Leadership Challange hfd

8/12/2019 Leadership Challange hfd

1/13

~ P e r g a m o nOmega, Int. J. Mgmt Sei. Vo l. 25, No . 5, pp . 567-579, 1997 1997 ElsevierScience Ltd . All righ ts reservedPrinted in Gr eat BritainP I I : S0 30 5-0 48 3(9 7)0 00 14 -5 0305-0483/97 17.00 + 0.00

Leadership Chal lenges for SmallerO rganisations: Self perceptions o f

TQM Implementat ionW T YLOR

T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f Brad fo rd , Brad fo rd , U KReceived May 1996; accepted a f ter rev is ion Apri l 1997)

This paper addresses a gap in the T Q M (To tal Qu ali ty Management) l i terature by providing empiricaldata on dif ferences in implementation pract ice associated with organisat ional s ize. I t also goes furtherthan is usua l dow n the wel l -trodden path of T Q M success and fai lure, by exa min ing senior executivesassocia ted atti tudes to and perceptions of T Q M . The results from 113 T Q M organisations suggestthat small organisat ions display s ignif icantly poorer levels o f understanding of the purpose of T Q Mand its true nature as a s trategic approach to customers and the mark et environment. Th ey also appearless knowledgeable about their customers sat is fact ion levels and are more l ikely to bel ieve that T Q Mhas had a marginal impa ct on their business. T he importance o f such research into TQ M in smallf irms is underl ined, especial ly in the context o f peripheral regions and also on the basis of the T Q Mtenet of supplier-customer partnerships . Base d on the work of Argyris , i t i s hypothesised that theseatt itudes and perceptions should in theory be mirrored by specif ic leadership b ehaviours , but in pract icecertain inconsistencies should emerge which betray a less opt imist ic picture of leadership in sm allorganisat ions . The pa per lays the foundation for these assert ions to be explored more ful ly in afol low-up paper. Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science LtdK e y w o r d s - - t o t a l qua lity managem ent, implem entation, small organisations, top managem ent,organisational studies, regional

1 . I N T R O D U C T I O NA N E C D O T A L E V ID E N CE s u g g e s t s t h a t s o m eo r g a n i s a t i o n s h a v e m o r e s u c c e s s t h a n o t h e r sw i t h T o t a l Q u a l it y M a n a g e m e n t ( T Q M ) . T h i sc o n c e n t r a t i o n o n s u c c e s s o r f a i l u r e h a s b e e n aw e l l - t r o d d e n p a t h i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e f o r t h e p a s tf ew y e a rs . H o w e v e r , a s w it h m a n y t o pi c s, T Q Mi s m o v i n g o u t o f f a s h i o n i n s o m e r e s e a r c hc o m m u n i t i e s , y e t u n r e s o l v e d i ss u e s n e v e rt h e l e ssr e m a i n . F u n d a m e n t a l l y t h e r e is st il l c o n s i d e r -a b l e d e b a t e a b o u t T Q M i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o u t -c o m e s a n d t h e d e t e r m i n a n t s o f s u c ce s s a n dfa i l u r e .A s r e g a r d s i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o u t c o m e s , o fc o u r s e t h e r e a r e m a n y m e d i a t i n g c o n t e x t u a lv a r i a b l e s s u c h a s t h e c u l t u r e a n d l e a d e r s h i p s t y leo f t h e o r g a n i s a t i o n , t h e l e ve l o f t e c h n o l o g y

e m p l o y e d a n d t h e c o m p e t i t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o ft h e m a r k e t s e c t o r , n o t t o m e n t i o n t h e d i f f e r i n ge m p h a s e s p l a c e d b y t h e s o - c a l l e d ' g u r u s ' a n do t h e r w r i t e r s o n t h e r o l e o f th e c u s t o m e r , t h ep r o c e s s , t h e c o s t o f q u a l i ty , s t a t is t i c a l t o o l s ,t e a m w o r k a n d s o on , C o n s e q u e n t l y i t is v e r yd i ff ic u lt to b e c e r t a i n a b o u t t h e p r i m a r y r e a s o n sf o r s u c h d i f f e r e n c e s i n o u t c o m e . N e v e r t h e l e s s i ti s s t i l l i m p o r t a n t t o s t u d y t h o s e f a c t o r s m o s to f t e n a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s u c c e s s a n d f a i l u r e ,e s p e c ia l ly f r o m a n e m p i r i c a l a n d l o n g i t u d in a lp e r s p e c t i v e .

S u c h s t u d i e s a r e r e s o u r c e i n t e n s i v e , r e q u i r i n gi n - d e p t h a n a l y s is o f i n d iv i d u a l o r g a n i s a t i o n st o e x p l o r e t h e i r a p p r o a c h e s t o T Q M , e v e ni n d e e d t o i d e n t i f y ' t r u e ' p r a c t i t io n e r s o f T o t a lQ u a l i t y a s d i s t i n c t f r o m t h o s e w h o m i s u n d e r -s t a n d t h e r e a l n a t u r e o f t h e p a r a d i g m . T h i s

567


2/13

568 Tayl or-L eadership chall enges or smaNer organisafi ons

misunderstanding has been reported elsewhere,for example, Whyte and Witcher [l] referred tothe prevalence of a form of TQM, much ofwhich looked like human resource managementfriendly versions of long established qualityassurance programmes.The TQM literature is a mixture of anecdotalcase studies, often written without the objectiv-ity of a third party, and small scale surveys, withthe latter lacking the ability to explore specificissues in any depth. This is the current reality,arising as much from the real cost of suchresearch and the nature of the methods ofenquiry as it does from anything else. It is in thiscontext that the current research was conductedas a longitudinal study of a cohort of 113 TQMcompanies. The objective was to examine ifbetter implementation practices correlated sig-nificantly with any specific organisationalvariables. In particular, exploration was centredinitially on the influence of organisational size.

In this research we employ Argyris [2] theoryof dysfunctionality between espoused be-haviours and observed behaviours of individ-uals. In the remainder of this section we showthat very few reliable studies of small firmimplementation of TQM exist. From the fewwhich are published about small firms, weextract the main issues which others have foundto be relevant. Section 2 deals with how Argyrisideas can apply to the study of TQMimplementation. In so doing we believe that thisholds much greater potential for gaining insightinto success and failure than the more usualreliance upon attitudinal surveys, or small scalecase studies.

Section 3 develops the methodology by which

a longitudinal perspective of this cohort of 113firms was achieved, particularly focusing on thevital role of senior executives in leading andmaintaining the drive for continuous improve-ment. In the penultimate section, data andresults are described relating to the self-perceptions of senior executives about their ownTQM implementations and their roles withinthem. Finally some interim conclusions areoutlined as the basis for the subsequentexploration of associated senior executivebehaviours.1 1 Previous research

Relatively few researchers have written aboutthe influence of organisation size on TQMoutcomes. On the contrary, much of what hasbeen published about TQM implementation hasaimed to identify good or best practice asembodied in individual organisations whichhave won Quality Awards, or else it has beendirected at larger organisations. Moreover,some of the most widely quoted studies havebeen conducted by eminent consultancy groups,whose clients tend to be skewed towards thelarger multi-nationals. Even leaving aside thefact that some of these reports have been widelymisquoted and misunderstood, most publishedmaterial tends to omit important details aboutthe sample structures and response rates (seeTable 11. Consequently, any analysis of theeffect of variables like organisation size is oftennot possible.1 2 Key vari ables

A few studies have emerged which do raiseimportant issues. When conducting field trials

Table I. TQM Consultancy reports: size orientation

AUTHORS TITLESAMPLE

SIZEAddressing SmallFirms?

Develin and Partners [3]A.T. Kearney [4]US General Accounting

Office [5]A.T. Kearney [6]A.T. Kearney [7]Whyte and Witcher [I]Ernst and Young [8]Ingersoll Engineers [9]Binney [IO]Management Today [I I] Putting the Total into Total Quality

The effectiveness of Quality ImprovementProgrammes in British Businesss.Creating the environment for TQM.Report on Management Practices: US companiesimprove performance through quality efforts.Total Quality: Time to take off the rose tintedspectacles.Achieving Customer Satisfaction Leadershipin Europe.The adoption of Total Quality Management inNorthern England.International Quality StudyCommitment-Implementing the VisionMaking Quality Work. Lessons from Europesleading companies.

Not statedNot stated

22Not stated

6% with < 100 empNoNo size analysisSmall firms included

Not stated No235 No584 NO200 Not stated46 No270 No


3/13

Omega Vol. 2.5 No. 5 569of a quality improvement framework, Dale andPrapopoulos [12] found that small firms didhave particular problems, for example, theyoften do not see the need for using an array ofquality management tools and techniques andextensive measurement of performance indi-cators.

Witcher [13, p. 231 in a study of 650 TQMfirms still found it generally too internallyfocused, yet even though over half of thissample employed fewer than 300 employees, noanalysis of differences associated with organis-ation size was included. Other studies have alsoexplored the implementation practices ofsmaller organisations, but not to any greatextent. Goh and Ridgway [14] studied 30 SMEs(small and medium sized enterprises) specificallyaddressing size differences, and Porter andParker [151 examined 10 TQM organisationsonly one of which was small. In the latter case,the authors highlighted management behaviouras the most critical success factor for TQM-be-haviour which in their terms included under-standing, commitment, leadership andcontinuing support for TQM.

In a wider study of world class practices andperformance in over 200 manufacturing sites,Voss [16, p. 331 underlined the role of size as asignificant variable, concluding that ownershipis less significant in predicting likely success thansize or industry sector. Clearly size may not bethe sole influence on outcomes since Voss alsomentions industrial sector and origin ofownership of the enterprises. The ownershipfactor was also mentioned in a recent Instituteof Management membership survey [17, p. 241,

_wherein 27% (n = 880) of responses representedorganisations employing fewer than 100 people,i.e.:

manufacturing companies, especiallyforeign owned ones, appear to use abroader range of measures of qualityimprovement, perhaps reflecting amore developed approach to qualitymanagement.

Interestingly, this survey found no differencein implementation outcomes associated withorganisation size. However, the authors wereexploring quality management practice whichappeared to accommodate a wider range ofinterpretations than normally associated with

Total Quality Management. Moreno-Luzon [18,p. 1731, in a study of 44 small manufacturingfirms in the Valencia region of Spain, high-lighted another problem for small TQMimplementors commenting that most of theprogrammes lack a strategic perspective which,in Moreno-Luzons terms, implies that they donot define quality from the customers point ofview. Finally, Ghobadian and Gallear [19, p. 881focus specifically on TQM in SMEs, trying todeduce the size dependent characteristics ofTQM. Using case studies of four SMEs, theyassert that management process, i.e. manage-ment practices and attitudes is the key elementin the implementation of TQM-a view whichstrongly supports the basis of this paper.1.3. The impor tance of small ovganisationsWhy should we be concerned about smallfirms in this context at all? The economicimportance of smaller organisations is generallyaccepted, no less so in peripheral regions. Ofeven more concern are the effects of locationalremoteness or peripherality, which arethought [20] to have greatest impact on thesmaller organisational unit. For example,remoteness of location can make it moredifficult to compete with rivals in so-called coreregions. Moreover, in Northern Ireland (fromwhere our data are drawn) there is an aboveaverage representation of the public sectorwhich is thought likely to diminish the pressureon indigenous producers to upgrade theirproducts and levels of service. Hence smallerorganisations face particular challenges, whichin the light of increasingly competitive marketconditions, underline the need for them toaddress these additional barriers to competitive-ness.

What is more, one of the central tenets ofTotal Quality Management is the notion of thesupplier+ustomer chain, i.e. the improvementof any business is dependent to some extent onthe quality of its suppliers and sub-contractors.Such customers have a need to extend theirimprovement activities beyond the boundariesof their own operations and to embrace theirsuppliers as partners. For this reason the smallerorganisation is becoming a concern for many ofthe leading edge practitioners of TQM. Itis therefore all the more striking that theresearch literature has been largely silent on thisissue.


4/13

570 Tayl or-L eadership chall enges or small er organisati ons

To summarise the issues arising from these,albeit limited, studies, the literature suggeststhat there may be significant differences in TQMimplementation practice and outcomes due,inter alia to an organisations size, sector ororigin of ownership. These differences mayinclude a lack of strategic or external focus, thedegree of sophistication of the techniquesemployed and the extent and appropriateness ofthe methods used for measurement andquantification of improvement.

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKThe purpose of this research was to gather

more empirical data to investigate the idea thatimplementation differences may be due to, forexample, the size of organisation. The approachwas based on trying to establish what lies behindTQM outcomes so that we may have a betterunderstanding of the underpinning influences.One major factor already mentioned is theinfluence and commitment of the Chief Execu-tive Officer and those who have responsibilityfor giving leadership to initiatives such as TQM.While much has been written on the relatedsubject of employee involvement and morespecifically, employee commitment, very littlestudy has been undertaken of the commitmentof senior managers. Without lengthening thediscussion unduly, it is important to clarify thecommitment construct by defining it as acomplex function of the interactions betweenattitudes and behaviours.

It is recognised that consensus does not existon this issue in the literature. Some claim thatbehaviours are a function of social context whileothers contend that behaviours are preceded byassociated attitudes. The former suggests thatmodifying the context will change behaviourwhile the latter suggests that behaviour will bedetermined by the prevailing attitudes.

While accepting that there are valid argu-ments for both viewpoints, it is the latter onewhich largely forms the theoretical basis of thispaper. Moreover, the paper builds on the notionof attitudes influencing behaviour by combiningit with the ideas of Argyris [2] who contendsthat managers often think they believe one setof things (espoused behaviours) yet theiractual behaviours in practice are contradictory(Fig. 1).

In particular the paper explores the possibility

Al Kl UDES SENIORAND _ EXECUnVE _ IMPLEMENTATTON

PERCEFCIONS BEHAVIOURS OUTCOMES

Espoused ehavioursehaviours in use

Fig. 1. Theoretical basis.

that although managers in TQM organisationsmay offer many of the right answers whenconfronted by attitudinal surveys, explorationof specific aspects of TQM practice in theirorganisations may be a truer reflection of theirperceptions and attitudes towards the paradigm.

This is not to suggest that managers wouldintentionally misrepresent their views aboutTQM. Rather it is the case that they are unableto see these contradictions between words anddeeds because their behaviours have become soingrained at a subconscious level. The papertherefore reports on the attitudes to andperceptions of senior managers to aspects ofTQM and its strategic role in improvingorganisational performance and customer satis-faction. This will subsequently be comparedwith implementation behaviours such as themechanisms for involving employees and themethods of quantifying improvement (seeFig. 2).The research provides an added dimension tothe literature in the sense that most TQMimplementation studies largely confine them-selves to reporting success or failure at theoutcomes level, or else they report on individualexamples of good practice, whereas here, actualimplementation behaviours and their consist-ency with espoused positions are probed moredeeply.

3. METHODOLOGYRound table discussions with groups of senior

industrialists and government representativeshighlighted the major issues of concern, whichcentred on the perceived differences betweenobserved TQM practice in firms and that whichis claimed to be practised. Assessment of TQMpractices was based upon the following primarydimensions of TQM, namely:

e accurate understanding of the purpose andscope of TQM;

the perception of the management ofquality as a strategic issue;


5/13

Omega Vol. 25, No. 5 571Understanding of purpose of TQMEfforts to improve organisational performanceManagement of Quality a Strategic IssueRanking of Quality against other Strategic Issues

PERCEPTIONS Perceptions of own customers satisfactionAnticipated benefits of TQMPerception of actual benefitsUnderstanding of IS0 9000Perception of employee involvement levels

Espousedbehaviours

SENIOREXECUTIVEBEHAVIOURSLPart II)IMPLEMENTATION

OUTCOMES

Means used to improve performanceMeasuring Customer SatisfactionMethods used to measure Customer SatisfactionMeasuring effects of TQM on Sales and/or CostsOrientation towards IS0 9000Use of Process MeasurementMechanisms used to involve employees

Positive or negative outcomeExtent of ImprovementDegree of employee involvementBusiness performance

Fig. 2. Expansion of research issues.

0 effective customer focus;o the importance of visible leadership from

top management;0 meaningful engagement of employees in

problem solving and improvement activity;regular measurement of key financial and

non-financial indicators of improvement;effective management of business pro-

cesses;a focus on both incremental and break-

through improvements;These discussions, taken together with the

literature review and the findings of the fewearlier empirical studies formed the basis of theresearch instrument. The instrument was aquestionnaire comprising 34 questions relatingto quality improvement, the questions beinglargely a mixture of open, closed and multiplechoice types. It was pre-tested on 60 firms andsubsequently revised.

The questionnaire was mailed to a sample offirms in the Northern Ireland region of the UK.The population of all firms in the NorthernIreland region comprised almost 3500 enter-

prises distributed across the eight main sectorsof clothing, textiles, food and drink, engin-eering, retailing, public, general manufacturingand services. Using a composite database offirms culled from several sources, the firms werestratified by sector and size before drawing arandom sample from each sub-group. Size wasdefined as follows: small: 10 to 99 employees,medium: 100 to 499 employees and large: 500plus employees. While in this paper we haveused 99 employees as the upper bound for smallfirms, mainly to ensure relevance to regionalpolicy makers, it is noted that others have usedthe same numerical definitions [21, 191. In asmall, self-contained regional economy, a largefirm is usually considered to be one with morethan 500 employees; in fact there are only about70 such large firms in the whole NorthernIreland region, with the largest employing fewerthan 9000 people.

Of course the size of an organisation is notalways best indicated by the number of itsemployees, which can in some instances be amisleading measure. The European Commis-sion, for example, combines a number of


6/13

572 Taylor-Leadership chaiienges for smaller organisations

measures in its characterisation of SMEs, citingnet annual turnover and type of ownershipalong with employee numbers. Certainly asfirms become more capital intensive, and as longas trends like outsourcing persist, the number ofemployees will become a less reliable indicator.In any future studies it would be helpful tocomplement number of employees with othermeasures of organisation size.

The survey was representative of the wholeregion, thus the minimum samples needed for a95% confidence level were calculated, alsoassuming a 25% response rate which is fairlytypical for postal questionnaires. Just over 2000questionnaires were sent out, each addressed tothe most senior executive in each organisationalunit. Actual names were used where these wereknown with confidence. A covering letterexplaining the purpose of the survey alsoaccompanied the mail shot.

Overall, a 34% response was achieved(n = 682). While the response rates were slightlypoorer in small firms, they were nevertheless stillabove the minimum requirement for 95%confidence. Of these 682 responses, there were113 firms claiming to practise TQM, i.e. about17% of all firms in the region. While it ispossible that the responses were biased towardsthose firms which were receptive to qualityissues, the overall distribution of resIjonsesmaintained the sector stratification within thesample frame. The data were analysed usingcross-tabulations and the chi-square significancetest was used to test the results. Use was alsomade of the responses from non-users ofTQM, mainly for comparative purposes. Valu-able insights have been obtained from theseresponses, although the data are not reported inthis paper.

4. RESULTS4.1. Senior executive understanding of thepurpose of TQM

Few would argue about the important rolewhich senior executives play in TQM. Theirgrasp of its purpose and intent is indicative ofthe amount of time they have given to itsconsideration, and by implication therefore,their level of involvement. Understanding alsoinfluences the levels of resources being commit-ted to TQM and the amount of time which will

be given to it before a bottom line return oninvestment becomes a prerequisite for itscontinuance.

The concept of understanding was examinedusing the following multiple choice question:What is your understanding of the Total Qualityconcept? (Choose one only)A new name for not-so-new management practice 0A way of guaranteeing high grade products andservicesMaking the customer the focus of all business 0processesContinuous improvement through problem solving 0and teamworkDont knowOther (please specify) ::

The options were intended to test severalattitudes to TQM, detected during theroundtable discussions. A new name fornot-so-new management practice reflected thecynicism of some who did not believe TQM wasfundamentally different. This group displayed aweariness with management fads.

As regards the second option in the question,while TQM may be a way of guaranteeing highgrade products and services, when offered incompetition with the third and fourth options itwas intended to sift out those managers whoretained a product, rather than process focus.The third option, making the customer thefocus of all business processes was regarded asthe most correct answer, given than it is verydifficult to accurately encapsulate TQM in thisway. This option contained explicit reference toboth processes and customers and expressed thevital linkage between the two. This was incontrast with continuous improvementthrough problem solving and teamwork wheresuch explicit references were absent. This fourthoption may be complementary to option three,but it is a less complete description of TQM,and was intended to expose those managerswho saw it in a partial way as a set ofteam based activities, driven by problemsalone. Respondents selecting option four tendednot to see TQM driven by opportunities forimprovement, even in the absence of explicitproblems. Moreover those in this category alsolimited the scope of TQM to operational levelsand saw no role for improvement of businessprocesses.

Thus, TQM is not defined here solely in termsof customer focus. While customer focusremains a key component of TQM, it is not


7/13

Omega, Vol. 25, No. 5Table 2. Understanding of Total Quality concept

Understanding the purpose of TQM Small n = 57Making the customer the focus of all business processes 21Problem solving and teamwork or other narrower definitions 59Other 20

573

Medium/large n = 5649510

Chi Square = 17.64, 2 df. Significant @ 1% level

sufficient. That is why the exploration ofunderstanding should be taken together with theother dimensions of TQM as articulated inSection 3, namely, the perception of themanagement of quality as a strategic issue, theimportance of visible leadership from topmanagement, meaningful engagement of em-ployees in problem solving and improvementactivity, regular measurement of key financialand non-financial indicators of improvement,and so on.Preliminary analysis of the data showed thatsenior executives interpreted TQM in a varietyof ways, with 36% overall describing it in wayswhich aligned with the authors view as above.A further 56% of respondents understood TQMin more limited ways which were not customerreferenced or else were confined to fixingproblems rather than focusing on finding newopportunities for improvement which addedvalue to the customer experience. A smallernumber showed confusion between TQM,quality assurance and product quality.

Analysis for organisational size revealed thatsmall organisations are not as conversant aslarger ones with the broader purpose of TotalQuality, even allowing for the fact that in thelargest size category the levels are not especiallyhigh. To put it another way, senior executiveunderstanding tends to improve with size oforganisation. In particular, understanding ofthe customer dimension of Total Quality issignificantly poorer in the small organisationspractising Total Quality, see Table 2.In the medium and large organisations, theassociation of TQM with Quality Assuranceand product grade disappears, yet the narrowerinterpretations persist.4.2. Understanding of the relationship betweenTQA4 and ovganisational perf ormance

Given that TQM is not the only route toimproved organisational performance, we ex-plored in general terms the extent to whichsenior executives were trying to improveorganisational performance, and the means they

were employing to bring this about. One mighthave expected all TQM practitioners to say thatthey were undertaking initiatives to improveorganisational performance, yet surprisingly anoverall 10% said they were doing nothing at allof this nature

One might also have surmised that thereshould logically be no difference in the numbersattempting to improve performance due to sizeof organisation and indeed the results bear thisout. Small organisations practising TQM are nodifferent in terms of the numbers claiming toundertake initiatives to improve organisationalperformance (Fig. 3).

However it will be more revealing when theseanswers are tested further in the light of thespecific activities being undertaken.4.3. Management of quali ty as a strategic issue

It is highly likely that quality will deliver moreif it is treated as a key strategic business issueand not merely an operational one. Thus wesought to probe organisations current strategicfocus and the role that quality plays within this,by asking Is the management of qualityperceived to be a strategic issue in yourorganisation? Overall there was a predictablyhigh level of prominence assigned to thestrategic dimension of Quality with all 113answering this question positively. When sub-sequently asked how Quality ranked amongstrategic issues currently being addressed, the

YES %91%

MALL 0 MEDILARGEn=51 n=56

(Chi Square=O,7I8, 1 df, not significant)Fig. 3. Undertaking initiatives to improve organisational

performance (size analysis).


8/13

574 Tayl or-L eadership chall enges or small er organisati ons

Number 1

Top 3

OtherI I I I

MALL 0 MEDILARGEn=57 n=56

Fig. 4. Ranking of quality among strategic issues (sizeanalysis).

results were equally positive (Fig. 4) with 96%ranking Quality in at least the top three andover one fifth claiming it to be the number oneissue in their organisation.

Unfortunately when compared with theanswers to the previous issue about understand-ing, the results suggested a less consistentpicture. The data suggested that many strategieswere focused more internally on problemsolving and teamwork than on external cus-tomer issues. Further data on what was beingdone in the name of improving organisationalperformance are needed to explore this inconsis-tency theory more fully.

It was recognised that potential problemsexisted with this type of question. Firstly itwas postulated that no self-respecting seniorexecutive would admit to being other thanstrategically focused and any mention of theterm strategy would invoke a predictableknee-jerk type reaction. Secondly, the questionallows the respondent to interpret strategy inhis or her own way, and from personalexperience, strategy can mean many differentthings to many different people. A further crosscheck was therefore made by comparing theconsistency of these answers about strategicconcern, understanding of TQM and organis-ational performance with the reasons whysenior executives had decided to commit their

cusZ3::Srcost IEfficiencyMarketingadvantage

To improveproductParticipativestyle

To bethe best

MALL 0 MEDILARGEn=77 ~92

(Chi Square = 16.84, 5df, significant @ 1 level)Fig. 5. Anticipated benefits of implementing TQM (size

analysis).

organisations to TQM at all, i.e. what were thebenefits they anticipated that TQM wouldbring?

4.4. Reasons for putwing TQMMotivations often influence behaviour, irre-

spective of what senior executives may claimabout their own strategic intent. In an attemptto avoid shaping responses in a prescribedmanner, an open form question was posed,What is/was your organisations primarymotivation in pursuing TQM? The motiv-ations cited for pursuing TQM were very mixed.After categorising the answers using theframework in Table 3, the preliminary analysisshowed that only 37% gave reasons specificallyassociated with customers. Other reasons wereassociated with cost reduction at operationallevels, marketing reasons more superficially todo with image and perception, and humanresource improvements again mainly at oper-ational levels.

However, there were significant differencesbetween the reasons of the small organisationsand the rest. Small firms gave answers whichwere more focused on cost and efficiency or anaspiration to be the best, and less on customerissues or marketing advantage (Fig. 5).

CategoryTable 3. Categories of motivations for pursuing TQM

Samples of actual answersCustomer focusCost and efficiency To improve customer satisfaction, to put the customer first, to improve services to customersA desire to improve the efficiency of manufacturing processes, to reduce costs or wastage, to increaseproductivityMarketing advantage To be seen as a TQM organisation, to improve public relations, to use TQM as a good marketing toolImprove products To get higher grade products , to improve quality in a vague or untargetted wayParticipative style To improve motivation, to reduce workplace stress, to bring the workers inTo be the best A desire for excellence. to be world class or to be the best in Eurooe


9/13

Omega, Vol. 25, No. 5 575

Fig. 6. Perceptions of customer satisfaction.

These results would appear to resonate withMoreno-Luzons earlier comments about lackof strategic (customer focused) perspectives.What is more, the results do call into furtherquestion the apparently high levels of commit-ment to the management of quality as a strategicissue.4.5. Perceptions of customer satisfaction

Since TQM has already been defined in termsinclusive of achieving customer satisfaction, itseemed logical to explore the extent ofknowledge which senior executives had aboutthe satisfaction levels of their own customers. Avery optimistic picture emerged (Fig. 6) showing49.5% overall believing that customer satisfac-tion was improving, and only 1% admitting todeterioration. Curiously over 40% of respon-dents found themselves unable to speculateeither because they chose not to answer or elsebelieved that it was too soon to say. Selection ofeither of these latter options suggests anunhealthy lack of knowledge about customers.

Small organisations were strikingly different,with approximately 20% more choosing thelatter categories of ignorance at the expenseof improvement in customer satisfaction levels(Fig. 7).

ImprovingStatic

DeterioratingToo SOO

Did notaSwerMALL 0 MEDILARGEtF5-l n=56

Fig. 7. Perceptions of customer satisfaction (size analysis).

Nevertheless these levels of optimism are alittle surprising in view of the adverse economicconditions in the UK prevailing at the time ofthe survey, when the national economy wasrecovering from recession. Moreover there wasstill some uncertainty about the likely timing ofthe actual recovery and in any event, theNorthern Ireland regional economy couldnormally anticipate at least a one to two year lagbefore it responded to any national recovery.4.6. Perceptions of the@nancial impact of TQM

Turning then to more bottom line issuessuch as financial impact of TQM, one wouldexpect that senior executives would be moreable to answer questions such as Does yourorganisation have quantitative data on howTotal Quality has affected its level of salesand/or costs? or What impact has TotalQuality had on your organisations perform-ance? Indeed this was the case. Most executives(96%) were prepared to offer an opinion on thefinancial impact of TQM on their organisationsperformance. Around 63% (of this 96%) feltthat TQM was having a positive effect on theiroperation while for most of the rest (36%), theystill felt it was too soon to say or else did notknow. None said that TQM was having anegative effect on their organisation and only1% felt that it had no effect so far. Smallorganisations were no less likely to believe thaitthe impact was positive. At face value theseopinions are encouraging although more dataare needed to reveal how many of their opinionscan be backed up with tangible data.4.7. Extent of the posit ive impact

Of the 63% of practitioners believing thatTQM was having a positive impact, almost90% said that the size of the positive impactof TQM on their organisations performancewas either dramatic (31%) or moderate (57%).As regards size differences in these per-ceptions, large organisations were most likelyto believe they were getting dramatic improve-ment. They were also least likely to perceivemerely a marginal outcome (see Table 4).

Table 4. Extent of impact of TQM (size analysis)Size Dramatic Moderate MarginalSmall n = 36 36% 52% 12%Medium n = 25 12% 70% 18%Large n = 12 50% 50% 0%


10/13

576 Tayl or-L eadership chall enges for smal ler organisati ons

Other than that there was no obvious 4 9 Understanding of quali ty managementpattern. systems4.8. Perceptions of employee involvement levels

Employee involvement in problem solvingand improvement is another cornerstone ofTQM. This is one area where the leaders ofsmall firms often argue that TQM is not new forthem. The apparent lack of formality in suchsmaller units is sometimes mistaken for aparticipative ethos which is something quitedifferent. Indeed it is the adoption and use of aproblem solving methodology allied to team-work and training which enables employees tobecome effectively involved in such improve-ment activity, and it is comparatively rare in theauthors opinion to find either of these to thefore in small organisations.

Small organisations had already been shownin Section 4.1 to be more confused about thepurpose of TQM, mistaking it particularly forQuality Assurance or product grade. Given that33% of the complete TQM population alsohad IS0 9000 registration it was possiblethat this was a source of some of the confusionand this fact, taken together with a further42% of the sample which claimed to be pursuingIS0 9000, gave some cause for furtherinvestigation.

Thus, when asked to quantify the percentageof their organisations employees activelyinvolved in Total Quality, theory might lead oneto expect that smaller size would be associatedwith higher percentage involvement (since it iscomparatively easy to achieve). On the otherhand, practical experience suggests that smallerorganisations would show less active involve-ment, perhaps due to less affordable overheadsor more pressures on time. Nevertheless, as withsome of the earlier issues, it would not besurprising to find leaders generally painting arosy and perhaps over-optimistic picture,irrespective of organisation size.

Hence it might be that the confusion aboutTQM, as already reported, stemmed predomi-nantly from association with IS0 9 000.Conversely it could be that the sub-group whichhad approached TQM from a supposedly moreholistic perspective had missed the pointabout IS0 9000 and quality managementsystems, resulting in the partial TQM men-tioned earlier.

Table 5 shows that almost two thirds (64%)of all leaders believed that at least 20% of theiremployees were actively involved in TotalQuality activities. This seems to be a high figurefor levels of activity at any snapshot intime. Not surprisingly small organisationsclaimed more involvement in general, althoughthe fact that almost half of them claimed morethan 60% active involvement compared with39% of medium and large units again seemsoptimistic.

Generally, understanding and enlighten-ment should increase as an organisationadvances from pursuing IS0 9000, throughregistration and beyond into TQM. Equally, itis accepted that to start with TQM is quite valid(although not the UK norm), provided itevolves to develop underpinning structures andsystems to maintain improvement at new levels.To test understanding of the purpose of IS09000, a similar approach to that described inSection 4.1 was used. The parallel question wasas follows:What is your understanding of the purpose of BS575O/ISO 9000? (Choose one only)To demonstrate that products/services are of ahigh grade or standard.To produce paperwork to satisfy customers. :To provide a disciplined means of producing 0goods/services for customers.To strengthen control over operations.To demonstrate that this is a Total Quality :organisation.To provide an alternative to Total Quality.Unsure/Dont know. :Other (please specify) 0

The options above were intended to exploreTable 5. Variations in employee involvement levels (size analysis)Percentage Small Medium/largeinvolvement n = 57 n = 5660 plus 49% 39%41-60 I I 3.5%2140 II% 17.5%I O-20 14% 16%Less than IO 5% 10%UlISUR 10% 14%

attitudes to IS0 9000 detected both in theliterature and during the roundtable discus-sions. The third option was identified as beingthe most correct and complete description of thestandards purpose. Option one, while it mightbe considered complementary to the thirdoption, was intended to capture differences in


11/13

Omega Vol. 25 No. 5Table 6. Influence of contact with IS0 9000 on understanding

Correct understanding Correct understandingof purpose of of purposeCategory IS0 9000 of TQMHave TQM and IS0 9000 Registration n = 37 65% 43%Have TQM and pursuing IS0 9000 registration 52% 24%n = 46Have TQM only n = 30 36% 33%

understanding between the focus of IS0 9000on outputs, as distinct from its focus on theways of producing the outputs, i.e. the processesand systems. Analysis of the results showed thatunderstanding of the purpose of IS0 9000 didimprove as organisations moved from pursuingit through to post-registration. Table 6 rep-resents the extent of these two approaches in thedata.

Curiously however, the group of TQMorganisations with no IS0 9000 orientation hadthe lowest levels of correct understanding of thestandard. It is curious because Quality Systemsare such an intrinsic part of TQM and theabsence of such sustaining systems may leavesuch initiatives without essential support.Consequently if the claimed employee involve-ment levels in the previous section are to bebelieved, then a large number of TQMinitiatives are likely to have problems due tolack of systems support. Further longitudinalstudy may yield some answers to this supposi-tion.

Completing this line of investigation aboutenlightenment, understanding of the purposeof TQM was also best amongst the organis-ations which had IS0 9000 registration ratherthan amongst the so-called TQM puristswhich were not even pursuing registration.While particular markets may not requireactual IS0 9000 registration, TQM shouldstill be founded partly upon its intrinsicprinciples. It could be argued that theunderlying influence of organisation size was thecause of the pattern in Table 6, but inspectionshows that there were similar percentages ofsmall organisations in each sub-group. Hencethere is a suggestion that at least some of theorganisations in this sample are practising TQMfrom a position of incomplete knowledge, whichas a consequence is being manifest as partialTQM.

Due to small sample sizes in this instance,

further analysis by size is not included, except tosay that the trend follows a similar pattern withsmall firms in general more likely to misunder-stand the purpose of TQM, which again is bestin IS0 9000 registered organisations and worstin the sub-group with no IS0 9000 orientationwhatsoever.

5. CONCLUSIONSTo summarise so far, responses from a

representative sample of leaders in 113 TQMorganisations in the Northern Ireland region ofthe UK have been analysed with regard toattitudes and perceptions about TQM. All ofthese organisations claimed to be practisingTQM, but clearly they had embarked uponthis journey for very different reasons, oftennot connected with customers and sometimesnot even associated with improving the per-formance of the organisation. Leaders ofthese organisations also demonstrated differinglevels of understanding of what TQM actuallyis. This was at its worst in smaller organisationswhere there was a lesser recognition of itsemphasis on customer satisfaction. Smallorganisations were also much more likely toconfuse TQM with Quality Assurance andproduct grade.

These differences in understanding weremirrored by the different benefits which smallorganisations anticipated would accrue fromTQM implementation. Again, leaders in smallorganisations focused more on improved costand efficiency and less on customer issues. It istherefore no surprise that small organisationswere also less knowledgeable about changes incustomer satisfaction levels. Furthermore,although small organisations were just as likelyto believe that TQM has had a positive effect ontheir organisations performance, they weresignificantly less likely to perceive this improve-ment as being dramatic. As regards employee


12/13

578 Taylor-Leadership challenges for smaller organisations

involvement levels, these were generally thoughtto be high, with small organisations claiming tohave obtained what would in many quarters beaccepted as best practice levels of 60% andabove.

Finally, the relationship between TQM andQuality Management Systems was explored andsome evidence was presented to suggest thatmany of these leaders do not understand thefundamental importance of Quality Manage-ment Systems like IS0 9000 to the sustenance ofTQM.

In some aspects, no size difference wasevident, i.e. concerning leaders views on:

the management of quality as a strategicrather than purely operational issue;the comparative ranking of quality relativeto other strategic issues;

the intentions to improve organisationalperformance.

Taken at face value, the results suggested verypositive orientations towards the strategicdimension of quality, its impact uponthe satisfaction levels of their customers andupon organisational performance. Neverthelessthere are apparent inconsistencies in theanswers. The lack of knowledge of importantissues like customer satisfaction suggests thatsome may be painting an over-optimisticpicture. This is particularly true in smallerorganisations. There may well be grounds forbelieving that many are only practising partialTQM.

In all of the above it must be remembered thatthe data represent only the perceptions of therespondents, not necessarily the reality of thepractices and behaviours. Further investigationmay show whether this degree of scepticism isjustifiable, by testing these attitudes andperceptions in two ways:

(a) by exploring the degree to which theywere based upon tangible data rather thanperception alone;

(b) by examining leadership behaviourswhich would be consistent with these attitudesand beliefs.

In other words, would differences inunderstanding, motivation and customerorientation be manifest in different behavioursin practice, e.g. towards the methods of

measurement of customer satisfaction, themechanisms used to engender employee involve-ment and the quantification of the financialimpact of TQM on business performance? Ifthis were true then the results presented heresuggest that small organisations will performcomparatively poorly on these dimensions ofpractice.

REFEREN ES1. Whyte, J. and Witcher, B. J., The adoption of TQMin northern England: an interim report. Occasional

Paper, 9236, Durham University Business School,Boston, 1992.

2. Argyris, C., Overcoming Organisational Defences:Facil it ati ng Organisati onai Learning Allyn and Bacon,1990.

3. Develin et al., The Effecti veness of Qual it y mprovementProgrammes in Bri ti sh Business 1989.

4. Kearney, A. T., Creati ng t he Environment for TQM1991.

5. General Accounting Office, Report on ManagementPractices: US companies improve performance throughquality efforts, GAO, 1991.

6. Kearney, A. T., Total Quali ty: Time to take offt he rose t in t ed spectacl es A. T. Kearny Co, London1991.

7. Kearney, A. T., Achieving Customer SatisfactionLeadershi p i n Europe A. T. Kearny Co, London 1992.

8. Ernst and Young, International Quality Study.(In four oartsl. Ernst and Young. Cleveland. Ohioi 992. _ I.

9. Ingersoll Engineers, Commitment-Implementing theVision, Ingersoll Engineers, England 1992.10. Binney, G., Making quality work: Lessons

from Europes leading companies. Special ReaortNo P655, -The Economist Intelligende Unit, UK1992.

11. M anagement Today Putting the total into total quality.August, 1994, pp. 56-60.

12. Dale, B. G. and Praponoulos, M., Starters orders.European Quali ty 1994 i 28-32.

13. Witcher, B. J., The adootion of Total OualitvManagement in Scotland. Durham University BusinessSchool, 1993.

14. Goh, P. L. and Ridgway, K., Total QualityManagement and the implications for innovationand growth in small and medium sized enterprises.In Proceedi ngs of In t ernat i onal Conference onTechnology Transfer and Innovat ion Queen ElizabethConference Centre, London. 18-20 July, 1994, pp.19-24.

15. Porter, L. J. and Parker, A. J., Total QualityManagement-the critical success factors. _TotalQual it y M anagement 1993 4 13-22.

16. Voss, C. A., Made in Britain. The true state of Britainsmanufacturing industry. IBM (UK1 Ltd and LondonBusiness School, 1993: .

17. Wilkinson, A., Redman, T. and Snape, E., Qual i tyand t he M anager The Institute of Management,London, 1993, p. 38.

18. Moreno-Luzon, M. D., Can total quality managementmake small firms competitive?. Total Q ual i ty M anage-ment 1993, 4, 165-181.


13/13

Omega Vol. 25 No. 5 51919. Ghobadian, A. and Gallear, D. N., Total Quality 21. Batchelor, C., Management: the growing business.Management and SMEs. Omega International Journal ] Financial Times February 23, 12, 1993.

of Management Science 1996 24 83-106.20. Begg, I. and Mayes, D., Peripherality and Northern ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE PrOfeSSOr W AndrewIreland. National Institute Economic Review 1994 Taylor Management Centre University of Bradford

November 90-100. Emm Lane Bradford West Yorkshire BD9 4JL.

Documents

Leadership Challange hfd