Session 1_Article 2_Total Quality Management_Origins and Evolution of the Term

8/10/2019 Session 1_Article 2_Total Quality Management_Origins and Evolution of the Term

1/9

Introduction

In the global marketplace increased levels of

competition have resulted in quality becom-

ing of increasing importance to organisations

and consequently total quality management

(T QM) has become a key management issue.A considerable number of companies are

applying TQM and the topic is the subject of

many books and papers. As the end of the

twentieth century approaches, T QM appears

to be a well-accepted system of management.

Yet two decades ago the term was not used.

What has been the process of development of

TQM theory and practice and when and why

did the term come into being? This paper

attempts to answer these questions.

Before discussing the origins of TQM it is

necessary to examine definitions of the term.This is not an easy task as almost every writer

on the subject has their own definition, by and

large devising it to suit their own beliefs, preju-

dices and business and academic experiences.

To some degree this is also true in the organisa-

tions which have introduced a TQM approach

to managing the business. The result is a prolif-

eration of unique definitions which confounds

comparisons and adds to the difficulties of

understanding and analysis. Even with the

publication of an international definition ofTQM in ISO 8402(1994) there is ample evi-

dence that writers and researchers do not stick

to this definition and create their own unique

offering. Moreover, as Hackman and Wage-

man (1995) state, a large number of interven-

tions not related with T QM are being encom-

passed under the TQM banner; this further

complicates the issue of definition and under-

standing. Despite the divergence of views on

what constitutes TQM there are a number of

common elements running through the various

definitions (e.g. top management support,customer and supplier relationships and

employee involvement). Several writers have

tried to define the different dimensions that

shape TQM , including Ahireet al. (1996),

Daleet al. (1994), F lynnet al. (1994) and

Saraphet al. (1989). Table I contains an analy-

sis by the authors of the common dimensions.

In this paper the discussion about the

development of T QM begins with a brief

historical review of the different stages that

preceded the birth of T QM. A comparativeanalysis of the Japanese approach to quality

management and an examination of

Feigenbaums (1961) concept of total quality

control is made, these constitute two of the

37 8

The TQM Magaz ine

Volume 10 Number 5 1998 pp. 378386

M CB Un iv ersi ty Press I SSN 09 54 -4 78 X

Research and concept s

Tot al qualit ym anageme nt: origins

and evolut ion of t heterm

Angel R. M artnez-Lorente

Frank Dewhurst and

Bar rie G. Dale

The authorsAngel R. M artnez-Lorente is Assistant professor of the

Department of Economia de la Empresa, University of

M urcia, Spain.

Frank De w hurst is a Lecturer in Op eratio nal Research

and Quantit ative M ethods, Director of IT, M anchester

School of M anagement, UM IST, M anchester, UK.

Barrie G. Dale is United Ut il it ies Professor of Quality

M anagement at the University of Manchester Institute of

Science and Technology and Academician of the Int erna-

tional A cademy for Quality.

Abstract

The focus of this paper is to t race the origins of the t erm

TQM and clarify the different definit io ns employed by

academics and practit ioners. Feigenbaum and Ishikaw a

are perhaps the greatest contributors to th e development

of the t erm. The other recognised quality m anagement

guru s such as Crosby, Deming and Juran have shaped t he

dimensions, practices and mechanism w hich underpin t he

concept, but it is noted t hat none of these three actually

uses the TQM term . TQM started to be used in the mid-

1980s and only became a recognised part of t he quality-

related language in the lat e 1980s. The paper also analy-ses the key dim ensions of TQM and t races their origins.


2/9


3/9

major inputs into the development of TQM.

The visions of the quality management gurus

are also examined.

A historical perspective

Powell (1995) makes the points that: T QMsorigins can be traced to 1949, when the Union

of Japanese Scientists and Engineers formed acommittee of scholars, engineers, and govern-

ment officials devoted to improving Japanese

productivity, and enhancing their post-warquality of life and American firms began to

take serious notice of T QM around 1980.

It can be argued that many of the TQM

dimensions outlined in Table I were beingapplied by organisations before the TQM

movement appeared; consequently, it is noteasy to establish the exact date of birth of the

term T QM . Stuelpnagel (1993) considersthat in Ford and Crowters bookM y Li fe and

Work, published in 1926, the origins of TQM

can be found. Nevertheless, it is clear that theterm and the philosophy as a whole appeared

around the mid 1980s. Bemowski (1992)

states that the term T QM was initially coined

in 1985 by the Naval Air Systems Commandto describe its Japanese-style management

approach to quality improvement.

Perhaps, the main reason for the origin ofthe term TQM could be a substitution in thepreviously used term of total quality control

(T QC), the word control by management

with the reasoning that quality is not just amatter of control, it has to be managed. T his is

reinforced by Demings (1982) view that

sampling inspection should be suppressed and

also by Crosby (1979) who makes the pointthat control is not necessary when a zero

defects level is achieved. T he term control is

sometimes understood as meaning control

over the workforces activities, and this is clear-ly not the aim of TQM (Godfreyet al. , 1997).

In the USA the development of quality

management resulted from the penetration ofits markets by Japanese products which start-

ed in the 1970s, together with the impact of

the writings of Crosby, Deming, Feigenbaum

and Juran. Consequently, companies andacademics studied the works of these authors

and others, such as Ishikawa, and, integrating

their approaches with quality management,

gave rise to the concept of T QM. T his move-ment was exported to other countries, the UK

being one of the first.

Dale, who started his research in qualitymanagement back in 1981, believes that the

term TQM arose in the UK from the activities

of the Department of Trade and Industry

National Quality Campaign which was

launched in 1983 and the pioneering work of

organisations such as IBM . He relates a dis-

cussion with John MacDonald (one of the

stalwarts of the UK quality management andthe first managing director of Crosby Associ-

ates UK Ltd) who mentioned that around

mid 1986 he was using the term T QM in his

cross-Atlantic communication with Philip

Crosby, who responded with the retort what

is TQM? It is also worth mentioning that in

the early to mid-1980s the use of quality-

related terms and acronyms was nothing like

as pronounced as it is today.

Table II has been created from an analysis of

the ABI-INFORM database, which includesbrief summaries of business articles published

since 1986. T he number of references with the

terms TQM , quality management (QM) and

total quality (TQ) included in them has been

searched. As Table II shows, the number of

papers including the term T QM in 1986, 1987

and 1988 is small, which confirms the view

already expressed that the term only started to

be used in the literature since the mid-1980s. It

can be seen that at the beginning of the 1990s,

the use of the term was already widespread,

reaching a peak in 1993. Since then, the num-ber of papers using the term has been in

decline, although maintaining some impor-

tance in relation to volume of material. I t is the

authors opinion that this decrease in the num-

ber of papers is because TQM is widely known

and accepted and is not attracting the attention

from writers as it once did. However, some of

the most recent incorporations into T QM,

such as benchmarking and self assessment,

38 0

Total qual i ty m anagement : or igins and evolut ion of the term

Angel R. Mart nez-Lorente, Frank Dewhu rst and Barrie G. Dale

The TQM Magaz ine

Volume 10 Number 5 1998 378386

Table I I Papers with references to TQM , QM and TQ included in theABI-INFORM database

YEAR TQM TQM % QM QM % TQ TQ % TOTAL

1986 4 0.0093 27 0.063 27 0.063 42,824

1987 7 0.0168 27 0.0648 48 0.1152 41,672

1988 10 0.0211 36 0.0758 58 0.1221 47,490

1989 44 0.096 54 0.1178 90 0.1963 45,853

1990 95 0.1861 56 0.1097 123 0.2409 51,054

1991 241 0.3996 91 0.1509 235 0.3896 60,313

1992 453 0.6772 108 0.1615 301 0.45 66,890

1993 720 0.5608 98 0.0763 612 0.4767 128,386

1994 592 0.424 91 0.0652 610 0.4369 139,608

1995 434 0.2746 57 0.0361 565 0.3575 158,046

1996 248 0.1441 82 0.0476 383 0.2225 172,156

1997 122 0.0912 84 0.0628 203 0.1517 133,810


4/9

have been the subject of further treatment in

the management literature.

If the origins of the TQM dimensions inTable I are traced and analysed, the following

key points emerge:

Those related with workforce management

and the need for top management leader-ship have their origins in the USA, arisingfrom the Hawthorne studies (Roethlisberg-

er and Dickson, 1939), the works of

Maslow (1954) and McGregor (1960) and,

more recently, that of Ouchi (1981).

With respect to process flow management,SPC has its roots in the USA with Shewhart

(1931) and the UK with Dudding (BS 600

(1935)). On the other hand, mistake proof-

ing systems are a Japanese idea (Shingo,

1986), as is the importance of cleanlinessand organisation of tools and housekeeping

using the fives and CANDO (cleanliness,

arrangement, neatness, discipline and

orderliness) principles.

The concern about consumers needs hasbeen of inherent interest to marketing

theorists since it first appeared, the main

development work on this subject has been

conducted in the USA. T he increase incompetition and demanding consumers

have been the main reasons for companies

treating this need to listen to customersvoices in a serious manner.

Most of the recommendations aboutdesign processes have arisen from observa-

tion of Japanese procedures and best prac-

tices. Taguchi methods (Taguchi, 1986)

were developed by Genichi Taguchi, a

statistician and electrical engineer who wasinvolved in rebuilding the Japanese tele-

phone system. Quality function deploy-

ment (QFD) methods were also developed

in Japan, but, as with the case of many

other Japanese management tools andtechniques, they have been popularised

world-wide by North American writers

such as Hauser and Clausing (1988).

The grounds of the supplier relationshipdimension can be found mostly in JIT

theories, which were first developed in

Toyota (Monden, 1983).

The role of the quality department has

been widely analysed by American writerssuch as Feigenbaum (1991) and Juranet al.

(1974). Benchmarking was first developed in

Xerox, an American company (Tucker et

al., 1987) and popularised by the work ofCamp (1989).

A brief rsum of the historical events that have

influenced the development of TQM theory

and practice is provided in Table III, indicatinga gradual emergence of T QM. T he use of

statistical methods and the fundamentals of the

system of workforce management began to be

developed early in the century and Japan devel-oped its TQM approach gradually from the

end of the Second World War. At the end of the

1970s and the beginning of the 1980s, Japan-ese pressure and the success of some American

writers created a general concern about the

focus on quality management in the USA, and

from this country to the rest of the world. Thepublication of the Malcolm Baldrige National

Quality Award and other similar awards in

other countries was the official recognition ofthe importance of TQM .

Com parisons bet w een Japa nese andAme rican TQC

Feigenbaum (1956, 1961) was the first authorwho used the term T QC . In his first book on

TQC (Feigenbaum, 1961) (a revision of the

book original published under the titleQuality

Controlin 1951), he defined TQC as aneffective system for integrating the quality-

development, quality maintenance, and

quality-improvement efforts of the variousgroups in an organisation so as to enableproduction and service at the most economi-

cal levels which allow for full customer satis-

faction. He considered that control muststart with the design of the product and end

only when the product has been placed in the

hands of a customer who remains satisfied.

In this book Feigenbaum recognised that alldepartments in a company have some respon-

sibility for the achievement of quality, as it was

originally perceived by Feigenbaum. Howev-

er, TQC did not include many of the elements(e.g. supplier developmental relationships,

people empowerment and teamwork) that are

now considered part of the TQM concept.Japanese companies have developed their

own approach to TQC, based on the teach-

ings of Deming and Juran, shaping it to suit

their own culture and operating environmentalong with the development of a new set of

tools, techniques and operating systems. In

the authors opinion Ishikawa was mainly

responsible for shaping Japanese style TQC.His definition of TQC or company wide

quality control (CWQC) is: Quality control

consists of developing, designing, producing,marketing, and servicing products and

381



The TQM Magaz ine



5/9

services with optimum cost-effectiveness andusefulness, which customers will purchase

with satisfaction. To achieve these aims, allthe separate parts of a company must worktogether (Ishikawa, 1990).

Analysing Feigenbaums and I shikawasdefinitions, it can be seen that there are nomajor differences. However, Ishikawa (1985)is of the view that the difference betweenCWQC and Feigenbaums approach is that,

while Feigenbaum advocates that TQC isconducted essentially by QC specialists,

CWQC has never been an exclusive domain ofsuch specialists. Indeed analysing the work ofFeigenbaum (1961), it can be seen that the

focus on the participation of employees is weakand the task of improving quality is given tomanagers. According to Garvin (1988), theterm CWQC was introduced in Japan in 1968,some ten years after Feigenbaum introduced

38 2



The TQM Magaz ine


Table II I Important events in the development of TQM

1924-1932 Hawt horne studies demonstrated t he import ance of the social and psychological c l imate in

work .

1 9 2 4 Shew hart develop ed stat istical process contro l.

1 9 2 6 The Bell Telephone began t o apply stat istical contro l met hods.

Mid-1940s The Am erican army p ushed t he use of sampling m ethods during World War II.1 9 5 0 s A large number of attem pts at w ork improvement w ere undertaken (e.g. job enrichment, w ork

redesign, partic ipative management, quality of w ork l i fe and w orker involvement).

1 9 5 0 First visit of Dem ing t o Japan.

1 9 5 1 Creation of Deming Application Prize in Japan.

First edit ion of Jurans Quality Control Handbook.

1 9 5 4 First visit o f Juran to Japan.

M aslow s theories about human needs.

1 9 6 0 Liberalisation of economy in Japan w ith pressure to im prove quality to compete w ith f oreign

companies.

M cGregors X and Y th eories.

1 9 6 1 First edit ion o f Feigenbaum s Total Quality Control.

1 9 6 2 The idea of qu ality circles appeared in the fi rst issue of t he Japanese journal Quality Control fo r

the Foreman.

Late 19 60s

and early

1 9 7 0 s The pressure of Japanese companies began t o be f elt in Am erican compan ies.

1 9 7 2 QFD w as developed at M itsubishis Kobe shipyard site.

1 9 7 3 Aft er the 197 3 oil crisis the JIT system w as adopted by a vast num ber of Japanese compani es. A

small number o f Am erican and European companies began to apply this system in t he 1980s.

Mid-1970s Quality c ircles began to be w idely introduced in the USA, the fi rst quality c ircle programm e was

launched in Lockheed in 1974 and in th e UK it was Rolls-Royce wh ich intro duced the concept in

1979.

1 9 7 9 First edit ion of Crosbys Qualit y Is Free.Xerox Corp. start ed to app ly the benchm arking concept t o processes.

Publication of t he BS 5750 qu ality m anagem ent series.

1 9 8 0 An NBC television documentary about the Japanese miracle proposed Deming as a key

element in this m iracle.

1 9 8 1 Ouchis Z theory.

1 9 8 2 First editio n of Dem ings Quality, Productiv ity and Competit ive Posit ion.

1 9 8 3 Quality on the l ine , published by Garvin in Harvard Business Review, analysed the differ-

ences betw een Japanese and American com panies, show ing some of t he reasons for th e better

performance of t he former.

A paper abou t Taguchis design of experim ents is publi shed in Harvard Business Review .

1 9 8 5 The Naval Air Systems Comm and nam ed its Japanese-style m anagement approach tot al

qua l i ty management .

1 9 8 6 First editio n of Dem ings Out of t he Crisis. It became a bestseller.

1 9 8 7 First editi on of ISO 9000 q ualit y manag ement system series.

1 9 8 7 Publication of the M alcolm Baldrige National Quality Aw ard.


6/9

the term TQC. Garvin (1988) states that

CWQC includes four principal elements: the

involvement of functions other than manufac-

turing in quality activities; the participation of

employees at all levels; the goal of continuous

improvement; and careful attention to cus-

tomers definitions of quality. He considersthe confusion between CWQC and TQC to be

widespread because whereas some experts

use the terms interchangeably others see

CWQC as a more advanced and comprehen-

sive concept. It is interesting that in Japan for

the last three years there has been discussion of

the differences between TQC and TQM and

the latter term is now starting to be used by

both organisations and academics.

The differences in Japanese and Western

views may relate to differences in culture,politics and company philosophy. Ishikawa

(1989) identified 14 areas of difference

between Japan and the West, including:

(1) In the USA and Western Europe, great

emphasis is placed on professionalism

and specialisation; QC only for QC

specialists.

(2) In the USA and Western Europe, great

emphasis is placed on the Taylor system.

(3) The pay system in the USA and Western

Europe is based on merit (to motivate

people by money alone). Japan uses asystem of seniority and ranking.

(4) High turnover rates and layoffs are found

in the West; Japan has a lifetime employ-

ment system.

(5) Relationships with subcontractors 70

per cent of a products manufacturing

costs are contributed by outside suppliers

in Japan, and only 50 per cent in the USA.

Subcontractors are treated as friends not

enemies as in the case in the West.

(6) Old-style capitalism versus democratisa-tion of capital: short-term profits versus

long-term profits.

These six differences, together with political

and cultural differences have meant that the

TQM approaches in Japan, the USA and

Europe are different. Although the Japanese

model has a proven successful track record,

the existence of differences is not necessarily

an indicator that the Western model is inferior,

since, as Ishikawa (1989) advocates, compa-

nies must adapt CWQC to the country orcompany according to differences of social

background. In the last decade numerous

success stories have emerged of TQM applica-

tions in Europe and America. Abo (1995)

demonstrates how the management of manu-

facturing systems of Japanese multinationals isdifferent in Asia, Europe and the USA. Thesedifferences indicate that Japanese multination-

als have had to adapt their management sys-tems to the different conditions of countries.

On the other hand, Ebrahimpour (1988) andGarvin (1986) examine how Japanese compa-nies operating in the USA have successfully

applied some of the features of the qualitymanagement approach they employ in Japan.

The authors consider that the way inwhich T QM has developed from the Japanese

and Feigenbaums concepts has been theinclusion of appropriate management theoryas demonstrated by the TQM dimensions

given in Table I. Examining the ISO 8402(1994) definition of T QM, it is clear that

TQC and CWQC are essentially TQM .However, differences in its application incompanies, due partially to the differences

that Ishikawa (1989) identified, still exist andthis will always be the case.

TQM : views of the quality manage mentgurus

Crosby, Deming, Feigenbaum, Ishikawa andJuran can be considered the most important

gurus of the quality management movement.However, this does not mean that theirapproaches are the same. The views of

Feigenbaum and I shikawa have already beenconsidered and the focus of attention is now

turned to Crosby, Deming and Juran.

Deming achieved great popularity in 1980

after the NBC television documentary about

success in Japan where he was considered a

key element. Although Deming maintained a

contrary position with respect to some of the

TQM elements (e.g. zero defects and quality

costing) (Deming, 1982, 1986), a consider-able number of authors (e.g. Davis and

Fisher, 1994; Grandzol and Traaen, 1995;

Milakovich, 1991; Pollock, 1993; Rago, 1994;

Schay, 1993; Tamimi and Gershon, 1995)

consider him as one of the main supporters of

the TQM concept. English (1996) considers

that Juran is related with T QM and Drensek

and Grubb (1995) and English (1996) also

consider that Crosby is a TQM theorist.

Hackman and Wageman (1995) state that

Deming, I shikawa and Juran can be consid-ered the founders of the TQM philosophy,

since TQM drinks in their works. Surpris-

ingly, they do not mention Feigenbaum, the

originator of the term TQC, which as shown

383



The TQM Magaz ine



7/9


8/9

in this paper has many similarities with the

term TQM. However, they also consider that

what many organisations are actually imple-

menting is a pale or highly distorted version of

what Deming, Ishikawa and Juran laid out.

Juran does not use the term TQM in his

main bookQual ity Control H andbook(Juranand Gryna, 1988; Juran et al. , 1974) nor in

Juran on Planning for Qualit y(Juran, 1988). I n

A H istory of M anaging for Qualityhe uses less

than one page to explain T QM and considers

that the best definition of T QM can be found

in the criteria used to judge the applications

for the USAs Malcolm Baldrige National

Quality Award (Juran, 1995). Neither does

Crosby in Qual ity I s Free(1979), nor inQuali-

ty wi thout Tears(1987) nor inCompleteness.

Quali ty for the 21st centur y(1992).A brief comparison of the ideas of these five

quality gurus in relation to the TQM dimen-

sions that were introduced in Table I is made

in Table IV. It can be seen that the need of top

management support and the importance of

customer relationship is shared by all. Bench-

marking is not considered by any of them,

perhaps because this technique came to the

fore when they already had a well-proven

approach to quality management. Deming

and Crosby focus their approaches in the

production process without referencing the

design process; however, their views are dif-

ferent, since Crosby defends the achievement

of zero defects through employees commit-

ment, whereas Deming criticises slogans and

exhortations to achieve zero defects. Both the

supplier relationship, the quality data and

reporting dimensions are not considered in

any detail by the five authors, but important

differences do not appear to exist. Ishikawas

approach is more employee focused than the

other four, which consider that quality man-agement needs to be guided mainly by man-

agers. Juran, I shikawa and Feigenbaum

devote chapters of their books to sampling

inspection, whereas Deming criticises this

technique and Crosby considers that it is not

necessary in a zero defects environment.

Conclusions

This paper has considered the evolution of the

elements, practices and mechanisms thatdefine TQM. It has been shown that, while

the term T QM only began to be popularised

in the second half of the 1980s, many of the

elements that have shaped it were developed

early, during the 1950s to 1970s. M ost theo-

retical developments in the advancement of

the concept have been made in the USA

whereas Japan has held the initiative in terms

of application.

The paper also indicates a lack of a total

agreement about how to apply T QM, assupported by the differences in the views of

the leading quality management gurus. For

example, the need for focus on workforce

management is widely accepted but the pro-

posed ways in which to apply this form of

management are different. Other elements of

TQM , such as benchmarking and supply

chain management, are not considered in any

detail by the shapers of the TQM concept.

Differences in the application of TQM

amongst different countries also appear toexist. Since the culture of the company influ-

ences the approach to the application of

TQM , different countries with different

cultures apply TQM in different ways. How-

ever, as we approach the end of the century,

economies and societies are becoming

increasingly inter-related and these differ-

ences are diminishing.

References

Abo, T. (1995), A com parison of Japanese hybrid facto-

ries in US, Europe and Asia , M anagement Interna-

t ional Review, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 79-93.

Ahi re, S. L., Golhar, D.Y. and W aller, M. A . (1996 ), Devel-

opment and val idat ion of TQM implementat ion

constructs , Decision Sciences, Vol. 27 No. 1,

pp. 23-56.

Bemow ski, K. (1992), The quality glossary , Quality

Progress, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 18-29.

BS 600 (1 935), The Application of Statistical Meth ods to

Industrial Standardisation and Quality Control,

Brit ish Standards Institutio n, London.

Camp, R.C. (1989), Benchmarking: th e Search for Indu stry

Best Practices That Lead to Superior Perform ance,

Quality Press, M ilw aukee, W I.

Crosby, P.B. (197 9), Qualit y Is Free, McGraw-Hill, New

York, N Y.

Crosby, P.B. (198 7), Quality w ithout Tears, McGraw-Hi l l ,

Singapore.

Crosby, P.B. (199 2), Completeness. Quality fo r the 21 st

Century, Dutton , USA.

Dale, B.G., Boaden, R.J. and Lascelles, D.M . (1994 ), Tota l

quality manag ement: an overview , in Dale, B.G.

(Ed.), M anaging Qual i ty, Prentice-Hall Internatio nal,

Herts, pp. 3-40.Davis, D. and Fisher, T.J. (199 4), The pa ce of change: a

case study of th e development of a tot al quality

organizat ion , International Journal of Quality &

Reliabil ity Management, Vol. 11 No. 8, pp. 5-18.

385



The TQM Magaz ine



9/9

Deming, W.E. (1982), Quality, Productivity and Com peti-

t ive Posit ion, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,

Cambridge.

Deming, W.E. (1986), Out of the Crisis, M assachusetts

Institute of Technology, Cambridge.

Drensek, R.A. and Grub b, F.B. (1995 ), Qualit y quest: one

companys successful att empt at implement ingTQ M , Qualit y Progress, Vol. 28 No. 9, pp. 91-5.

Ebrahimp our, M . (1988), An emp irical study of A merican

and Japanese approaches to quality m anagement in

the United States , International Journal of Quality

& Reliabil ity Management, Vol. 5 No. 5, pp. 5-24.

English, L.P. (1996), Help for data-quality prob lems ,

In format ionweek, No. 600, pp. 53-62.

Feigenbaum, A.V. (1956), Total quality control , Harvard

Business Review , Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 93-101.

Feigenba um , A.V. (1961), Total Quality Control, McGraw-

Hill, New York.

Feigenba um , A.V. (1991), Total Quality Control, 3rd ed.,McGraw-Hill, New York.

Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G. and Sakaki bara, S. (199 4), A

framew ork for TQM research and an associated

measurement instrument , Journal of Operations

Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 339-66.

Garvin, D.A. (1986), Quality problem s, policies, and

attit udes in the Unit ed States and Japan: an

exploratory study , Academy of M anagement

Journal, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 653-73.

Garvin, D.A. (1988), M anaging Qual i ty, The Free Press,

New York.

Godfrey, G., Dale, B., M archington, M . and W ilkinson, A.(1997), Control: a contested concept in TQM

research , International Journal of Operations &

Production Management, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 558-73.

Grandzol , J.R. and Traaen, T. (1995), Using m athem atical

programm ing to help supervisors balance work-

loads , Interfaces, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 92-103.

Hackman, J.R. and Wagem an, R. (1995), Total qu ality

managem ent: empirical, conceptual, and practical

issues , Adm inistrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40

No. 2, pp. 309-42.

Hauser, J.R. and Clausing , D. (1988 ), The hou se of quali -

t y , Harvard Business Review , Vol. 66 No. 3,

pp. 63-73.

Ishikawa, K. (1985), What Is Total Qualit y Control? The

Japanese W ay, Prentice-Hall, New York.

Ishikawa, K. (1989), How to apply companywide qual i ty

control in foreign countries , Qualit y Progress,

Vol. 22 No. 9, pp. 70-4.

Ishikawa, K. (1990), Introduction to Qualit y Control,

3A Corporation, Tokyo.

Juran, J.M ., Gryna, F.M . and Bingh am, R.S. (Eds) (1974),

Quality Control Handbook, 3rd ed., M cGraw-Hill,

New York.

Juran, J.M . (1988 ), Juran on Planning for Qualit y, Free

Press, New York.

Juran, J.M . (Ed.) (1995), A History of Managing for Quality,

ASQC Qualit y Press, M ilw aukee, Wisconsin.

Juran, J.M . and Gryna, F.M . (Eds) (1988), Quality Control

Handbook, 4th ed., McGraw -Hill, New York.

M cGregor, D.N. (1960 ), The Human Side of Enterpri se,McGraw-Hill, New York.

M aslow, A.H. (1954), M otivatio n and Personality, Harper &

Bros, New York, N Y.

M ilakovich, M .E. (1991), Total quality managem ent in the

publ ic sector , Nation al Productivity Review, Vol. 10

No. 2, pp. 195-213.

M onden, Y. (1983), Toyota production system , Institut e

of Ind ustrial Engineers, At lanta.

Ouchi, W.G. (1981), Theory Z. How Am erican Business Can

M eet th e Japanese Challenge, Addison-Wesley

Publishing, USA.

Pollock, S. (1993), The KISS principle work s , Journal forQuality & Participation, Vol. 16 No. 7, pp. 90-2.

Pow ell, T.C. (1995), Total qualit y managem ent as compet-

it ive advantage: a review and empirical study ,

Strategic M anagement Journal, Vol. 16 No. 1,

pp. 15-37.

Rago, W.V. (1994), Adapt ing tot al quality m anagement

(TQM) to government: another point of v iew ,

Public Administration Review, Vol. 54 No. 1,

pp. 61-4.

Roethlisberger, F.J. and Dickson, W.J., (1939), Management

and the Worker, Harvard Un iversity Press, Cam-

br idge, M A.Saraph, J.V., Benson, P.G. and Schroeder, R.G. (1989), An

instrument f or measuring the crit ical factors of

TQ M , Decision Sciences, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 810-29.

Schay, B.W. (1993 ), In search of the holy gra il: lessons in

per formance management , Public Personnel

Management, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 649-68.

Shew hart, W.A. (1931 ), Economic Control of Qualit y

Manufactured Product, Van Nostrand, New York.

Shing o, S. (198 6), Zero Quality Control: Source Inspection

and the Poka-Yoke System, Productiv ity Press,

Cambridge, MA.

Stuel pnag el, T.R. (1993), Dj vu: TQM returns to Detroit

and elsewhere , Qualit y Progress, Vol. 26 No. 9,

pp. 91-5.

Taguchi , G. (1986), Introduction t o Quality Engineering,

Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo.

Tamim i, N. and Gershon, M . (1995), A tool for assessing

industry TQM p ractice versus the Deming ph iloso-

phy , Production & Inventory M anagement Journal,

Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 27-32.

Tucker, F.G., Zivan, S.M . and Camp, R.C. (1987), How to

measure yourself against the best , Harvard Busi-

ness Review , Vol. 65 No. 1, pp. 8-10.

38 6



The TQM Magaz ine


Documents

Session 1_Article 2_Total Quality Management_Origins and Evolution of the Term