value of com-paring an organizations performance in various business processes with leading com-petitors and noncompetitors with similar operations. The importance of the expandedrole of information technology and information systems in integrating information frominside and outside (e.g., suppliers, customers, competitors) is also identified in this cat-egory. Of the 226 reviewed articles, 3 1 have a primary focus on information and analysis(Table 3 ) . Generally, these articles focus on four information issues: strategic importance,integration, use, and characteristics.Traditionally, information systems departments have viewed their role as compilersof financial data. However, in the context of TQM, information technology (hardware)and information systems (software) design must provide useful information to decisionmakers to improve an organizations performance. In other words, information man-agement must be viewed as a strategic weapon instead of a tactical function. Willborn( 1986) discussed the role of information technology as an aid to quality assurance. Riehl( 1988) presented a comprehensive strategy for applying innovative telecommunicationstechnology to enhance an organizations information-sharing ability. The strategic rele-vance of information systems was demonstrated by Wal-Marts decision to invest insatellite communication technology to achieve fast, accurate information disseminationas a means of surpassing K-Mart in pricing and market share (Stalk, Evans, Schulman1992). Babbar ( 1992) developed a dynamic model for incorporating continuous feedbackand input from customers into strategic quality planning for a facilities-based serviceorganization.

The integration of information within an organization has been examined at two levels:across an organization and within the manufacturing function. Chang ( 1989) and Ross( 199 1) presented processes for integrating quality information systems with market re-search, product design, product planning, process development, quality planning, andproduction operation planning. Similarly, Water and Vries ( 1992) developed an integratedinformation system to determine quality policies and help other functions set up andimplement quality plans. From a manufacturing perspective, Suresh and Meredith ( 1985),Savage and Tannock ( 1989 ), and Ashmore ( 1992 ) presented frameworks to incorporatequality-related information into the manufacturing functions of preproduction, produc-tion, and postproduction phases. Additionally, Karp and Ronen ( 1992) developed ananalytical model of the information needs for manufacturing systems based on infor-mation theory and entropy measurement and show that smaller lot-size production leadsto lesser information needs.Authors examined the use and analysis of information from several perspectives.Schneider ( 1992) discussed the role of the finance function in implementing TQM. Hesuggested that the finance function could contribute directly to TQM by ( 1) acting as apivotal source of information and analysis in benchmarking, (2) quantifying costs ofnonconformance to quality, (3) identifying nonvalue-added activities through activity-based accounting, and (4) participating in cross-functional quality action teams. Hosseiniand Fard ( 199 1) described the design, development, and implementation of a decision-support-system to store, categorize, and analyze quality characteristics of numerous com-ponents. Saraph, Benson, and Schroeder ( 1989) identified such major elements as thetimeliness of quality data, the extent to which quality data are used for supervisor andmanagerial performance review, and the availability of good quality data. From anotherperspective, Miller ( 1992) described an effort to obtain feedback on customers productperceptions in real time and to incorporate this continuous feedback into an informationsystem. Two major benefits of obtaining real-time data are reliable, objective information


9/30

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW 285on market and customer trends and the immediate availability and use of informationfor more efficient customer satisfaction. Finally, to enhance information usefulness, theimportance of timely, reliable, and adequate information has also been noted (Garvin1983; Ebrahimpour 1985; Savage and Tannock 1989; and Babbar 1992).4.3 Strategic Quality PlanningThe aim of TQM is to define product quality from the customers viewpoint. Organi-zations that can strategically plan and organize their resources are able to meet or exceedcustomers expectations. According to the Baldrige Award, this category assessesan or-ganizations planning process and its ability to integrate all key quality requirements intoovertill business plans. The major components of this assessment are the thoroughnessof strategy formulation (identifying the what and how of building competitive qualitystrength) and strategy deployment (translating the desired competitive quality strengthsinto activities such as human resource management, quality assurance in design andmanufacturing). We found 3 1 articles with a primary focus on strategic quality planning(Table 3).The most important step in strategy formulation is to find out what the customerexpects from the organization. Garvin ( 1987) defined quality along eight dimensions:performance, features, conformance, reliability, durability, serviceability, perceived qual-ity, and aesthetics. Each organization must assess ts capability to incorporate a subsetof these dimensions of quality into each product. Wheelwright ( 198 1) compared the roleof operations management in the overall strategy formulation in Japanese and U.S. or-ganizations. He concluded that the top management must focus on long-term planningof operations capabilities, including quality. Relegating responsibility for quality to atactical status renders it ineffective and hurts the organization in the long run. Juran( 1978) provided an overview of how the Japanese employ strategic quality planning toidentify precise customer needs. Market research, design review, model construction andtesting, and trial runs were the suggested steps for new product quality assurance. Hendrick( 1987) recommended an audit of the quality function throughout an organization beforelaunching a TQM initiative. Such an audit provides a benchmark of the current perfor-mance against which future improvements can be compared.

Translating identified customer needs into operational activities is a critical step instrategy deployment and requires an organization to establish effective infrastructure. Ina study of quality-related decision making in six British companies, Dale and Duncalf( 1985) observed that a more structured quality-oriented organization leads to more ef-fective efforts toward increased quality. Using approaches such as quality function de-ployment helps the organization translate customer needs into actions through variousfunctions such as design, manufacturing, and purchasing (Hauser and Clausing 1988).Organization for quality, in terms of functional responsibility, depends on the type ofproduct and business. The literature contains evidence of different structures and mech-anisms of good quality organization that have worked in diverse organizations (Fordand Coward 199 1; Dawson and Patrickson 199 1; Nakajo and Kono 1989). The inter-functional nature of strategic planning for quality is reflected in almost all the articles.Finally, only one author explicitly modeled the link between customer needs and pro-duction resource management ( Wacker 1989 ) .4.4 Human Resource Management

Human resource management is a key linkage in TQM and can be responsible forsignificant differences between the performances of organizations with similar technicalcapabilities. In this category, the Baldrige Award scrutinizes the process through whichthe workforce develops its potential for pursuing the organizations quality and operationalperformance objectives. The organizations efforts to build and maintain an environment


10/30

286 SANJAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHARconducive to full participation and personal and organizational growth are also examined.Accordingly, TQM demands that all aspects of human resource management (manpowerplanning, recruitment and staffing, training and development, performance appraisal,and rewards system management) assume strategic roles.

At the level of the individual, this should be reflected in qualified employees with asincere concern for good quality work, satisfied with the training, development, appraisal,and reward system, and willing to offer their best to the TQM implementation. At a grouplevel, the performance of quality improvement teams, task forces, quality circles, andother groupings becomes important. At a macro-level, an effective human resource man-agement policy will result in an organizational culture of cooperation, consensus, andparticipation. It will be reflected in well-coordinated, synergistic interactions of varioushuman components among one another to execute other systemic processes of TQM suchas quality assurance and customer satisfaction.Of the articles we reviewed, 60 have a primary focus on human resource managementissues. All but 1 of the 11 empirical studies were published after 1988, indicating a recentshift toward field research. Generally, the articles focus on ( 1) participative management,(2) quality control circles, and (3) two-way effects of TQM and human resource man-agement.

TQM authors discussed participative management from several perspectives. Oliver( 1988 ) reviewed the literature on the psychology of employee commitment. He identifiedfour contextual factors (explicitness of performance target, revocability of ones actions,consequent publicity, and volition of actions) affecting commitment to working in aparticipative environment and discusses how organization of work, performance mea-surement, and employee involvement groups affect the commitment to quality. Harber,Marriott, and Indrus ( 199 la) focused on the relationship between employee participation,employee satisfaction, and performance. They concluded that employee participation iscontingent upon demographic variables and employees level in the organizations hi-erarchy. Everett and Sohal ( 199 1) discussed the social and psychological dimension ofandon (the human aspect of jidoka or the stop-the-line decision ). They identified factorsresponsible for over- and underutilization of the andon system and contended that becauseandon empowers shop floor employees, it improves their morale. Sonfield ( 1984) stressedthe potential of participative human resource management to improve the effectivenessof small business operations. He recommended using a participative style of managementwith concern for employees, long-term employment, and long-term evaluation and pro-motion policies.

Two empirical studies examine participative management. Ebrahimpour and Withers( 1992 ) showed that firms using TQM have higher levels of worker involvement in qualityefforts and greater use of TQM tools than the nOri-TQM firms. However, they cautionedthat higher employee involvement by itself cannot account for better performance. Inanother study, Harber, Marriott, and Indrus ( 199 1b) concluded that training satisfactionincreases with TQM implementation; however, satisfaction toward recognition, promotion,pay, and work conditions decreases. Additionally, several articles identified training anddevelopment at all levels as the single strategy to improve quality and productivity (Juran198 la, 198 lb; Lee and Ebrahimpour 1985; Ebrahimpour 1985). However, none of theauthors provided details of an effective training and development strategy that facilitatesparticipative management.In another empirical study, Harber, Burgess, and Barchy ( 1993a) examined the outcomeof adopting and implementing TQM as a cultural intervention in a large electronics en-terprise. They found that TQM had a positive effect on an employees involvement in,commitment to, and perception of the organization. Additionally, Longenecker andScazzero ( 1993) examined the perceptions of the organizations quality improvementprocess. They found that when management (at all levels) failed to create a climate for


11/30


12/30

288 SAN JAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHARcontrol ( SPC) and the Taguchi method. The applications and mechanics of the Taguchimethod are presented by Taguchi and Clausing ( 1990). Additionally, Robinson andSchroeder ( 1990)) Stein ( 199 1 ), and Benton ( 199 1) discussed limitations of spc towardimproving quality and concluded that ( 1) SPC is useful only to monitor the quality ofconformance and recognizes only the internal costs of quality (e.g., scrap and rework)and (2) the Taguchi method assumes that any deviation from the targeted quality rep-resents a loss to the customer. However, they cited Taguchi methods complexity and itsdifficulty in quantifying the losses to society as its major limitation. Other quality tools[e.g., Shainin tools ( Bhote 1989 ), Poka- Yoke (Robinson and Schroeder 1990)] have notreceived as much coverage. Modarress and Ansari ( 1989) assessed the use of variousnonstatistical tools (cause and effect diagrams and checklists) and statistical techniques(scatter diagrams, frequency histograms, control charts, sampling inspection plans, cor-relation-regression, analysis of variance, and design of experiments) by more than 200u .s. manufacturing firms. They concluded that the potential for these techniques in allareas of business had not been adequately exploited. In another study, Ebrahimpour andWithers ( 1992) surveyed the SPC use by traditional American firms, American firmsusing Japanese quality techniques, and u .S .-based Japanese firms. They found a widedifference between the extent to which any of these techniques was used in traditionalAmerican firms as compared with the others. Finally, Newman ( 1988a, 1988b) andGiunipero and Brewer ( 1993) addressed the application of quality assurance activitiesto the procurement process.

Support functions such as marketing, finance, accounting, and research and develop-ment have with a fe w exceptions received less research attention. Schneider ( 1992) dis-cussed direct contributions of the finance function to TQM. Duncalf and Dale ( 1988)provided an analytical framework for identifying different management levels and func-tions in an organization, the type and frequency of quality-related information receivedand initiated by them, and their role in quality-related decision making. Wacker ( 1989)presented a comprehensive analytical model for performing cost-benefit analysis of variousquality improvement strategies in a manufacturing organization and outlined the roleof marketing and manufacturing in implementing these strategies.Several authors compared quality assurance approaches across various organizations.For example, Garvin ( 1986) compared Japanese with u .s. manufacturers to explain thedisparity in their quality performance. He concluded that as the quality performance ofan organization improves, the mix of quality problems and the quality-thinking frameworkalso changes and suggests that attempts by u .S . firms to mimic Japanese quality practiceswithout first adapting them to local conditions are unlikely to be completely successful.Additionally, Chen ( 199 1) surveyed quality functions and practices in Midwestern u .s.firms and noted differences in the types of problems faced by smaller firms implementingquality improvement compared to larger firms. Broad comparisons of the Japanese ap-proach to the traditional u .s. approach to quality management were presented by Hayes(1981), Schonberger (1982), Tregoe (1983), Ebrahimpour and Schonberger (1984),Ebrahimpour ( 1985), and Lee and Ebrahimpour ( 1985). The main conclusion of theseresearchers was that the traditional approach of quality management ( pre- 1980s) in u .s.firms was more inspection oriented, and quality was considered by the U.S. companiesas an operational or tactical issue. The Japanese, on the other hand, viewed qualitymanagement as a long-term strategy initiated, implemented, and monitored by top man-agement. Also, the various techniques for problem solving and quality design used bythe Japanese were recognized as crucial.4.6. Quality and Operational Results

The quality and operational results category encompasses monitoring and improvingquality performance based on objective measures of operational results. Within the criteria


13/30

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW 289of the Baldrige Award, a measurement of quality results is determined in four dimensions:( 1) product and service quality results, (2) company operational results, ( 3) businessprocess and support service results, and (4) supplier quality results. In the literature, theauthors of 15 articles dealt with quality results. Their primary concerns were ( 1) mea-surement of quality results, (2) quality results for specific firms, and (3) quality resultsacross organizations.Measurement of quality results is the primary focus of four papers. Reddy and Berger( 1983) suggested that world-class quality performance is the result of understanding thefactors that determine quality and product performance. Fortuin ( 1988) described thedesign of performance indicators for monitoring TQM progress and their implementationpitfalls. In a similar vein, Plunkett and Dale ( 1987) concluded that many of the modelsused to indicate the cost of quality are inaccurate and misleading. Finally, Collier ( 1992 )suggested that results alone are not enough within the context of total quality man-agement and that long-term achievement should also be measured.

In the quality results for specijicfirms category, Carr ( 1992 ) examined definitions forand measurements of the cost of quality as it applies to Xerox. Doran ( 1985) reportedon a quality improvement program and the resulting improvements at an IBM manu-facturing plant at Havant, U.K. Ham and Williams ( 1986) described the top managementleadership and employee involvement that resulted in operational improvements at PhilipsInternational.The authors of four papers compared the results of quality initiatives across dzjizrentorganizations. Fisher ( 1992) contrasted the quality and productivity improvements atfour Australian TQM companies. He found no significant improvements in the overallperformance of an organization. However, he reported improvements in internal andexternal quality factors and labor productivity. In a study of the chain saw industry,Chen ( 199 1) concluded that the cost of rework was ess for firms that invested in employeerecruitment, training, vendor management, quality management, capital, and measure-ment equipment. An investigation of British companies (automotive, chemical, computer,and finance sector) suggested that ineffective planning limits the quality of results fromTQM processes (Newall and Dale 199 1) . Finally, in an analysis of the automotive industry,Cole ( 1990) suggested that firms need to focus on improving the quality of every workprocess as measured by the needs of internal and external customers.4.7 Customer Focus and Satisfaction

Customer focus and satisfaction form the most heavily weighted category among theBaldrige Award criteria. It encompasses an organizations knowledge of its customers,overall customer service system, responsiveness, and ability to meet customer require-ments and expectations. Quality assurance activities must be driven by customers needsand expectations. If customers expectations are either identified incorrectly or misin-terpreted, the final product will not possess the desired qualities. Hence, considerablemarketing effort is needed to ensure that customers needs and expectations are correctlyidentified and met. However, because there are many dimensions to these expectations,it may be difficult to satisfy them all simultaneously. Therefore, organizations must focuson key dimensions that reflect customer needs. Once identified, needs must be translatedinto technical specifications. Next, product designs are transferred to manufacturing andservice delivery-both responsible for producing products or delivering services that de-light customers. The primary emphasis of the literature is on the translation of the needsand expectations into product design. A total of 33 articles had customer satisfaction asthe primary focus (Table 3). These articles dealt with ( 1) defining the customer, (2)translating customers needs and expectations, and (3) producing goods that satisfy cus-tomers.


14/30

290 SANJAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHARThe definition of customer was addressed in several reviewed papers (Sohal, Tay, andWirth 1989; Baum 1990; Feldman 199 1). These researchers extended the definition to

include employees as internal customers and suggested that such an extension wouldreduce departmental factionalism. Turney ( 199 1) recommends that customers be clas-sified as primary (direct) and secondary (indirect) users of products and services.The role of design engineering in TQM is translating customers needs and expectationsinto usable specifications and processes. Hauser and Clausing ( 1988) discussed the use

of a house of quality to help interdisciplinary management teams identify and translatethe product attributes (perceived important by the customers) into design priorities andproduction parameters. Similarly, Ham and Williams ( 1986)) Denton ( 199 1) and Miller( 1992) stressed the need to include customers needs and expectations in the process.Additionally, Lauglaug ( 1992) argued that research and development (R&D) personnelneed to take a more active role in what has traditionally been the domain of marketing.By doing so, R&D and marketing personnel can help their organization become moreeffective in translating customer needs. Shepetuk ( 199 1) noted an increasing demandfor new and improved products and suggested organizations use interdisciplinary designteams to determine customers needs and expectations so that they are included in thefinal product. Kristensen ( 1992) observed that production personnel should communicatedirectly with external customers to determine their needs and expectations to improveproduct quality and acceptance. To see if customers needs and expectations are addressedby producers of intermediate goods, Lascelles and Dale ( 1989a) examined customersatisfaction from the point of view of the buyer-seller relationship. Their conclusion wasthat buyers (customers) should review their purchase specifications, communicationlinkages, and organizational roles to ensure that suppliers have a thorough understandingof their expectations. However, the buyer and supplier have equal responsibility for clearcommunication of the buyers needs and expectations.Some of the authors recognize that customer satisfaction depends on meeting dynamicneeds and expectations. Because the dimensions of quality are dynamic from the cus-tomers viewpoint, Takeuchi and Quelch ( 1983) argued that even well-designed, defect-free products may not fit customers perception of high quality. To guarantee customersatisfaction, organizations must monitor changes in customers view of quality. Fur-thermore, customers needs and expectations are closely tied to the perceived value ofthe product. Zeithaml ( 1988) proposed a model suggesting a gap between actual priceof a product and its perceived value. Hence, the pricing of products should includecustomers nonmonetary costs (e.g., time and effort) to reduce their perceived monetarysacrifice. This will increase the perceived value of the product. Sasaki ( 1988) suggestedthat customers do not only buy the product but also buy its utility; and if customers aredissatisfied with the product or its utility, they do not repeat the purchase. Aly, Maytubby,and Elshennawy ( 1990)) while stressing the importance of designing products that meetcustomer expectations, argued that product design should not be subrogated to the needsof the design engineers when they develop specifications or processes.

5. Directions for Further ResearchOur review of contemporary TQM literature has led us to the conclusion that the

research has been unbalanced, tilting heavily toward concept development and prescriptivewriting (Table 3). Lately, a few published empirical studies have undertaken hypothesisgeneration and theory testing (Benson, Saraph, and Schroeder 199 1; Modarress andAnsari 1989; Harber, Marriott, and Indrus 199 1b; Snell and Dean 1992; Schroeder,Sakakibara, Flynn, and Flynn 1992; Roth and Miller 1992; Ebrahimpour and Withers1992). However, to transform TQM into a formal, rationally evaluated discipline, addi-tional empirical research in this direction is certainly required. One should not, of course,


15/30

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW 291underestimate the contribution of exploratory and situational research. Often, a casestudy identifies which aspects of TQM work in a given situation, but generalization of thefindings may not be possible. Hence, more balance between the two approaches shouldresult in the rapid maturation of the field. While there are opportunities for TQM researchin a variety of disciplines, it is our objective to concentrate on a research agenda for theoperations management community. We discuss the major research issues we identifiedas important but not adequately covered in the existing empirical literature. Althoughwe attempt to identify the relevant research issues, ours is not an all-inclusive list of TQMconcerns. For additional discussion of research issues, see the Summary of the NSFWorkshop on Quality and Organizational Transformation ( 1993) and A Report of theTotal Quality Leadership Steering Committee ( 1992) listed in Appendix A.5.1 Research in the Seven Categories of the Baldrige Award

Existing TQM literature lacks an in-depth examination of issues related to the sevenBaldrige Award categories. For example, the authors of most articles in the leadershipcategory have generalized the leadership role and did not take into account either theeffect of organizational context and the environment on the leadership role or the con-sequent variations in effectiveness of leadership styles. Again, for consistency, we use theframework of the seven Baldrige criteria to present our suggestions. The Baldrige criteriahave been suggested by a leading research group for setting research agenda (A Reportof the Total Quality Leadership Steering Committee 1992 cited in Appendix A).

5.1.1 LEADERSHIP.l Analysis of leadership elements required of the functional managers in TQM orga-nizations. Analysis of the relative importance and interactions of the three roles of a top manager,

namely, interpersonal (figurehead, leader, liaison), informational (monitor, dissem-inator, spokesperson ) , and decisional (entrepreneur, disturbance handler, resourceallocator, negotiator) across various TQM firms and across industriesl Measurement of top management commitment and involvement5.1.2 INFORMATIONANDANALYSISl Structural changes in information management function to enhance its contribution

tOTQM. Interactions of the information management function with other functional areas(e.g., design, production, marketing)l Impact of factors such as organizational size, complexity, industry type, and existinginformation management structure on appropriate benchmarking strategiesl Application of quantitative and qualitative techniques to select processes to be

benchmarked5.1.3 STRATEGICQUALITYPLANNINGl Linkage between corporate level strategy and quality strategyl Role of functional managers in formulating and executing the quality strategyl Use of various decision analysis techniques to improve effectiveness of the qualitystrategy formulation processl Interfhm and interindustry comparisons of approaches to quality strategy formulationand execution5.1.4 HUMANRESOURCEMANAGEMENTl Impact Of TQM on planning and executing such human resource management func-tions as staffing, recruiting, training, appraisal, and compensation; and vice versal Contingency models to assess he impact of contextual factors like organizationalsize, complexity, and technology on the effectiveness of human resource management

strategies in a TQM environment


16/30

292 SANJAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y.GOLHARl Impact of TQM on roles and responsibilities of different levels of management (forexample, middle managers and supervisors in manufacturing firms)l Factors influencing the effectiveness of quality groups5.1.5 MANAGEMENTOFPROCESSQUALITYl Quality assurance of postproduction operations and their interactions with the pre-production and production phasesl Role of support functions (marketing, finance, R&D) in TQM implementation andquality assurance in these functionsl Relationship between TQM system components and actual product qualityl Dynamic planning and execution of interfunctional TQM strategies5.1.6 QUALITYANDOPERATIONALRESULTSl Customer-supplier linkages in new product developmentl Organizational and environmental determinants of effective design and innovationl Measurement of quality performance and comparison along various dimensionssuch as firms own past performance and performance with benchmarksl Linkage between quality results and overall business resultsl Time lag between the implementation of quality strategies and the realization ofquality resultsl Impact of dynamic factors (e.g., organizational size, technology, industry forces) on

OVerall TQM effeCtiVeneSS5.1.7 CUSTOMERFOCUSANDSATISFACTIONl Roles of, and interactions among, different functions in identifying customer needsand translating them into operational plansl Factors (internal and external) determining an organizations effectiveness in iden-tifying and translating customer needs into operational strategies

5.2 Integrated ModelTQM, as an interdisciplinary field, draws heavily from developments in diverse fields

such as operations management, organizational behavior, human resource managementand marketing. However, only the three case studies of Newall and Dale ( 199 1)) Hamand Williams ( 1986 ) , and Doran ( 1985 ) included a discussion of six of the seven Baldrigecriteria; none examined all seven criteria together. Hence, to provide a holistic frameworkfor TQM implementation, an attempt should be made to examine all seven categoriesjointly. This would require empirical research identifying items associated with the sevencategories and investigating specific linkages between them (e.g., quality assurance andhuman resource management). Greater understanding of the interdependence amongthe strategies will help practitioners and researchers identify the ones that are critical forsuccessful TQM implementation.5.3 Measures of Efectiveness

Evaluation of quality efforts in an organization should be an ongoing process. Thusfar, only one empirical study has resulted in instruments for measuring the effectivenessof TQM constructs ( Saraph, Benson, and Schroeder 1989 ) . Furthermore, these researchersdid not identify all the important constructs. Hence, to monitor the progress of qualitymanagement strategies, the elements of critical measures of performance should be iden-tified and operationalized. Further, it is important to know how the various TQM strategiesimpact the quality of the goods and services provided. Moreover, the relationship betweenthe TQM strategies and traditional measures of an organizations performance (e.g., earn-ings per share, stock price, and return on investment) should be examined.


17/30

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW 2935.4 Environmental Related Issues

The impact of variables such as organizational size, technological change, and cultureon the effectiveness Of TQM strategies needs to be explored. Benson, Saraph, and Schroeder( 199 1) presented one of the first attempts to examine the impact of organizational sizeand culture on TQM implementation. An international comparison study of TQM im-plementation should explore corporate culture issues. It is also important to examinethe strategies identified by firms to manage and incorporate technological changes in theTQM environment.Considering the diversity of the TQM strategies and the interdependence among them,the research agenda will be well served by interdisciplinary research teams. For example,customer satisfaction has long been considered the domain of marketing. However, theTQM philosophy requires an interdisciplinary approach, linking marketing with design,production planning, production, and distribution to delight customers. Also, as pointedout by the industry leaders and academicians, it is equally important for the businesscommunity and academia to work together and learn from each other when exploringthese issues (Robinson et al. 199 1; Singhal and Hayes 1992).

6. ConclusionThe purpose of our research was to provide a topology of the TQM literature andidentify directions for future research. We achieved our goals through a rigorous exam-.ination of the TQM literature that identified 226 refereed articles. We used a two-dimen-sional scheme to classify the articles: article orientation and article focus as defined by

the Baldrige Criteria. We organized this diverse body of literature by article orientationand primary and secondary research foci (Appendix B). We presented a synthesis ofpertinent published articles for each category of the Baldrige criteria.The review, classification, and analysis of the existing TQM literature we present showsthat until recently the primary focus has been on conceptual, practitioner-oriented, do-everything-right types of articles and case studies. Only recently have a few large-scaledata-based research articles been published. For TQM to grow into a formal field of study,a proper balance must be struck between conceptual research and case studies on onehand and empirical and analytical research on the other. Hence, the research focus shouldshift toward more realistic effectiveness testing of many strategies in a multitude of settings.The framework for classification and analysis we used will be useful for monitoringthe progress of research into each aspect of TQM. Further work on the research agendawe identified will expedite the creation of a much needed theoretical base for TQM andtransform it into a rationally developed and evaluated formal discipline; thus successfullymeeting the challenge given it by industry leaders (Robinson et al. 199 1) .

The authors thank Professor Harry V. Roberts (University of Chicago), four anonymous reviewers, andProfessor David J. Flanagan (Western Michigan University) for their comments and recommendations.

Appendix A. Illustrative List o f TQM Books and MonographsA Report of The Tota l Quality Leadership Steering Committee and Working Coun cils ( 1992), The Proctor &

Gamble, Cincinnati, OH.BARKE R, T. B. (1985), Quality By Experimental Design, Mercer Dekkner, New York.BERRY, T. H. (199 I), Managing The Total Quality Transformation, McGraw-Hill, New York.CAMP, R. C. (1989), Benchmarking The Search For Industry Best Practic es That Lead To Superior

Performance, ASQC, Quality Press, Milwaukee, WS.CIAMPA , D. (1988), Manufacturing New Mandate, John Wiley & Sons, New York.DEMING, W. E. (1986), Out of Cri sis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Advanced

Engineering Study, Cambridge, MA.


18/30

294 SANJAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHARF!ZIGENBAUM, A. V. (199 I), Tota l Quality Control, McGraw-Hill, New York.FLOOD, R. L. (1993), Beyond TQM, John Wiley & Sons, New York.FUNK, JEFFREY L. (1992), The Teamwork Advantage; An Inside Look At Japanese Product and Technology

Development, Productivity Press, Norwalk, MA.GEOR GE, S. AND A. WEIMERSKIRCH (1994), Tota l Quality Management; Strategies and Tech niques Proven

at Todays Most Successful Companies, John Wiley & Sons, New York.G ITLO W , H. S. AND S. J. G ITLO W (1987), The Deming Guide to Quality and Competitive Position , Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cl if fs , NJ.GOETSC H, D. L. AND S. DAVIS (1994), Introduction to Tota l Quality, Merrill, New York.JOHANSSON, H., P. MUHUGH, A. J. PENDLEBURY AND W. A. WHEELER III (1993), Business Process

Reengineering, John Wiley & Sons, New York.JURAN, J. M. AND F. M. GRYNA (1993), Quality Planning and Analys is, McGraw-Hill, New York.Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (1993) National Institute of Standards and Technology,Gaithersburg, MD.Mitra, A. (1993), Fundamentals ofQuality Control and Improvements, MacMillan, New York.MOEN, R. D., T. W. NOLAN AND L. P. PROVOST (199 l), Improving Quality Through Planned

Experimentation, McGraw-Hill, New York.OMACHONU, V. K. AND J. E. Ross (1994), Principles ofTotal Quality, St. Lucie Press, Delmy

Beach, FL.PAUL, GABRIEL A. (1987), Quality Proces s Management, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cl if fs , NJ.REIMANN, C. W. AND H. S. HERT Z (1993) The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award and IS0 9000

Registration: Understanding Their Many Important D@rences, National Institute of Standards andTechnology, Washington, DC.

ROSS, J. E. (1993) Total Quality Management; Text, Cases and Readings, St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL.SASHKIN, M. AND K. J. KISER (1993), Putti n! Total Quality Management To Work, Berrett-Koehler, San

Francisco, CA.SHIBA, S., A. GRAHAM AND D. WALDEN (1993), A New American TQM, Four Practic al Revolutions in

Management, Productivity Press, Portland OR.Summary of the NSF Workshop on Quality and Organizational Transformation (1993), National Science

Foundation, Washington DC.TAGUCH I, G., E. A. ELSAYED AND T . HSIANG (1989), Quality Engineering in Production Systems, McGraw-Hill, New York.TENNER, A. R. AND I. J. DETORO (1992), To tal Quality Management, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.WOLLSCHLAEGER, L. J. (1991), The Quality Promise, Marcel Dekker, New York.

Appendix B. TQM Article s by Orientation and Primary (P) and Secondary (s) FociFocus*

Author(s) Orientationt L I&.4 SQP HRM MPQ QOR CFSAbernathy, Clark, andKantrow 198 1Aggarwal 1993Aldridge, Taylor, and Dale

1991Aleo 1992Allen and Oakland 1988Allen and Oakland 199 aAllen and Oakland 199 1bAly, Maytubby, andElishennawy 1990Arinze and Sylla 1990Ashmore 1992Ashton and Cook 1989Axline 199 1Babbar 1992Bamett 199 1Baum 1990Becker 1993Belohlav 1993Benson, Saraph, andSchroeder 199 1

C0

cscsEcs PE

C SCCcs SC PC PCcs S0cs

E S

PPP

SP

PSS

P

P

P

P

SP

PS

P

P

S

P

P

P P


19/30

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: LITERATURE REVIEWAppendix B. (Co&d)

Focus*

295

Author(s) Orientationt L I&A SQP HRM MPQ QOR CFSBenton 199 1Berry, Zeithaml, andParasuraman 1985Berry, Zeithaml, andParasuraman 1988Bhote 1989Bognossian 1988Bolwijn and Kumpe 1990Bullington and Bullington1991Bushe 1988Butman 1992Buxey 1991Carman 1993Carr 1992Carson and Carson 1993Chang 1989Chang and Lin 199 1Chapman, Clarke, and Sloan

1991Cheema, Griffiths, and Towill1991Chen 1991Chen 1992Chen and Tang 1992Chevalier 199 1Cieri, Samson, and Sohal1991Cole 1980Cole 1990Cole 1992Cole, Bacdayan, and White

1993Collier 1992Cornick and Barre 199 1Dale and Duncalf 1985Dale and Lees 1985Dawson and Patrickson 199 IDenton 1991Deshpande, Dusting, and

Younger 1986Dooyoung and Min 1993Doran 1985Draaijer 1992Drayton 199 1Duncalf and Dale 1988Durity 1991Easton 1993Ebrahimpour 1985Ebrahimpour 1988Ebrahimpour and Lee 1988Ebrahimpour andSchonberger 1984Ebrahimpour and Withers1992Eldred 1991Erickson 1992

C

C

ECCC

CcscscscscsCCC

cs

cscsECE

csCC0

CCCcsEcscs

ECcscs0cs000csE

C

EcsC

P

P

P

P

S

S

S

PS

P

PP

P

PP

S

PP

PS

S

P

S

PP

PS

PS

P S

S

S

P

P

P

P

PP

P

PP

SSP

S

SS

S

PSS

P

P

P

PPPP

PP

P

PPP

P

P

PP

P

PPSP

P

PP

P

P

P

P

SPP

SS S

P

P

P S

S S

S P

P SP P

P


20/30

296 SANJAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHAR

Appendix B. (Co&f)Focus*

Author(s) Orientation? L I& A SQP HRM MPQ QOR CFSEttorre 1993Everett and Sohal 199 1Fah 1988Feiring 1993Feldman 199 1Ferdows and Demeyer 1990Fine 1986Fisher 1992Flohr 1974Flynn 1992Ford and Coward 199 1Fortuin 1988Fuld 1992Furukawa, Ikeshoji, andIshizuchi 1982Garvin 1983Garvin 1984Garvin 1986Garvin 1987Garvin 1991Garvin 1993Giltow and Hertz 1983Giunipero and Brewer 1993Griffin 1988Ham and Williams 1986Hames 199 IHammons 1992Handfield 1989Hannah 1987Harari 1993aHarari 1993bHarari 1993~Harari 1993dHa&r, Marriott, and Indrus1991aHa&r, Marriott, and Indrus1991bHa&r, Burgess, and Barclay1993aHarber, Burgess, and Barclay1993bHardaker and Ward 1987Harmon 1988Hart, Schlesinger, and Maher1992Hauser and Clausing 1988Hayes 198 1Heath 1989Heiko 1989Hendrick 1987Hosseini and Fard 199 1Hostage 1975Hsing-Wei and Tosirisuk1991Huckett 1985

CCcsCCEAcsCS0CSCC

ACEEC0csCCEcscscs0CC0CC

C

E

E

CcsC

CCCcsCCcscs

Ccs

S

SPS

PP

S

SSP

S

P

P

P

P P

SP

P S

PSP

S

PP

PP

PP

PSP

S

S

PPPP

S

P

P

P

PPS

S

PP

SP

P

PPP

PPS

P

P P P

P SP

PP

S

S

P

P PP PP

P

PS

PP S


21/30

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: LITERATURE REVIEWAppendix B. (Conrd)

Focus*

297

Author(s) Orientation-f L I& A SQf HRM MPQ QOR CFSInstone and Dale 1989Ishikure 1988Juran 1978Juran 198laJuran 198lbJuran 1993Kano 1993Karp and Ronen 1992Kathawala 1989Kennedy 1989KIauss and Wolter 1990Knight, Beningfield, and

Kizzort 1987Knorr and Thiese 199 1Kolesar 1993Kordupleski, Rust, andZahorik 1993Kowalski and Walley 1993Krantz 1989Kristensen 1992Kumar and Gupta 1993Lascelles and Dale 1988Lascelles and Dale 1989aLascelles and Dale 1989bLascelles and Dale 1990Lauglaug 1992Laza and Wheaton 1990Lee and Ebrahimpour 1985Leonard and Sasser 1982Lewis 1992Lin 1991Longenecker and Scazzero

1993Maani 1989Mabert 1992Madu and Kuei 1993Magrath 1992Marquardt 1992McCarthy and Eishennawy1991Mears 1993Melcher, Acar, Dument, andKhouja 1990Miller 1992Modarress and Ansari 1987Modarress and Ansari 1989Modarress and Ansari 1990Myers and Ashkenas 1993Nakajo and Kono 1989New 1992Newall and Dale 199 1Newman 1988aNewman 1988bNiven 1993Nosow 1981Oliver 1988Peak 1993

cscsCCCC0A0cscs

SCcs

CEcsEcs0EEcsC0CEEC

ECC0C0

0C

CcsCEcsCcsCaCCcsCCC

PS

PPP

P

SPP

S

S

PP

SS

P

P

PP

SSS

S

S

P

S

S

P

S

P

P

P

SPPPP

SP

S

SP

PS

PPS

P

P

SPP

S

P

PS

PPP

P

PPP

PPP

PS

S

PPP

SPPPP

S

SS S

S

S

SS

S

P

P

S SP

S

PS

P


22/30

298 SANJAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHAR

Appendix B. (Contd)Focus*

Author(s) Orientationt L I&n SQP HRM MPQ QOR CFSPerkins and Perry 1992Pignatiello 1988Plunkett and Dale 1987Plunkett and Dale 1988Price and Chen 1993Quigley and McNamara 1992Rayner 1992Reddy and Berger 1983Rehder and Ralston 1984Richmond and Blackstone1988Riehl 1988Rienzo I993Robinson and Schroeder

1990Robinson et al. 199 1Ross 1991Ross and Shetty 1985Roth and Miller I992Safford, Gobell, and Suen1990Saraph, Benson, andSchroeder 1989Sasaki 1984Sasaki 1988Saunders and Walker 199 1Savage and Tannock 1989Schneider 1992Schonberger 1982Schonberger 1983Schroeder, Sakakibara, Flynn,and Flynn I992Scott 1981Senge 1990Shepetuk 199 1Shetty 1988Showalter and Mulholand1992Singhal and Hayes 1992Sloan 1992Snell and Dean I992Sohal, Tay, and Wirth 1989Sonfield 1984Sparks 1990Sriraman, Tosirisuk, and Chu

1990Stalk, Evans, and Schulman1992Stein 1991Suresh and Meredith 1985Sylla 1988Taguchi and Clausing 1990Takei 1986Takeuchi 198 1Takeuchi and Quelch 1983Tillery and Rutledge 199 1

CSA0C0C0CC

CCa

C0CEE

C

ECCCCCCCS

ECCCC

00CEcsCC

C

CCCCCcsCCC

S

P

P

S

PP

P

P

S

P

S

S

S P

S

S

S

PP

PP

P

SP

PP

P SP S

PPPS

SS

P

P

P S

PP

P P

P

P PP S

P S

P

P

PP S

P S

PP

P

PP

P

PPS

P

P S P

P

P

PP S

P SP S

S PP S


23/30

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW 299Appendix B. (Confd)

Focus*Author(s) Orientation? L I&A SQP HRM MPQ QOR CFS

Tillery, Rutledge, and Inman1993Tosirisuk 1990Toth 1993Tregoe 1983Tumey 1991Water and Vries 1992Voss 1992Wacker 1989Wheelwright I98 1Wilkinson and Witcher 1992Willbom 1986Zairi 1993Zeithaml 1988

0AcsCCCaAC0C0C

P SP SP S P P P

P S P PP P PPP S P

P* L, leadership; I&A, information and analysis; SQP,strategic quality planning; HRM, human resource man-

agement; MPQ, management of process quality; QOR, quality and operational results; CFS,customer focus andsatisfaction.t 0, overview; c, conceptual; cs, case study; E, empirical; A, analytical; S, simulation.

ReferencesABERNATHY, W. J ., K. B. CLARK, AND A. M. KANTROW ( 198 I ), The New Industrial Competition, Harvard

Busi ness Review, 59, 5, 68-8 1.AGGARWAL, S. (1993), A Quick Guide to Total Quality Management, Bus iness Horizons, 36, 3, 66-68.ALDRIDGE, J. R., J. TAYLOR, AND B. G. DALE ( 1991), The Application of Failure Mode and EffectsAnalysisat an Automotive Components Manufacturer, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Man-

agement, 8, 3, 45-56.ALEO, J. P. ( 1992), Redefining the Manufacturer-Supplier Relationship, Journal of Busin ess Strategy, 13,5, 10-14.ALLEN, N. AND J. S. OAKLAND ( 1988), Quality Assurance in the Textile Industry: Part I, InternationalJournal of Quality and Reliability Management, 5, 5, 25-31.

-AND - ( 1991a), Quality Assurance in the Textile Industry: Part II, International Journal ofQuality and Reliability Management, 8, 1,22-30.- AND - ( 199 1b), Quality Assurance in the Textile Industry: Part III , International Journal ofQuality and Reliability Management, 8, 2,9-20.

ALY, N. A., V. J. MAYTUBBY, AND A. K. ELSHENNAWY (1990), Total Quality Management: An Approachand A Case Study, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 19, 1 & 4, 11 -1 16.ARINZE, B. AND C. SYLLA ( 1990), Information Derivability Analysis for Quality Assurance InformationManagement Systems, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 19, 1 & 4, 249-253.ASHMORE, G. M. ( 1992), Better Information Means Better Quality, Journal of Busin ess Strategy, 13, 1, 57-60.

ASHTON, J. E. AND F. X. COOK, JR. ( 1989), Time to Reform Job Shop Manufacturing, Harvard BusinessReview, 67, 2, 106-I 11.AXLINE, L. L. ( 199 1 , TQM: A Look in the Mirror, Management Review, 80, 7, 64.BABBAR, S. ( 1992), A Dynamic Model for Continuous Improvement in the Management of Service Quality,International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 12; 2, 38-48.BARNETT, N. S. ( 1991), Management and Statistical Issues Affecting Quality Improvements in Australia,International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 8, 5,9-13.BAUM, H. M. ( 1990), White-Collar Quality Comes of Age, Journal of Bus iness Strategy, 11, 2, 34-37.

BECKER,S. W. ( 1993), TQM Does Work: Ten Reasons Why Misguided Attempts Fail,Management Review,82, 5, 30-33.BELOHLAV, J. A. ( 1993), Quality, Strategy, and Competitiveness, California Management Review, 35, 3,55-67.BENSON, P. G., J . V. SARAPH, AND R. G. SCHROEDER 1991), The Effects of Organizational Context onQuality Management: An Empirical Investigation, Management Scien ce, 37, 9, 1107-l 124.


24/30

300 SANJAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHARBENTON, W. C. ( 1991), Statistical Process Control and the Taguchi Method: A Comparative Evaluation,

International Journal of Production Research, 29, 9, I76 I - 1110.BERRY, L. L., V. A. ZEITHAML, AND A. PARASURAMAN ( 1985), Quality Counts in Services Too, BusinessHorizons, 21, 3, 45-46.- -,AND - ( 1988), The Service Quality Puzzle, Business Horizons, 31, 5, 35-43.

BHOTE,K. R. ( 1989), Americas Quality Health Diagnosis: Strong Heart, Weak Head, Management Review,18, 5, 34-38.BOGNOSSIAN,F. H. ( 1988), Build Quality In: Dont Inspect It, SAMAdvanced Management Journal, 53, 4,44-41.BOLWIJN,P. T. AND T. KUMPE ( 1990), Manufacturing in the 199Os-Productivity, Flexibility and Innovation,Long-Range Planning, 23,4,44-51.

BULLINGTON, K. E. AND S. F. BULLINGTON ( 1991), Working Towards World-Class Manufacturing Prior toTop Management Commitment, Production and Inventory Management Journal, 32, 3, 3 -34.BUSHE, G. R. ( 1988), Cultural Contradictions of Statistical Process Control In American ManufacturingOrganizations, Journal of Management, 14, I, 19-3 1.BUTMAN, J. ( 1992), Quality Comes Full Circle, Management Review, 81, 2, 49-51.BUXEY, G. ( 199 1 ), The Nexus Between CAD-CAM and Quality, International Journal of Operations andProduction Management, I 1, 10, 19-32.CARMAN, J. M. ( 1993), Continuous Quality Improvement as a Survival Strategy: The Southern Pacific Ex-perience, California Management Review, 35, 3, 118-132.CARR, L. P. ( 1992), Applying Cost of Quality to a Service Business, Sloan Management Review, 33, 4,12-

II.CARSON,P. P. AND K. D. CARSON 1993), Deming versusTraditional Management Theorists on Goal Setting:Can Both Be right? Business Horizons, 36, 5,19-84.CHANG, C. ( 1989), Quality Function Deployment (QFD) Processes n an Integrated Quality Information

System, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 1 , I & 4, 3 1 -3 16.- AND J. T. LIN ( 199 1 ), Data Flow Model of a Total Service Quality Management System, Computersand Industrial Engineering, 2 1, 1 & 4, 1 I - 12 I.

CHAPMAN, R. L., P. CLARKE, AND T. SLOAN ( 199I), TQM in Continuous-Process Manufacturing: Dow-Corning (Australia) Pty Ltd. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 8, 5, ll-90 .CHEEMA, P. S., A. J . GRIFFITHS, AND D. R. TOWILL ( 1991), A Review of the Cast Iron Foundry Industryand Future: Part 2-The Way Forward, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management,8, 1, 46-55.

C&EN, F. ( 1991), Quality Management in the Chain Saw Industry: A Case Study, International Journal ofQuality and Reliability Management, 8, 1, 3 I-39.- ( 1992), Survey of Quality in Western Michigan Firms, International Journal of Quality and ReliabilityManagement, 9,4,46-52.

CHEN, Y. S. AND K. TANG ( 1992), A Pictorial Approach To Poor-Quality Cost Management, IEEE Trans-actions on Engineering Management, 39, 2, 149-I 51.CHEVALIER, F. ( 1991), From Quality Circles to Total Quality, International Journal of Quality and Reliability

Management, 8, 4, 9-24.CIERI,D. H., D. A. SAMSON,AND A. S. SOHAL ( 199 I ), Implementation ofTQM in an Australian ManufacturingCompany, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 8, 5, 55-65.COLE, R. E. ( 1980), Learning from the Japanese: Prospects and Pitfalls, Management R,eview, 69,9,22-g.

- ( 1990)) U.S. Quality Improvement in the Auto Industry: Close but No Cigar, California ManagementReview, 32, 4, 71-85.- ( 1992)) The Quality Revolution, Production and Operations Management, 1, 1, 118- 120.

- P. BACDAYAN, AND B. J. WHITE ( 1993), Quality, Participation, and Competitiveness, CalSforniakanagement Review, 35, 3, 68-8 1.COLLIER, D. A. ( 1992), Service Please: The Malcom Baldridge National Quality Award, Business Horizons,35, 4, 88-95.CORNICK, T. C. AND N. J. BARRE ( 199I), Quality Management and Design-Build: The Opportunities forThis Method of Procurement, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 8, 3, ll-20.

DALE, B. G. AND A. J. DUNCALF ( 1985), Quality-Related Decision Making: A Study in Six British Companies,International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 5, I, 15-25.-AND J. LEES ( 1985), Factors Which Influence the Successof Quality Circle Programmes in the UnitedKingdom, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 5,4,43-54.

DAWSON, P. AND M. PATRICKSON ( I99 1 , Total Quality Management in Australian Baking Industry, In-ternational Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 8, 5, 66-16.


25/30

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW 301DENTON, D. K. ( I99 I), Lessons on Competitiveness: Motorolas Approach, Production and Inventory Man-

agement Journal, 32, 3,22-25.DESHPANDE,A. B., F. P. J. DUSTING, AND A. YOUNGER 1986), A Co-Operative Quality Management Systemfor Small Companies, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 3, 1, 38-41.DOOYOUNG, S. AND H. MIN ( 1993), A Line-Stop Strategy For The Just-In-Time/Total Quality ControlProduction System, Production and Inventory Management Journal, 34, 2, 43-41.

DORAN, P. K. ( 1985), A Total Quality Improvement Programme, International Journal of Quality andReliability Management, 2, 3, 18-36.DRAAIJER, D. J. ( 1992);Market Orientedness of Improvement Programmes in Manufacturing: Results fromField Study Research, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 12, 7 & 8,24-40.DRAYTON, K. G. ( 199 I ) , Are You Ready to Apply for the Award? Management Review, 80, 11,40-43.DUNCALF, A. J. AND B. G. DALE ( 1988), Quality Management Effectiveness-An Analytical Approach,International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 8, 5, 3-45.DURITY, A. ( 1991), Everyones a Winner in the Baldrige Stakes, Management Review, 80, 11, 36-39.EASTON, G. S. ( 1993), The 1993 State of U.S. Total Quality Management: A Baldrige Examiners Perspective,California Management Review, 35, 3, 32-54.EBRAHIMPOUR,M. ( 1985), An Examination ofQuality Management in Japan: Implications for Managementin the United States, Journal of Operations Management, 5, 4, 4 19-43 I.- ( 1988), An Empirical Study of American and Japanese Approaches to Quality Management in theUnited States, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 5, 5, 5-24.- AND S. M. LEE ( 1988), Quality Management Practices of American and Japanese Electronic Firmsin the United States, Production and Inventory Management Journal, 29, 4, 28-3 1.

- AND R. J. SCHONBERGER 1984), Japanese Just-In-Time/Total Quality Control Production System:Potential for Developing Countries, International Journal of Production Research, 22, 3, 42 l-430.~ AND B. E. WITHERS ( 1992), Employee Involvement in Quality Improvement: A Comparison ofAmerican and Japanese Manufacturing Firms Operating in the U.S., IEEE Transactions on EngineeringManagement, 39,2, 142-148.ELDRED, W. A. ( 1991), A Proposed Approach to Computer-Supported TQM in Maintenance Work Inductionand Accomplishment, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 2 1, 1-4, 123- 121.ERICKSON,T. J. ( 1992), Beyond TQM: Creating the High Performance Business, Management Review, 8 1,I, 58-61.ETTORRE, B. ( 1993), Benchmarking: The Next Generation, Management Review, 82, 6, 10-16.EVERETT, R. J. AND A. S. SOHAL ( 1991), Individual Involvement and Intervention in Quality ImprovementProgrammes: Using the Andon System, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management,

8,2, 21-34.FAH, C. T. ( 1988), A Total Quality Control Prognw fa> Da&p Malaysia: The Key Issues, International..%xrrnal f Quak~and~iieliability Management, 5, 4, l-16.FEIRING, B. R. ( 1993), A Ten-Step Approach to Constant Quality Improvement, International Journal ofQuality and Reliability Management, 10, 8, 66-14.FELDMAN, S. ( I99 1) , Keeping the Customer Satisfied-Inside and Out, Management Review, 80, 11, 58-

60.FERDOWS,K. AND A. DEMEYER ( 1990), Lasting Improvements in Manufacturing Performance: In Search ofa New Theory, Journal of Operations Management, 9, 2, 168- 183.FINE, C. H. ( 1986), Quality Improvement and Learning in Productive Systems, Management Science, 32,

10,1301-1315.FISHER,T. J. ( 1992), The Impact of Quality Management on Productivity, International Journal of Qualityand Reliability Management, 9, 3, 44-52.FLOHR, J. R. ( 1974), In Total Quality Assurance, Training is Vital, Management Review, 63, 6, 25-31.

FLYNN, B. B. ( 1992), Managing for Quality in the US and in Japan, Interfaces, 22, 5, 69-80.FORD, I. M. AND D. G. COWARD ( 199 I), The Lucas Approach to Facilitating Total Quality, InternationalJournal of Quality and Reliability Management, 8, 3, 7- 16.FORTUIN, L. ( 1988), Performance Indicators-Why, Where and How ? European Journal of OperationsResearch, 34, 1, l-9.FULD, L. M. ( 1992), Achieving Total Quality Through Intelligence, Long-Range Planning, 25, 1, 109-15.FIJRUKAWA, O., H. IKESHOJI,AND H. ISHIZUCHI ( 1982), A Theoretical Study on Configurations of QualityControl Systems, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 29, 4, 128- 134.GARVIN, D. A. ( 1983), Quality On the Line, Harvard Business Review, 61, 5, 64-75.- ( 1984)) Japanese Quality Management, Columbia Journal of World Business, 19, 3, 3- 12.- ( 1986), Quality Problems, Policies, and Attitudes in the United States and Japan: An ExploratoryStudy, Academy of Management Journal, 29, 4, 653-673.- ( 1987), Competing on the Eight Dimensions of Quality, Harvard Business Review, 65,6, 101-109.


26/30

302 SANJAY L. AHIRE, ROBERT LANDEROS, AND DAMODAR Y. GOLHAR- ( 1991), How the Baldridge Award Really Works, Harvard Business Review, 69, 6, 80-95.- ( 1993), Building a Learning Organization, Harvard Business Review, 7 1, 4, 78-9 1.GILTOW, H. AND P. HERTZ ( 1983), Product Defects and Productivity, Harvard Business Review, 61, 5,131-141.GIUNIPERO, L. C. AND D. J . BREWER 1993), Performance Based Evaluation Systems Under Total QualityManagement, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 29, 1, 35-4 1.GRIFFIN, R. ( 1988), Consequences of Quality Circles in an Industrial Setting: A Longitudinal Assessment,Academy of Management Journal, 3 1,2, 338-58.HAM, K. V. AND R. WILLIAMS ( 1986), The Quest for Quality at Philips, Long-Range Planning, 19, 6, 25-30.HAMES, R. D. ( 199 1 , Managing the Processof Cultural Change, International Journal of Quality and Reliability

Management, 8, 5, 14-23.HAMMONS, C. ( 1992), The Copying Machine Paper Caper: Where Lowest Price Did Not Work, BusinessHorizons, 35, 2, 68-70.HANDFIELD, R. ( 1989), Quality Management in Japan Versus the United States: An Overview, Productionand Inventory Management Journal, 30,2, 79-85.HANNAH, K. H. ( 1987), Just-In-Time: Meeting the Competitive Challenge, Production and Inventory Man-agement, 28, 3, 1-3.

HARARI, 0. ( 1993a), Think Strategy When You Think Quality, Management Review, 82, 3, 58-60.~ ( 1993b), The Eleventh Reason Why TQM Doesnt Work, Management Review, 82, 5, 31-36.- ( 1993c), The Lab Test: A Tale of Quality, Management Review, 82, 2, 55-58.- ( 1993d), Three Very Diff icult Steps To Total Quality, Management Review, 82, 4, 39-43.HARBER, D., K. BURGESS,AND D. BARCLAY ( 1993a), Total Quality Management as a Cultural Intervention:An Empirical Study, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 10, 6, 28-46.-, -, AND - ( 1993b), Total Quality Management as a Cultural Intervention: An Integrative

Review, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 10, 6, 17-27.-, F. MARRIOTT, AND N. INDRUS ( 199la), Employee Participation in TQC: An Integrative Review,International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 8, 5, 24-34.-, -, AND - ( 199 1 ), Employee Participation in TQC: The Effectof Job Levels on Participationand Job Satisfaction, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 8, 5, 35-54.HARDAKER, M. AND B. K. WARD ( 1987), How to Make a Team Work, Harvard Business Review, 65, 6,112-120.HARMON, L. K. ( 1988), Total Quality and The Management of Performance Improvement, SAM AdvancedManagement Journal, 53,4,4-12.HART, C. W. L., L. A. SCHLESINGER,AND D. MAHER ( 1992), Guarantees Come to Professional ServiceFirms, Sloan Management Review, 33, 3, 19-29.HAUSER, J. R. AND G. I. CLAUSING ( 1988), The House of Quality, Harvard Business Review, 66, 3, 63-73.HAYES, R. ( 1981). Why Japanese Factories Work? Harvard Business Review, 59,4, 56-66.HEATH, P. M. ( 1989), The Path to Quality Achievement Through Teamwork and Commitment, InternationalJournal of Quality and Reliability Management, 6, 2, 5 1-59.HEIKO, L. ( 1989), A Simple Framework for Understanding JIT, Production and Inventory Management

Journal, 30, 4, 61-63.HENDRICK, T. E. ( 1987), The PRE-JIT/TQC Audit: First Step of the Journey, Production and InventoryManagement, 28,2, 132-143.HOSSEINI,J. AND N. S. FARD ( 1991), A System for Analyzing Information to Manage the Quality-Control

Process, Interfaces, 2 1, 2, 48-58.HOSTAGE, G. M. ( 1975), Quality Control in a Service Business, Harvard Business Review, 53, 4, 98-106.HSING-WEI, C. AND P. TOSIRISUK ( 1991), Process Decision Program Chart: From Operations Research toTotal Quality Control, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 2 1, 1 & 4, 11 I- 115.HUCKETT, J. D. ( 1985), An Outline of Quality Improvement Process at Rank Xerox, International Journalof Quality and Reliability Management, 2, 2, 5-14.INSTONE,F. J. AND B. G. DALE ( 1989), A Case Study of Typical Issues Involved in Quality Improvement,International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 9, I, 15-26.ISHIKURE, K. ( 1988), Achieving Japanese Productivity and Quality Levels at a U.S. Plant, Long RangePlanning, 21, 5, 10-17.JURAN, J. M. ( 1978), Japanese and Western Quality: A Contrast in Methods and Results, ManagementReview, 67, 11, 27-45.- ( 198 a), Product Quality-A Prescription for the West: Part I, Management Review, 70, 6, 8-14.

- ( 198 1b), Product Quality-A Prescription for the West: Part II, Management Review, 70, 7, 57-6 1.- ( 1993), Made in U.S.A.: A Renaissance in Quality, Harvard Business Review, 71, 4, 42-50.KANO, N. ( 1993), A Perspective on Quality Activities in American Firm, California Management Review,35, 3, 12-31.


27/30

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT: LITERATURE REVIEW 303KARP, A. AND B. RONEN ( 1992), Improving Shop Floor Control: An Entropy Model Approach, Znternational

Journal of Production Research, 30,4, 923-938.KATHAWALA, Y. ( 1989), A Comparative Analysis o f Selected Approaches to Quality, Znternational Journalof Quality and Reliability Management, 6, 5, 7- 17.KENNEDY, C. ( 1989), Xerox Charts a New Strategic Direction, Long-Range Planning, 22, 1, 10-17.

KLAUSS, H. AND T. WOLTER ( 1990) Total Quality at Siemens Wurzburg Electric Motor Factory, InternationalJournal of Technology Management, 5, 1, 114- 12 1.KNIGHT, J. M., H. W. BENINGFIELD,AND B. KIZZORT ( 1987), Quality Cycles, IEEE Transactions on En-gineering Management, 34, 4, 2 14-222.KNORR, R. 0. AND E. F. THIESE ( 1991), Making New Technologies Work, Journal of Business Strategy,12, 1, 46-49.KOLESAR, P. J. ( 1993), Vision, Values, Milestones: Paul ONeill Starts Total Quality at Alcoa, CaliforniaManagement Review, 35, 3, 133-165.KORDUPLESKI, R. A., R. T. RUST, AND A. J. ZAHORIK (1993), Why Improving Quality Doesnt ImproveQuality (Or Whatever Happened to Marketing?), California Management Review, 35, 3, 82-95.

KOWALSKI, E. AND P. WALLEY ( 1993), Employee Receptivity to Total Quality, International Journal ofQuality and Reliability Management, 10, 1, 23-37.KRANTZ, K. T. ( 1989), How Velcro Got Hooked on Quality, Harvard Business Review, 67, 5, 34-40.KRISTENSEN, P. S. ( 1992), Flying Prototypes: Production Departments Direct Interaction with External

Customers, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 12, 7&8, 197-212.KUMAR, S. AND Y. P. GUPTA ( 1993), Statistical Process Control at Motorolas Austin Assembly Plant,InterSaces, 23, 2, 84-92.LASCELLES, D. M. AND B. G. DALE ( 1988), A Review of the Issues Involved in Quality Improvement,International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 5, 5, 76-94.- AND - (1989a), The Buyer-Supplier Relationship in Total Quality Management, Journal ofPurchasing and Materials Management, 25, 2, IO- 19.

-AND- ( 1989b), The UK Department of Trade and Industry National Quality Campaign: 1983to January 1989, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 9, 6, 2-46.- AND - ( 1990), The Key Issues of Quality Improvement Process, International Journal

tqm-literature review by ahire et al 1995

Documents