Total_Quality_Management

Total Quality Management Defined Total Quality Management (TQM) is a young and developing business function. Whether the function is described as a philosophy or management methodology it still must be identified, implemented, and managed. The importance of this function will be outlined in the definition of TQM. As more businesses consider globalization, the impact this has on quality will be described. The differences between traditional management styles and quality-focused management styles will be explored while an example of how TQM applies to an actual organization will also be included. It all begins with a total quality culture. Total Quality Management Definition Total Quality Management is an organizational function charged with implementing and sustaining an organizational culture of quality. This is achieved by directing people and processes towards the ultimate goal of satisfying customer needs by maximizing the efficiency and effectiveness of production processes. The continuous improvement in the quality of all processes involved with production and its support will result in quality products and services, meeting the goal of customer satisfaction. SEMATECH’s definition (as cited in Burrill & Ledolter, 1999) is: Total Quality Management is a [holistic] business management methodology that aligns the activities of all employees in an organization with the common focus of customer satisfaction [to be achieved] through continuous improvement in the quality of all activities [processes], goods and services. (p. 35) TQM’s definition establishes it as a core function within an organization. This means that it must be aligned within the organizational structure and implemented to fulfill its purpose. Purpose As with any core business function, TQM’s success hinges on two critical inputs - leadership implementation and employee buy-in. Ginés Santiago Marco Perles (2002) explains that TQM has become a business phenomenon since the early 1990s. While different organizations take slightly different approaches to TQM, businesses, public institutions, and private institutions are all implementing quality programs. The repercussion and scope of these programs are different everywhere. While some companies just make a few superficial changes in norms, controls and processes, some others are able to change their organizations [sic], their concepts of quality, their cultures and philosophies. (Santiago Marco Perles, 2002, p. 59) Santiago Marco Perles goes on to state that leadership is not only a critical factor in a successful TQM program but that commitment and ethics are required to support that leadership requirement (2002). This concept underscores the need for quality to be an organizational culture and not simply another topic for lip service. Once leadership commits to and exemplifies quality, employee buy-in becomes a result and not a second input. Strategic goals are not achieved until the respective strategies are implemented, supported, and accepted. Likewise, total quality is simply a goal until a culture of quality is implemented, exemplified, and bought into. TQM is the function to achieve this. Its purpose is to facilitate the mechanisms required to achieve continuous process improvement. Globalization Impacts on Quality National Culture Globalization has moved past a mere possibility for many businesses and has become a necessity for others. As economic integration makes its way around the globe leaving free trade agreements, monetary unions, and economic unions in its wake, many companies are being exposed to impacts globalization has on existing business functions. TQM is just one of many business functions faced with this newer challenge. TQM researchers Crosby, Deming, and Juran (as cited by Anwar & Jabnoun, 2006) have held fast to their beliefs that TQM can be used universally for improving quality and productivity. However, newer research indicates that this universal success is predicated by implementation and environment variables and is neither universal nor automatic. Anwar and Jabnoun (2006) reference researchers Spencer, Chorn, Laza and Wheaton, and Ngowi when they state, “…each organization is influenced by the national environment and TQM's successful implementation, therefore, cannot be automatically guaranteed universally” (p. 272). New Market, Same Story Tan and Tan (2002) observe that globalization creates a need for TQM for many businesses that decide to compete in the global market. Many organizations found the global market to be very turbulent and turned to a strategy of quality and flexibility to remain competitive and withstand the turbulence. “In their race to improve the quality of products and services, Total Quality Management (TQM) often seems to be the operation strategy embraced by these firms” (Tan & Tan, 2002, p. 315). While the authors continued to outline reasons for failure in these global organizations, it was not globalization itself that proved difficult but the implementation and design of the program itself. While other impacts such as government regulations on certain products and processes; communication and cultural barriers; nationalism; and subsidiary relationships can also be credited to globalization, TQM still relies on the organizational culture and the management style that implements and supports the function. Traditional vs. Quality-Focused Management Styles Structure The implementation of TQM has been stressed consistently throughout the previous topics. The success of TQM relies heavily on its implementation, which makes the management style an important aspect of the function. Comparing and contrasting a traditional management style with a quality-focused management style will illustrate some key reasons why implementation is so vital to implementation. The traditional management style includes a structure shaped like a pyramid with the CEO at the top, or point, of the pyramid. The base of the pyramid is made up of line workers who interface with the external customers and have the hands-on experience with final products, services, and the processes that get them there. The broad base of the pyramid and its supported management layers are the foundation and support of the CEO at the top who is responsible for guiding the organization (Melnyk & Swink, 2005). A quality-focused management style uses a structure that is diametrically opposed to the traditional style. Since the frontline employees are the ones dealing with customers and their needs, they are intimately familiar with the details of the processes and determine the quality level offered by the organization. Melnyk and Swink (2005) state, “As a result, TQM advocates believe, the entire organization should support the operating employees. This view turns the traditional organization upside down, assigning managers the responsibility of supporting employees” (p. 6). Power Joan Manley (2000) explains that TQM implementations in professional organizations are possible but require complex negotiations of existing formal and informal power relationships. Power is a significant obstacle to transforming a traditional management style to one that is more conducive to successful TQM implementation. She states, “Some employees and middle managers embraced the TQM philosophy and techniques and successfully influenced the implementation and project team design” (Manley, 2000, p. 457) however, she also noted that, “…administrators used TQM as rhetoric and justification for increased bureaucratic control, goals that are distinctly at odds with the ideological objectives of TQM” (Manley, 2000, p. 457). The fear of change or loss of power is a primary obstacle in this transformation and represents a significant difference in management styles. This fear has to be confronted in order for a quality-focused culture to develop. Many researchers have noted that bureaucracy and the need for control have prevented achievement of the employee empowerment goal before it even had a chance. Applied TQM An example of applied TQM is a service organization, Global Desktop Services (GDS), within a large financial services organization. GDS services network and computer equipment for a bank’s internal customer base of approximately 65,000 nationwide. GDS is based on a typical organizational structure and has the mission of being the technology service provider of choice for the entire organization. With external vendors as an option, GDS focuses on client satisfaction as a key performance indicator. Service level agreements (SLA’s) have been set ahead of industry standards and processes have been originally based on industry best practices. Process teams are made up of technicians who volunteer to perform the function of process review and improvement. Process changes are based on feedback from random client satisfaction surveys and results from SLA metrics. Employee satisfaction surveys are used to evaluate middle and upper management’s success of employee engagement while GDS’ Operating Director facilitates anonymous conference calls where technicians can speak openly and candidly about any topic. The establishment of this biweekly call has helped eliminate some of the power struggles and favoritism that is often fostered by traditional management styles. The commitment to celebrating diversity has also helped strengthen the organizational culture that supports morale, engages employees, and provides a small sense of employee empowerment. Conclusion TQM is a core business function that needs to be thoroughly integrated into an organization to be successful. Some organizations are more successful than others at implementing the philosophy just as some organizational cultures are healthier than others. By defining TQM, describing the impacts of globalization, discussing the differences between management styles, and providing an example of applied TQM, the importance of TQM implementation and employee buy-in has been supported. TQM is an all-or-nothing proposition with the net benefit reflecting the level of commitment. References Anwar, S., & Jabnoun, N. (2006, June). The development of a contingency model relating national culture to total quality management. International Journal of Management, 23(2), 272-280. Retrieved February 16, 2008, from Business Source Complete database. Burrill, C.W. & Ledolter, J. (1999). History of the quality movement. In Achieving Quality Through Continual Improvement (pp. 26-54). New York, NY: Wiley. Manley, J. (2000, September). Negotiating quality: Total quality management and the complexities of transforming professional organizations. Sociological Forum, 15(3), 457- 484. Retrieved February 17, 2008, from Academic Search Premier database. Melnyk, S.A., & Swink, M. (2005). Total quality management: Frameworks, measures, and standards. In Value-Driven Operations Management: An Integrated Modular Approach (pp. 1-31). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Santiago Marco Perles, G. (2002, August). The ethical dimension of leadership in the programmes of total quality management. Journal of Business Ethics, 39(1/2), 59-66. Retrieved February 17, 2008, from Business Source Complete database. Tan, L., & Tan, J. (2002, May). Cellular structure for total quality management in a globalized economy. Total Quality Management, 13(3), 315-321. Retrieved February 16, 2008, from Academic Search Premier database.