You are on page 1of 16

The TQM Magazine

TQM as a management system consisting of values, techniques and tools


Ulrika HellstenBengt Klefsj

Article information:
To cite this document:
Ulrika HellstenBengt Klefsj, (2000),"TQM as a management system consisting of values, techniques and tools", The TQM
Magazine, Vol. 12 Iss 4 pp. 238 - 244
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09544780010325822
Downloaded on: 16 December 2016, At: 08:31 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 39 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 15939 times since 2006*

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:


(2006),"Lean production, six sigma quality, TQM and company culture", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18 Iss 3 pp. 263-281 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/09544780610659998
(2006),"Similarities and differences between TQM, six sigma and lean", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18 Iss 3 pp. 282-296 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/09544780610660004

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:460145 []

For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com


Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Perspectives
TQM as a management
system consisting of
values, techniques and
tools

Background

Ulrika Hellsten and


Bengt Klefsjo

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

The authors
Ulrika Hellsten is a Research Engineer and
Bengt Klefsjo is a Professor, both at the Division of
Quality Technology & Statistics, Lulea University of
Technology, Sweden.
Keywords
TQM, Techniques, Management styles
Abstract
The interest in total quality management (TQM) has
increased rapidly in recent years. Some people see TQM
as something necessary to reach competitiveness but
others claim TQM to be merely a management fad. We
believe that there are several reasons for the different
opinions about TQM. One is that the gurus, who often are
seen as fathers of TQM, do not like the concept. Another
one is that there are several similar names for roughly the
same idea. A third one, which, maybe, is the most severe,
is that there are many vague descriptions and few
definitions of what TQM really is. In this paper we will
discuss some of the problems with TQM and describe and
discuss our own view of TQM as a management system
consisting of the three interdependent components:
values, techniques and tools. We strongly believe that this
definition will help to understand and implement TQM.
Electronic access
The research register for this journal is available at
http://www.mcbup.com/research_registers/
quality.asp
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is
available at
http://www.emerald-library.com
The TQM Magazine
Volume 12 . Number 4 . 2000 . pp. 238244
# MCB University Press . ISSN 0954-478X

Total quality management (TQM) has gained


much attention in recent years. Many articles
and books, both in academic press and
popular press, have been written on the
subject. Some people see TQM as something
necessary to reach competitiveness and
emphasize the relation between TQM and
success (e.g. US GAO, 1991; Becker, 1993;
Ghobadian and Gallear, 1996). Others claim
TQM to be merely a management fad and
point out that many companies have failed to
implement TQM (e.g. Binney, 1992; Harari,
1993; Hackman and Wageman, 1995).
We believe that there are several reasons for
the different opinions about TQM. One is
that the gurus, who often are seen as fathers of
TQM, do not like the concept. Another one is
that there are several similar names for
roughly the same idea. A third one, which,
maybe, is the most severe, is that there are
many vague descriptions and few definitions
of what TQM really is. These reasons are of
course partly related to each other.
In this paper we will discuss some of the
problems with TQM and describe and discuss
our own view of TQM as a management
system consisting of values, techniques and
tools.

TQM gurus do not like the term TQM


Many of the famous quality gurus have not
actually used the term TQM although much
of their work has been recognized as being
relevant and sometimes quoted as referring to
TQM. For instance, Deming never did use
the term TQM. He said ``the trouble with
total quality management, the failure of
TQM, you can call it, is that there is no such
thing. It is a buzzword. I have never used the
term, as it carries no meaning'' (Deming,
1994a, p. 22). In a conversation with William
Latzko in 1992 Deming said that ``the term
TQM implies that quality is a method when
in reality it is the outcome of a method''
(Latzko, 1998). Also Juran is critical of the
concept ``It is astounding how the term TQM
is tossed about without defining what it
means. To me, TQM consists of those actions
needed to get to world-class quality. Right
We are grateful to Professor William Golomski for
valuable comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

238

TQM as a management system

The TQM Magazine


Volume 12 . Number 4 . 2000 . 238244

Ulrika Hellsten and Bengt Klefsjo

now, the most comprehensive list of those


actions is contained in the Baldrige Award
criteria . . .'' (Juran, 1994, p. 32). This
resistance to the term TQM from some gurus
might have got people confused and doubtful.

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

The existence of many similar concepts


give confusion
There is little agreement on what TQM really
means. One reason for the confusion might be
that there are many different terms used in
literature when discussing this topic, such as
for instance total quality control
(Feigenbaum, 1956, 1991), total quality
improvement (Lascelles and Dale, 1991),
company wide quality control (Ishikawa,
1985), and strategic quality management
(Garvin, 1988). The difference, if any,
between these and other concepts is often
unclear and creates confusion. There are,
however, also descriptions of the term TQM
available in literature.

Vague descriptions of TQM


Several attempts have been made to define
TQM. Most of these definitions are, in our
opinion, rather vague. We can often see
formulations such as ``a way to. . .'', ``a
philosophy for. . .'', ``a culture of. . .'', ``an
approach for. . .'', ``a business strategy that. . .''
and so on. Examples of definitions, or maybe
sometimes more descriptions, can be found in
e.g. Tenner and DeToro (1992); Oakland
(1993); Dahlgaard et al. (1994); and Kanji
(1995). Also the definition in ISO 8402
(Quality management and quality assurance
terminology) is in our opinion quite vague.
There TQM is said to be a ``management
approach of an organization, centred on
quality, based on the participation of all its
members and aiming at long-run success
through customer satisfaction, and benefits to
all members of the organization and to
society''. The absence of a clear definition of
TQM is probably the most important
negative factor among those discussed in this
paper.
One reason for these confusions and also
for the use of different terms in the definitions
of TQM might be the development and
interpretation of TQM as a term over time,
from something like a philosophy to

something more like culture. The philosophy


is the foundation for the concept, the culture
is the desired state, which will be reached
when the philosophy is realized, and the
strategy is the way to realize the philosophy,
see Lundquist (1995). Another explanation
might be that much of the literature is written
by consultants and the question of what
TQM ``really is'' has not interested the
academia to a larger extent.

Total quality management as a


management system
The concept of TQM is generally understood,
and often also described, as some form of
``management philosophy'' based on a
number of core values, such as customer
focus, continuous improvement, process
orientation, everybody's commitment, fast
response, result orientation and learn from
others (see e.g. Table I). What here are called
core values are also in literature named
principles, dimensions, elements or
cornerstones, which indicates that the
terminology is unclear and inconsistent. We
prefer the term core values since it is a way to
emphasize that these statements should work
together to constitute the culture of the
organization, and that they accordingly are
basic concepts. A discussion about core
values related to organizational cultures and
TQM can be found in e.g. Hellsten (1997)
and Cameron and Sine (1999).
One problem is that the suggested core
values differ more or less between different
authors, and also the number of core values in
TQM differs; for a discussion see Cameron
and Sine (1999).
Often TQM is illustrated by the model of a
quality award, such as the Malcolm Baldrige
National Quality Award in the USA (NIST,
1999) or the European Quality Award
(EFQM, 1999) established by the European
Foundation for Quality Management
(EFQM). However, the relation between the
award models and TQM is often quite
diffuse. The number of core values also differs
between the award models and accordingly
also the core values themselves. This is
probably even more confusing since these
award models and their award criteria
certainly have had more influence on the
practical implementation of TQM than the
articles written by academia.

239

TQM as a management system

The TQM Magazine


Volume 12 . Number 4 . 2000 . 238244

Ulrika Hellsten and Bengt Klefsjo

Table I Core values of awards


Malcolm Baldrige National
Quality Award

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

Customer-driven quality
Leadership
Continuous improvement and learning
Valuing employees
Fast response
Design quality and prevention
Long-range view of the future
Management by fact
Partnership development
Public responsibility and citizenship
Results focus

European Quality Award

The Swedish Quality Award

Results orientation
Customer focus
Leadership and consistency of purpose
Management by processes and facts
People development and involvement
Partnership development
Public responsibility

Customer orientation
Committed leadership
Participation by everyone
Competence development
Long-range perspective
Public responsibility
Process orientation
Prevention
Continuous improvement
Learning from others
Faster response
Management by facts
Partnership

Note: The core values which are said to be the basis for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, the
European Quality Award and the Swedish Quality Award. (The Swedish Quality Award, SQA, was established in
1992 by The Swedish Institute for Quality and was at that time strongly based on the Malcolm Baldrige Award.
Since then the SQA has been developed to be more adapted to the Swedish society.)

A literature study (Hellsten, 1997) shows that


a number of core values seems to be common
in most descriptions of TQM, namely: ``focus
on customers'', ``management commitment'',
``everybody's commitment'', ``focus on
processes'', ``continuous improvements'', and
``fact-based decisions''. These values are close
to the core values presented by Bergman and
Klefsjo (1994) and there called ``the
cornerstones of TQM'' (see Figure 1).
The evolution of quality management has
reached a point where quality is being viewed
as a basis for competition. This perspective
suggests that quality has moved from a
narrow, manufacturing-based discipline to a
corporate emphasis applied to all business
functions and employees with broader
implications for management. Due to this
shift TQM is more focused towards overall
strategic planning and has therefore more and
more changed to be a management theory to
be used by management as a basis for how to
Figure 1 The cornerstones of total quality management as presented by
Bergman and Klefsjo (1994)

act in order to fulfil the organization's goals.


The interest in TQM can partly be explained
as a result of an increasing interest in
management theories (see e.g. Huczynski,
1993). The relation between TQM and some
other theories is illustrated in Figure 2.
Further discussion on TQM related to other
management theories can be found in e.g.
Boaden (1997), Dean and Bowen (1994),
Grant et al. (1994) and Spencer (1994).

TQM and its components


To us, this development means that TQM is
much more than core values. It is a
management system, a system in the sense of
Deming, i.e. as ``a network of interdependent
components that work together to try to
accomplish the aim of the system'' (Deming,
1994b, p. 50).
Figure 2 TQM as a management theory among others, from
Hellsten (1997)

240

TQM as a management system

The TQM Magazine


Volume 12 . Number 4 . 2000 . 238244

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

Ulrika Hellsten and Bengt Klefsjo

One of the components consists, in our


opinion, of the core values. The core values
are the basis for the culture of the
organization. Another component is
techniques, i.e. ways to work within the
organization to reach the values. A technique
consists of a number of activities performed in
a certain order. The third component consists
of tools, i.e. rather concrete and well-defined
tools which sometimes have a statistical basis,
to support decision making or facilitate
analysis of data. These three components are
interdependent on each other and support
each other, see Figure 3.
We believe that it is important to classify
different terms related to TQM according to
any of the three components. For instance,
QFD (quality function deployment) has often
been looked on as a tool, probably depending
on the confusion between QFD and the
Quality House. However, QFD is defined as
``a system for translating consumer
requirements into appropriate company
requirements at each stage from research and
product development to engineering and
manufacturing to marketing/sales and
distribution'' (Slabey, 1990), and is therefore,
in our opinion, a technique. The Quality
House, on the other hand, is a tool to be used
within that technique. In a similar way design
of experiments (DOE) is a technique, but, for
instance, a factorial design is a tool to be used
within DOE. As still another example, the
control chart is a tool to be used within
process management or process control,
Figure 3 Three components of TQM

which are both techniques. The booklet with


criteria related to a quality award, such as
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award or
the European Quality Award, is a tool. That
tool can be used within self-assessment which
is a technique supporting many different core
values. In particular self-assessment will
support ``let everybody be committed'' if
many people in the organization are involved
in the the self-assessment process. By
consistently using a terminology based on
core values, techniques and tools, the
``concepts'' used within TQM will be
clarified, which certainly simplifies for
organizations working with TQM since it
gives a picture and structure of what TQM is
about.
Any system should have an aim. ``Without
an aim there is no system'', according to
Deming (1994b). The aim of the TQM
system is in our opinion to increase external
and internal customer satisfaction with a
reduced amount of resources. Accordingly,
the system has a focus on external customers,
but also an internal focus on employee
satisfaction and effectiveness. However, it
should be pointed out that the objectives of
TQM seem to vary between different authors,
from Feigenbaum's ``cost effectiveness'' to
Deming's and Juran's ``survival through
profitability'' (see a discussion in Hellsten,
1997).
However, the TQM system is also
continuously evolved. Over time, some core
values might change, and in particular the
interpretation of some of them might be
developed. As an example we can consider
the change in the interpretation of the concept
of ``customer'' from ``buyer'' to include
several categories of external customers and
also internal customers.
But new techniques will also appear or be
transferred from other management theories.
One example of this might be policy
deployment. New tools will also be developed
or taken from other disciplines. A recent
example is the seven product development
tools, see Konda (1995). However, the name
of the three components and the aim of the
system will stay over time.
One of the things that is important to notice
is that TQM really should be looked on as a
system. The values are supported by
techniques and tools to form a whole. For
example, the core value of ``Let everybody be
committed'' cannot be implemented without

241

TQM as a management system

The TQM Magazine


Volume 12 . Number 4 . 2000 . 238244

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

Ulrika Hellsten and Bengt Klefsjo

suitable techniques. Some of these might be


``improvements groups'' or ``quality circles''.
However, these techniques and their groups
will not work efficiently without use of
specific tools. Examples of such tools might
be ``Ishikawa diagram'', ``Pareto diagram''
and ``histograms''. Another core value is
``focus on processes''. One technique to
establish process orientation is process
management (see e.g. Harrington, 1991).
Some tools which are useful when working
with process management are process maps
and control charts. As another example we
can mention the value of ``focus on
customers''. Here quality function
deployment might be a useful technique and
the Quality House is then a tool for a
systematic transformation. Another technique
might be customer surveys and a tool here is
the questionnaire.
There are several benefits with the system
view of TQM. One is that it emphasizes the
role of top management. Many of the
organizations that have failed with TQM have
not had sufficient top management
commitment (see e.g. Dahlgaard et al., 1994;
Oakland, 1993; Tenner and de Toro, 1992).
Another one is that it focuses on the totality
and hopefully decreases the risk that an
organization picks up just parts of the system.
We know that one reason why several
companies have failed with implementing
TQM is that they just use small parts from the
system. They pick up one or a few tools or
techniques (see e.g. Deleryd, 1997; Hoerl,
1995) and believe that these will solve their
problems. They do not see TQM as a whole
system. Illustrations of this are the use, or
maybe we should call it the abuse, of control
charts and quality circles some decades ago.
We have to start with the core values and
ask: Which core values should characterize
our organization? When that is decided we
have to identify techniques that are suitable to
our organization to use and which support
our values. Finally, from that decision the
suitable tools have to be identified and used in
an efficient way to support the techniques (see
Figure 4). As an example, benchmarking
should not be used without seeing the reason
for using that technique and you should not
use just control charts without seeing the core
value behind the choice and a systematic
implementation of the techniques and tools.
It is, of course, important to note that a
particular technique can support different

Figure 4 Role of core values, techniques and tools

core values and the same tool can be useful


within many techniques. If we can use such
techniques and tools we support several
values which of course is of benefit to the
culture.
It is also important to note that the quality
culture is a subset of the company culture (see
Cameron and Sine, 1999). On the other
hand, a similar system approach as the one we
have suggested for TQM might be used for all
the organizational culture.

Some other system proponents


The idea of using a system approach to TQM
is not quite new. Examples of definitions,
which have inspired us, are for instance those
created at the Proctor & Gamble-sponsored
conference (1992) and also the definition by
Shiba et al. (1993) who says that ``TQM is an
evolving system of practices, tools and
training methods for managing companies to
provide customer satisfaction in a rapidly
changing world''.
In an article by Dean and Bowen (1994) a
trial is made to focus on what they call
``principles'', ``practices'' and ``techniques''.
They also indicate a similar approach as the
one in this paper in the sense that ``TQM
develops over time particularly with
increasing adoption and experience, the
relative importance of these principles will
change''.
A discussion about principles and practices
and the confusion between these within TQM
can also be found in Boaden (1997). She
claims that the distinction between principles
(i.e. beliefs or tenets) and practices (things
that organizations do that display and embody
their beliefs) is a key issue and that there
seems to be little evidence to support this
distinction in literature. ``Most authors appear

242

TQM as a management system

The TQM Magazine


Volume 12 . Number 4 . 2000 . 238244

Ulrika Hellsten and Bengt Klefsjo

to list a mixture of beliefs and activities as


`principles', but this may cause confusion,
since not all principles can be implemented
without the use of practices.''
However, none of these papers have, in our
opinion, a clear definition based on a
management system perspective.
Furthermore, they do not include our
components: values, techniques and tools,
and, most of all, they do not emphasize the
chain to work from values, via techniques to
tools.

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

Conclusions
TQM should, as we see it, be viewed as a
management system consisting of the three
interdependent components: values,
techniques and tools. Techniques and tools
support the values and together they form a
whole. We strongly believe that this definition
will facilitate for organizations to understand
and implement TQM. The work of
implementation should begin with the
identification of core values that should
characterize the organization. The next step is
to distinguish techniques that are suitable to
for the organization use and which support
the chosen values. Ultimately, from that
decision suitable tools have to be identified
and used in an efficient way in order to
support the techniques.
The system view of TQM will reduce the
risk that an organization only picks up parts of
the system without considering how the
values are supported and whether it is of
benefit to the culture. As implied, the
implementation of TQM is more likely to
succeed and hopefully the approach will
decrease the risk of ``jumping from one tuft to
another''. Not the least to small organizations,
which have even more problems than large
organizations to implement TQM (Hellsten
and Klefsjo, 1998), this system view gives a
more complete picture, which we believe will
simplify and give a better structure to the
work of implementation.
Further research in this area is to study the
evolution of the TQM system, especially how
the core values change over time and how the
interpretation of them develops.

References
Becker, S.W. (1993), ``TQM does work; ten reasons why
misguided attempts fail'', Management Review,
May, pp. 32-3.
Bergman, B. and Klefsjo, B. (1994), Quality from Customer
Needs to Customer Satisfaction, McGraw-Hill,
London, and Studentlitteratur, Lund.
Binney, G. (1992), Making Quality Work. Lessons from
Europes's Leading Companies, The Economist's
Intelligence Unit, London.
Boaden, R.J. (1997), ``What is total quality management
. . . and does it matter?'', Total Quality
Management, Vol. 8, pp. 153-71.
Cameron, K. and Sine, W. (1999), ``A framework for
organizational quality culture'', Quality
Management Journal, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 7-25.
Dahlgaard, J.J., Kristensen, K. and Kanji, G.K. (1994), The
Quality Journey; A Journey Without an End, Carfax
Publishing Company, Abingdon.
Dean, J. and Bowen, D. (1994), ``Management theory and
total quality: improving research and practice
through theory development'', Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 19, pp. 392-418.
Deleryd, M. (1997), ``A strategy for mastering variation'',
In 1997 ASQC Quality Congress Transactions,
Orlando, pp. 760-78.
Deming, W.E. (1994a), ``Report card on TQM'',
Management Review, January, pp. 22-5.
Deming, W.E. (1994b), The New Economics for Industry,
Government, Education, 2nd edition, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
EFQM (1999), The European Quality Award, European
Foundation for Quality Management, Brussels.
Feigenbaum, A.V. (1956), ``Total quality control'', Harvard
Business Review, November-December, pp. 93-101.
Feigenbaum, A.V. (1991), Total Quality Control, 3rd
edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Garvin, D.A. (1988), Managing Quality, The Free Press,
New York, NY.
Ghobadian, A. and Gallear, D.N. (1996), ``Total quality
managment in SMEs'', Omega, Vol. 24 No. 1,
pp. 83-106.
Grant, R.M., Shan, R. and Krishnan, R. (1994), ``TQM's
challenge to management theory and practice'',
Sloan Management Review, Winter, pp. 50-4.
Hackman, J.R. and Wageman, R. (1995), ``Total quality
management: empirical, conceptual and practical
issues'', Adminstrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40
No. 2, pp. 309-3421.
Harari, O. (1993), ``Ten reasons why TQM doesn't work'',
Management Review, January, pp. 33-8.
Harrington, H.J. (1991), Business Process Improvement,
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Hellsten, U. (1997), ``The Springboard a TQM-based tool
for self-assessment'', Licentiate Thesis No. 42,
Division of Quality Technology & Statistics, Lulea
University of Technology.
Hellsten, U. and Klefsjo, B. (1998), ``Some efforts in
Sweden to stimulate TQM work in small
enterprises'', Proceedings from the 10th Annual
Quality Management Conference, Session P.,
San Diego, CA.
Hoerl, R.W. (1995), ``Enhancing the bottom-line impact of
statistical methods'', Quality Management Journal,
Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 58-74.

243

TQM as a management system

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

Ulrika Hellsten and Bengt Klefsjo

The TQM Magazine


Volume 12 . Number 4 . 2000 . 238244

Huczynski, A.A. (1993), ``Explaining the succession of


management fads'', International Journal of Human
Resource Management, Vol. 4, pp. 443-63.
Ishikawa, K. (1985), What is Total Quality Control? The
Japanese Way, Prentice Hall, Engelwood Cliffs, NJ.
ISO 8402, Quality Management and Quality Assurance
Terminology.
Juran, J. (1994), ``The upcoming century of quality'',
Quality Progress, August, pp. 29-37.
Kanji, G. (Ed.) (1995), ``Quality and statistical concepts'', in
Kanji, Proceedings of the First World Congress on
Total Quality Management, Chapman & Hall,
London, pp. 3-10.
Konda, N. (1995), ``The seven product planning tools'',
Total Quality Management, Vol. 6, pp. 13-19.
Lascelles, D.M. and Dale, B.G. (1991), ``Levelling out the
future'', Total Quality Management, December,
pp. 325-30.
Latzko, W.J. (1998), Communication on
``den.list@deming.eng.clemson.edu"
Lundquist, R. (1995), Quality Related Costs in Higher
Education A Tool for Improvements?, Research
Report 1995:4, Divison of Quality Technology &
Statistics, Lulea University (in Swedish).
NIST (1999), The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality
Award, ASQ Quality Press, Milwaukee, WI.

Oakland, J.S. (1993), Total Quality Management. The


Route to Improving Performance, 2nd edition,
Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Procter & Gamble (1992), Report to the Total Quality
Leadership Steering Committee and Working
Councils, Procter & Gamble, Cincinnati, OH.
Shiba, S., Graham, A. and Walden, D. (1993), A New
American TQM; Four Practical Revolutions in
Management, Productivity Press/The Center for
Quality Management, Portland, OR.
Slabey, W.R. (1990), In the Second Symposium on Quality
Function Deployment/QPC, Automotive Division
ASQC, Milwaukee, WI and the American Supplier
Institute, Novi, MI, pp. 21-86.
Spencer, B.A. (1994), ``Models of organization and total
quality management: a comparison and critical
evaluation'', Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 19, pp. 446-71.
Tenner, A.R. and DeToro, I.J. (1992), Total Quality
Management: Three Steps to Continuous
Improvement, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,
Reading, MA.
United States General Accounting Office (1991),
Management Practices: US Companies Improve
Performance Through Quality Efforts, United States
General Accounting Office, GAO/NSIAD-91-190,
Washington, DC.

Commentary
An interesting perspective on the nature of TQM and the role of quality values, techniques and tools.
244

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

This article has been cited by:


1. Amjad Fayoumi, Pericles Loucopoulos. 2016. Conceptual modeling for the design of intelligent and emergent information
systems. Expert Systems with Applications 59, 174-194. [CrossRef]
2. LagrosenYvonne Yvonne Lagrosen Associate Professor Yvonne Lagrosen holds a PhD in quality management from Chalmers
University of Technology. Her main research interests are organizational learning and quality management related to health
and fitness, performance, values/core values and brain functioning. She has a wide range of publications in those areas.
TravisFrederick Frederick Travis Professor Frederick Travis received his Masters and PhD in Psychology. He had a two-year
post-doctoral position at UC. Davis and the VA Medical Center in Martinez, CA, with Dr Irwin Feinberg, exploring brain
changes during sleep. He has authored 70 papers that investigate the relation between brain patterns, performance, conscious
processes, states of consciousness and meditation practice. Department of Engineering Science, University West, Trollhttan,
Sweden Center for Brain, Consciousness and Cognition, Maharishi University of Management, Fairfield, Iowa, USA . 2016.
Developing a neuropsychological measurement to capture workplace learning. Journal of Modelling in Management 11:3,
783-801. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. ArcidiaconoGabriele Gabriele Arcidiacono CostantinoNico Nico Costantino YangKai Kai Yang Innovation and Information
Engineering Department, Marconi University, Rome, Italy Leanprove, Florence, Italy Leanprove, Florence, Italy, and
Industrial and Systems Engineering Department, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA . 2016. The AMSE Lean
Six Sigma governance model. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma 7:3, 233-266. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. ErikssonMaria Maria Eriksson IngelssonPernilla Pernilla Ingelsson Department of Quality Technology and Management,
KMM, stersund, Sweden Department of Quality Technology and Management, Mid Sweden University, stersund,
Sweden . 2016. Building an organizational culture when delivering commercial experiences the leaders perspective.
International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences 8:2, 229-244. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
5. Desire H. van Dun, Jeff N. Hicks, Celeste P.M. Wilderom. 2016. Values and behaviors of effective lean managers: Mixedmethods exploratory research. European Management Journal . [CrossRef]
6. Satyendra Kumar Breja Centre for Quality Management, Standards and Calibration Services, National Council for Cement
and Building Materials, Ballabgarh, India Devinder Kumar Banwet Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute
of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India K C Iyer Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi,
New Delhi, India . 2016. Towards sustainable excellence: strategic analysis of Deming Prize winning companies. The TQM
Journal 28:3, 390-410. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
7. Salvatore Moccia Aydin University, Istanbul, Turkey AND University Castilla la Mancha, Cuenca, Spain . 2016. The role of
value and virtues in TQM: an overview of literature. The TQM Journal 28:2, 216-234. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
8. Lars-ke Mikaelsson, Johan Larsson. 2016. Integrated planning for sustainable building production an evolution over three
decades. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 1-8. [CrossRef]
9. Magnus Holm, Gran Adamson, Philip Moore, Lihui Wang. 2016. Why I want to be a Future Swedish Shop-floor Operator.
Procedia CIRP 41, 1101-1106. [CrossRef]
10. Vanajah Siva, Ida Gremyr, Bjarne Bergquist, Rickard Garvare, Thomas Zobel, Raine Isaksson. 2016. The support of Quality
Management to sustainable development: a literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production . [CrossRef]
11. Muhammad Asif, Henk J. de Vries. 2015. Creating ambidexterity through quality management. Total Quality Management
& Business Excellence 26:11-12, 1226-1241. [CrossRef]
12. Michael Donauer, Paulo Peas, Americo Azevedo. 2015. Identifying nonconformity root causes using applied knowledge
discovery. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 36, 84-92. [CrossRef]
13. Tove Holm, Kaisu Sammalisto, Thomas S. Grindsted, Timo Vuorisalo. 2015. Process framework for identifying sustainability
aspects in university curricula and integrating education for sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production 106,
164-174. [CrossRef]
14. Vasileios Ismyrlis, Odysseas Moschidis. 2015. The use of quality management systems, tools, and techniques in ISO 9001:2008
certified companies with multidimensional statistics: the Greek case. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 26:5-6,
497-514. [CrossRef]
15. Michael Donauer, Paulo Peas, A.L. Azevedo. 2015. Nonconformity tracking and prioritisation matrix: an approach for
selecting nonconformities as a contribution to the field of TQM. Production Planning & Control 26:2, 131-149. [CrossRef]
16. Stefan Lagrosen Department of Marketing, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden Yvonne Lagrosen Department of
Engineering Sciences, University West, Trollhttan, Sweden . 2014. Work integrated learning for employee health in schools.
International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences 6:4, 387-398. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
17. Nadine Hietschold, Ronny Reinhardt, Sebastian Gurtner. 2014. Measuring critical success factors of TQM implementation
successfully a systematic literature review. International Journal of Production Research 52:21, 6254-6272. [CrossRef]
18. Kanwal Nasim, Muhammad Zahid Iqbal, Iram A. Khan. 2014. Antecedents of TQM implementation capability: a review
with a conceptual model. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 25:11-12, 1395-1409. [CrossRef]

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

19. Nilda Tri Putri Department of Industrial Engineering, Andalas University, Padang, Indonesia Shari Mohd. Yusof Department
of Manufacturing & Industrial Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Skudai, Malaysia Dradjad Irianto
Department of Industrial Engineering, Bandung Institute of Technology, Bandung, Indonesia . 2014. The Delphi hierarchy
process-based study of quality engineering in Malaysia and Indonesia automotive companies. The TQM Journal 26:6, 566-576.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
20. Nicholas Kingsley Graham Faculty of Business Administration, Pentecost University College, Kumasi, Ghana Yarhands Dissou
Arthur University of Education, Winneba, Kumasi, Ghana Duke Peprah Mensah Combert Impression, Accra, Ghana . 2014.
Managerial role in ensuring successful total quality management programme in Ghanaian printing firms. The TQM Journal
26:5, 398-410. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
21. Jos lvarez Garca, Mercedes Vila Alonso, Jos Antonio Fraiz Brea, Mara de la Cruz del Ro Rama. 2014. Relacin entre
herramientas y factores crticos de la calidad. Revista Europea de Direccin y Economa de la Empresa 23:2, 82-97. [CrossRef]
22. Rohayati Che Din, Salina Daud. 2014. Critical Success Factors of MS1500:2009 Implementation. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences 121, 96-103. [CrossRef]
23. Apiwat Krommuang, Opal Suwunnamek. 2014. How Organizational Characteristics and Employee Involvement Affect Quality
Management Practices in the Thai Food Industry. Research Journal of Business Management 8:3, 203-216. [CrossRef]
24. Alemu Moges Belay Department of Engineering Design and Materials, Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Trondheim, Norway and Department of Production Technology, University of Vaasa, Vaasa, Finland Fentahun Moges Kasie
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Hawassa University, Hawassa, Ethiopia Petri Helo Department of
Production Technology, University of Vaasa, Vaasa, Finland Josu Takala University of Vaasa, Vaasa, Finland Daryl J. Powell
Department of Production and Quality Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway .
2014. Adoption of quality management practices. Benchmarking: An International Journal 21:1, 77-100. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
25. M. Natarajan Department of Mechanical Engineering, Adithya Institute of Technology, Coimbatore, India V. Senthil
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Adithya Institute of Technology, Coimbatore, India S.R. Devadasan Department
of Production Engineering, PSG College of Technology, Coimbatore, India N. Vijay Mohan Research and Development
Department, Lakshmi Machine Works Limited, Coimbatore, India N.M. Sivaram Department of Production Engineering,
PSG College of Technology, Coimbatore, India . 2013. Quality and reliability in new product development. Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management 24:8, 1143-1162. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
26. Mohammad Ali Shafia, Mammo Muchie, Ali Reza Babakhan. 2013. Articulating the Construct of Organizational
Innovativeness in Iranian SMEs. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 5:5, 389-394. [CrossRef]
27. Amalia Venera Todorut. 2013. The Need of Total Quality Management in Higher Education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences 83, 1105-1110. [CrossRef]
28. Manoj Dora, Maneesh Kumar, Dirk Van Goubergen, Adrienn Molnar, Xavier Gellynck. 2013. Food quality management
system: Reviewing assessment strategies and a feasibility study for European food small and medium-sized enterprises. Food
Control 31:2, 607-616. [CrossRef]
29. Shun-Hsing Chen. 2013. Integrated analysis of the performance of TQM tools and techniques: a case study in the Taiwanese
motor industry. International Journal of Production Research 51:4, 1072-1083. [CrossRef]
30. Su Mi Dahlgaard-Park, Chi-Kuang Chen, Jiun-Yi Jang, Jens J. Dahlgaard. 2013. Diagnosing and prognosticating the quality
movement a review on the 25 years quality literature (19872011). Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 24:1-2,
1-18. [CrossRef]
31. Elisabeth Johansson, Lars Witell, Mattias Elg. 2013. Changing quality initiative does the quality profile really change?.
Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 24:1-2, 79-90. [CrossRef]
32. Ali Mohammad Mosadeghrad. 2013. Obstacles to TQM success in health care systems. International Journal of Health Care
Quality Assurance 26:2, 147-173. [CrossRef]
33. Amalia Venera Todorut. 2012. Sustainable Development of Organizations through Total Quality Management. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 62, 927-931. [CrossRef]
34. Yvonne LagrosenDepartment of Engineering Sciences, University West, Trollhttan, Sweden Frederick T. TravisCenter for
Brain, Consciousness and Cognition, Maharishi University of Management, Fairfield, Iowa, USA Stefan LagrosenDepartment
of Economics and Informatics, University West, Trollhttan, Sweden. 2012. Brain integration as a driver for quality
management success. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences 4:3, 253-269. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
35. Yvonne LagrosenDepartment of Engineering Science, University West, Trollhttan, Sweden Ingela BckstrmDepartment
of Technology and Sustainable Development, Mid Sweden University, Ostersund, Sweden Hkan WiklundDepartment of
Technology and Sustainable Development, Mid Sweden University, Ostersund, Sweden. 2012. Approach for measuring
healthrelated quality management. The TQM Journal 24:1, 59-71. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

36. Pernilla Ingelsson, Maria Eriksson, Johan Lilja. 2012. Can selecting the right values help TQM implementation? A case
study about organisational homogeneity at the Walt Disney Company. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 23:1,
1-11. [CrossRef]
37. Stefan Lagrosen, Yvonne Lagrosen. 2012. Trust and quality management: Perspectives from marketing and organisational
learning. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 23:1, 13-26. [CrossRef]
38. Syaiful-Rizal Hamid. 2012. What's the Principles of TechnologyManagementEliciting Technology ManagementPrinciples
through Expert Opinion. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology . [CrossRef]
39. Andrea ChiariniChiarini & Associates, Bologna, Italy University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy. 2011. Japanese total quality control,
TQM, Deming's system of profound knowledge, BPR, Lean and Six Sigma. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma 2:4,
332-355. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
40. Manuel F. SurezBarrazaEGADE Business School, Mxico, Tecnolgico de Monterrey, Monterrey, Mxico Juan Ramis
PujolOperations Management and Innovation Department, ESADE Ramon Llull University at Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
Laoucine KerbacheIndustrial Engineering and Operations Research, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts,
USA. 2011. Thoughts on kaizen and its evolution. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma 2:4, 288-308. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
41. Ching-Chow Yang, King-Jang Yang. 2011. An integrated model of value creation based on the refined Kano's model and the
blue ocean strategy. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 22:9, 925-940. [CrossRef]
42. Assadej Vanichchinchai, Barbara Igel. 2011. The impact of total quality management on supply chain management and firm's
supply performance. International Journal of Production Research 49:11, 3405-3424. [CrossRef]
43. Ingela Bckstrm, Pernilla Ingelsson, Hkan Wiklund. 2011. Learning from others to adapt quality management to the
future. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 22:2, 187-196. [CrossRef]
44. Peter Sderholm, Ramin Karim. 2010. An enterprise risk management framework for evaluation of eMaintenance.
International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management 1:3, 219-228. [CrossRef]
45. Georg F. Bauer, Frithjof Mller, Alice Inauen, Mark Brink, Thomas Laeubli. 2010. State of worksite health promotion
in companies with and without Quality-Management systems: A comparative study. Human Factors and Ergonomics in
Manufacturing & Service Industries 20:5, 451-460. [CrossRef]
46. Christos V. Fotopoulos, Evangelos L. Psomas, Fotis K. Vouzas. 2010. Investigating total quality management practice's interrelationships in ISO 9001:2000 certified organisations. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 21:5, 503-515.
[CrossRef]
47. L. TheuvsenDevelopments in quality management systems for food production chains 324-346. [CrossRef]
48. Birgitta Bergvall-Kreborn, Bjarne Bergquist, Bengt Klefsj. 2009. Creating social change in a municipality using a Total
Quality Management approach. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 20:12, 1375-1393. [CrossRef]
49. Abdul Talib Bon, Norhayati Abdul RahmanQuality measurement in lean manufacturing 1-7. [CrossRef]
50. Larry Weinstein. 2009. The application of a Total Quality Management approach to support student recruitment in schools
of music. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 31:4, 367-377. [CrossRef]
51. Ingela BckstrmQuality Technology and Management, Department of Engineering, Physics and Mathematics, Mid Sweden
University, stersund, Sweden Johan LarssonQuality Technology and Management, Department of Engineering, Physics
and Mathematics, Mid Sweden University, stersund, Sweden Hkan WiklundQuality Technology and Management,
Department of Engineering, Physics and Mathematics, Mid Sweden University, stersund, Sweden. 2009. Are healthy and
successful organizations working accordingly to quality management?. International Journal of Workplace Health Management
2:3, 245-257. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
52. Christos FotopoulosDepartment of Business Administration of Food and Agricultural Enterprises, University of Ioannina,
Agrinio, Greece Evagelos PsomasDepartment of Business Administration of Food and Agricultural Enterprises, University of
Ioannina, Agrinio, Greece. 2009. The use of quality management tools and techniques in ISO 9001:2000 certified companies:
the Greek case. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 58:6, 564-580. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
53. Ismail Erol, William G. Ferrell. 2009. Integrated approach for reorganizing purchasing: Theory and a case analysis on a
Turkish company. Computers & Industrial Engineering 56:4, 1192-1204. [CrossRef]
54. Vinod KumarSprott School of Business, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada Franck ChoisneSprott School of Business,
Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada Danuta de GrosboisDepartment of Tourism and Environment, Brock University, St
Catharines, Canada Uma KumarSprott School of Business, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada. 2009. Impact of TQM on
company's performance. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 26:1, 23-37. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
55. Emre ahin Dlarslan. 2009. A review of post-modern management techniques as currently applied to Turkish forestry.
Journal of Environmental Management 90:1, 25-35. [CrossRef]

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

56. sa RnnbckDivision of Quality Sciences, Chalmers University of Technology, Gteborg, Sweden Lars WitellService
Research Center, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden. 2008. A review of empirical investigations comparing quality
initiatives in manufacturing and service organizations. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 18:6, 577-593.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
57. Alan BrownNorthern Ireland Bioengineering Centre (NIBEC), University of Ulster, Newtownabbey, UK Julie EatockSchool
of Information Systems, Computing and Mathematics, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK Dorian DixonNorthern Ireland
Bioengineering Centre (NIBEC), University of Ulster, Newtownabbey, UK Brian J. MeenanNorthern Ireland Bioengineering
Centre (NIBEC), University of Ulster, Newtownabbey, UK John AndersonNorthern Ireland Bioengineering Centre (NIBEC),
University of Ulster, Newtownabbey, UK. 2008. Quality and continuous improvement in medical device manufacturing. The
TQM Journal 20:6, 541-555. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
58. Peter JohanssonSupplier Quality Engineer, Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication, Lule University of Technology, Malm,
Sweden. 2008. Implementing stakeholder management: a case study at a microenterprise. Measuring Business Excellence 12:3,
33-41. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
59. Stephanus Johannes Viljoen, Cornelis Cristo van WaverenAn improved model for quantifying an organisational quality culture
1781-1789. [CrossRef]
60. sa WrederQuality and Environmental Management, Lule University of Technology, Lule, Sweden Maria
GustavssonDepartment of Behavioural Sciences, Linkping University, Linkping, Sweden Bengt KlefsjQuality and
Environmental Management, Lule University of Technology, Lule, Sweden. 2008. Management for sustainable health.
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 25:6, 561-584. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
61. Dag NslundDepartment of Management, Coggin College of Business, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, Florida,
USA. 2008. Lean, six sigma and lean sigma: fads or real process improvement methods?. Business Process Management Journal
14:3, 269-287. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
62. Su Mi DahlgaardParkBengt KlefsjDivision of Quality and Environmental Management, Lule University of Technology,
Lule, Sweden Bjarne BergquistDivision of Quality and Environmental Management, Lule University of Technology,
Lule, Sweden Rickard GarvareDivision of Quality and Environmental Management, Lule University of Technology, Lule,
Sweden. 2008. Quality management and business excellence, customers and stakeholders. The TQM Journal 20:2, 120-129.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
63. Su Mi DahlgaardParkAndreas HellstrmDivision of Quality Sciences, Department of Technology Management and
Economics, Chalmers University of Technology, Gteborg, Sweden Henrik ErikssonSouthern lvsborg Hospital (SS),
Bors, Sweden. 2008. Are you viewing, mapping or managing your processes?. The TQM Journal 20:2, 166-174. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
64. Johan Larsson, Stig Vinberg, Hkan Wiklund. 2007. Leadership, Quality and Health: Using McGregor's X and Y Theory
for Analyzing Values in Relation to Methodologies and Outcomes. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 18:10,
1147-1168. [CrossRef]
65. Juan Jos Tar, Jos Francisco Molina, Juan Luis Castejn. 2007. The relationship between quality management practices
and their effects on quality outcomes. European Journal of Operational Research 183:2, 483-501. [CrossRef]
66. Roland HarneskDivision of Quality and Environmental Management and Department of Health Science, Lule University
of Technology, Lule, Sweden Lena AbrahamssonDepartment of Human Work Sciences, Lule University of Technology,
Lule, Sweden. 2007. TQM: an act of balance between contradictions. The TQM Magazine 19:6, 531-540. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
67. Cristina MeleDepartment of Business Economics, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy. 2007. The synergic
relationship between TQM and marketing in creating customer value. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal
17:3, 240-258. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
68. Stefan LagrosenUniversity of Trollhttan/Uddevalla, Uddevalla, Sweden. 2007. Quality management and environment:
exploring the connections. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 24:4, 333-346. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
69. Nicholas ChilesheBuilt Environment Division, Faculty of Development and Society, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield,
UK. 2007. Quality management concepts, principles, tools and philosophies. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology
5:1, 49-67. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
70. Peter SderholmCentre for Dependability and Maintenance, Division of Operation and Maintenance Engineering, Lule
University of Technology, Lule, Sweden Mattias HolmgrenCentre for Dependability and Maintenance, Division of
Operation and Maintenance Engineering, Lule University of Technology, Lule, Sweden Bengt KlefsjCentre for
Dependability and Maintenance, Division of Operation and Maintenance Engineering, Lule University of Technology, Lule,
Sweden. 2007. A process view of maintenance and its stakeholders. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 13:1, 19-32.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

71. Pieternel A. Luning, Willem J. Marcelis. 2007. A conceptual model of food quality management functions based on a technomanagerial approach. Trends in Food Science & Technology 18:3, 159-166. [CrossRef]
72. Ozden Bayazit, Birsen Karpak. 2007. An analytical network process-based framework for successful total quality management
(TQM): An assessment of Turkish manufacturing industry readiness. International Journal of Production Economics 105:1,
79-96. [CrossRef]
73. Ching-Chow Yang. 2006. Establishment of a Quality-Management System for Service Industries. Total Quality Management
& Business Excellence 17:9, 1129-1154. [CrossRef]
74. Magnus SvenssonLule University of Technology, Lule, Sweden Bengt KlefsjLule University of Technology, Lule,
Sweden. 2006. TQMbased selfassessment in the education sector. Quality Assurance in Education 14:4, 299-323. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
75. Raine IsakssonGotland University, Visby, Sweden. 2006. Total quality management for sustainable development. Business
Process Management Journal 12:5, 632-645. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
76. Cristina MeleBusiness Economics Department, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy Maria ColurcioBusiness
Economics Department, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy. 2006. The evolving path of TQM: towards business
excellence and stakeholder value. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 23:5, 464-489. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
77. Su Mi DahlgaardParkRoy AnderssonSchool of Engineering, University College of Bors, Bors, Sweden Henrik
ErikssonSchool of Engineering, University College of Bors, Bors, Sweden Hkan TorstenssonSchool of Engineering,
University College of Bors, Bors, Sweden. 2006. Similarities and differences between TQM, six sigma and lean. The TQM
Magazine 18:3, 282-296. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
78. ChingChow YangDepartment of Industrial Engineering, ChungYuan Christian University, ChungLi, Taiwan. 2006. The
impact of human resource management practices on the implementation of total quality management. The TQM Magazine
18:2, 162-173. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
79. Stefan LagrosenUniversity of Trollhttan, Uddevalla, Sweden Yvonne LagrosenChalmers University of Technology,
Goteborg, Sweden. 2006. A dive into the depths of quality management. European Business Review 18:2, 84-96. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
80. Gran SvenssonOslo School of Management, Oslo, Norway. 2006. Sustainable quality management: a strategic perspective.
The TQM Magazine 18:1, 22-29. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
81. DEEB Salah, IUNG Benot. 2006. ISO9000 BASED ADVANCED QUALITY APPROACH FOR CONTINUOUS
IMPROVEMENT OF MANUFACTURING PROCESSES. IFAC Proceedings Volumes 39:3, 799-804. [CrossRef]
82. Gran SvenssonSchool of Business and Engineering, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden. 2005. Leadership performance
in TQM: a contingency approach. The TQM Magazine 17:6, 527-536. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
83. Henrik ErikssonDivision of Quality and Environmental Management, Lule University of Technology, Lule, Sweden
Rickard GarvareDivision of Quality and Environmental Management, Lule University of Technology, Lule, Sweden. 2005.
Organisational performance improvement through quality award process participation. International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management 22:9, 894-912. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
84. Lars NilssonWitellService Research Center, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden Marc AntoniRobert Bosch GmbH,
Driver Assistance Systems, Project Management, Automotive Electronics, Leonberg, Germany Jens J. DahlgaardDivision of
Quality Technology and Management, Linkping University, Linkping, Sweden. 2005. Continuous improvement in product
development. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 22:8, 753-768. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
85. Martin LjungstrmArrigo Consultants, Lule University of Technology and University College of Gvle, Lule, Sweden.
2005. A model for starting up and implementing continuous improvements and work development in practice. The TQM
Magazine 17:5, 385-405. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
86. Yvonne LagrosenChalmers University of Technology, Gteborg, Sweden Stefan LagrosenUniversity of Trollhattan
Uddevalla, Uddevalla, Sweden. 2005. The effects of quality management a survey of Swedish quality professionals.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management 25:10, 940-952. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
87. Bjarne BergquistDivision of Quality and Environmental Management, Lule University of Technology, Lule, Sweden Maria
FredrikssonDivision of Quality and Environmental Management, Lule University of Technology, Lule, Sweden Magnus
SvenssonDivision of Quality and Environmental Management, Lule University of Technology, Lule, Sweden. 2005. TQM:
terrific quality marvel or tragic quality malpractice?. The TQM Magazine 17:4, 309-321. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
88. Maria Fredriksson. 2005. A cooperation model for the third sector based on Total Quality Management. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence 16:6, 693-706. [CrossRef]
89. Nicholas Chileshe Theo C. Haupt. 2005. Modelling critical success factors of construction project management (CPM).
Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology 3:2, 140-154. [Abstract] [PDF]

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

90. David R. BamfordManchester School of Management, UMIST, Manchester, UK Richard W. GreatbanksManchester School
of Management, UMIST, Manchester, UK. 2005. The use of quality management tools and techniques: a study of application
in everyday situations. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 22:4, 376-392. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
91. Ali Mohammad Mosadegh RadSchool of Management, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham, UK. 2005. A survey
of total quality management in Iran. Leadership in Health Services 18:3, 12-34. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
92. Juan Jos TarDepartment of Business Management, University of Alicante, Spain. 2005. Components of successful total
quality management. The TQM Magazine 17:2, 182-194. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
93. Gran SvenssonSchool of Business and Engineering, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden Greg WoodBowater School
of Management and Marketing, Deakin University, Warrnambool, Australia. 2005. Corporate ethics in TQM: management
versus employee expectations and perceptions. The TQM Magazine 17:2, 137-149. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
94. Gran SvenssonSchool of Business and Engineering, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden Greg WoodBowater School
of Management and Marketing, Deakin University, Warrnambool, Victoria, Australia. 2005. Business ethics in TQM. The
TQM Magazine 17:1, 19-34. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
95. Stefan LagrosenDepartment Chairman in the School of Management and Economics, Vxj University, Vxj, Sweden. 2004.
Quality management in global firms. The TQM Magazine 16:6, 396-402. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
96. Juan Jos Tar, Vicente Sabater. 2004. Quality tools and techniques: Are they necessary for quality management?. International
Journal of Production Economics 92:3, 267-280. [CrossRef]
97. Peter Sderholm. 2004. Continuous Improvements of Complex Technical Systems: a Theoretical Quality Management
Framework Supported by Requirements Management and Health Management. Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence 15:4, 511-525. [CrossRef]
98. Henrik ErikssonHenrik Eriksson is a PhD Student in the Division of Quality and Environmental Management, Lule
University of Technology, Lule, Sweden.. 2004. Organisational value of participating in a quality award process: a Swedish
study. The TQM Magazine 16:2, 78-92. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
99. Maria FredrikssonMaria Fredriksson is a PhD student in the Division of Quality and Environmental Management, Lule
University of Technology, Lule, Sweden.. 2004. Experienced effects from applying TQM in societal improvement work in
a Swedish community. The TQM Magazine 16:1, 6-13. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
100. Roland HarneskResearch Engineer in the Division of Quality & Environmental Management, Lule University of
Technology, Lule, Sweden.. 2004. Partnership with internal customers a way to achieve increased commitment. The TQM
Magazine 16:1, 26-32. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
101. Jonas HanssonDivision of Quality Technology and Statistics, Lule University of Technology, Lule, Sweden and
Fredrik BacklundDivision of Quality Technology and Statistics, Lule University of Technology, Lule, Sweden Liselott
LyckeDepartment of Technology, University of Trollhttan/Uddevalla, Trollhttan, Sweden. 2003. Managing commitment:
increasing the odds for successful implementation of TQM, TPM or RCM. International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management 20:9, 993-1008. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
102. Henrik ErikssonDoctoral student in the Division of Quality and Environmental Management at Lule University of
Technology, Lule, Sweden. 2003. Experiences of working with incompany quality awards: a case study. The TQM Magazine
15:6, 397-407. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
103. Stefan LagrosenSchool of Management and Economics, Vxj University, Vxj, Sweden Yvonne LagrosenDepartment of
Total Quality Management (IIQ), Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg, Sweden. 2003. Quality configurations:a
contingency approach to quality management. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 20:7, 759-773.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
104. Ozden BayazitOzden Bayazit is Visiting Faculty, Department of Management, Youngstown State University, Youngstown,
Ohio, USA.. 2003. Total quality management (TQM) practices in Turkish manufacturing organizations. The TQM Magazine
15:5, 345-350. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
105. Stefan LagrosenAssociate Professor of Marketing and Quality Management at the School of Management and Economics,
Vaxjo University, Vaxjo, SwedenYvonne LagrosenPhD Candidate in Quality Management in the Department of Total Quality
Management, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden. 2003. Management of service quality differences
in values, practices and outcomes. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 13:5, 370-381. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
106. Stefan LagrosenSchool of Management and Economics, Vxj University, Vxj, Sweden. 2003. Exploring the impact of
culture on quality management. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 20:4, 473-487. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
107. Anders GustafssonService Research Center, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden Lars NilssonService Research Center,
Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden Michael D. JohnsonUniversity of Michigan Business School, Ann Arbor, Michigan,
USA. 2003. The role of quality practices in service organizations. International Journal of Service Industry Management 14:2,
232-244. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

108. Jonas HanssonThe Division of Quality Technology and Statistics, University of Lule, Lule, Sweden.Bengt KlefsjThe
Division of Quality Technology and Statistics, University of Lule, Lule, Sweden.. 2003. A core value model for
implementing total quality management in small organisations. The TQM Magazine 15:2, 71-81. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
109. Hkan WiklundProfessor of Quality Technology, Mid Sweden University and Lule University of Technology, SwedenBengt
KlefsjProfessor of Quality Technology, Lule University of Technology, Sweden.Pia Sandvik WiklundDeputy Vice
Chancellor, Mid Sweden University, Sweden.Bo EdvardssonProfessor of Business Administration, Special Services, Karlstad
University, Sweden.. 2003. Innovation and TQM in Swedish higher education institutions possibilities and pitfalls. The
TQM Magazine 15:2, 99-107. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
110. Fco. Javier Llorns MontesManagement Department, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain Antonio Verd
JoverManagement Department, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain Luis Miguel Molina FernndezManagement
Department, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain. 2003. Factors affecting the relationship between total quality
management and organizational performance. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 20:2, 189-209.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
111. 2003. Erratum. Measuring Business Excellence 7:1, 36-50. [Abstract] [PDF]
112. Eva LindbergDepartment of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Health Service Research, University of Uppsala, Uppsala,
Sweden Urban RosenqvistDepartment of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Health Service Research, University of Uppsala,
Uppsala, Sweden. 2003. The staff s views on whats the job the starting point for quality improvement in health care.
International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance 16:1, 47-54. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
113. Jonas HanssonJonas Hansson is a Doctoral Students, at the Division of Quality Technology & Statistics at the Lulea
University of Technology, Sweden.Henrik ErikssonHenrik Eriksson is a Doctoral Students, at the Division of Quality
Technology & Statistics at the Lulea University of Technology, Sweden.. 2002. The impact of TQM on financial
performance. Measuring Business Excellence 6:4, 44-54. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
114. Stefan LagrosenStefan Lagrosen is an Associate Professor in the School of Management and Economics, Vxj University,
Vxj, Sweden.. 2002. Quality management in Europe: a cultural perspective. The TQM Magazine 14:5, 275-283. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
115. Don BathiePaisley Business School, Paisley, UK Josh SarkarPaisley Business School, Paisley, UK. 2002. Total quality
marketing (TQMk) a symbiosis. Managerial Auditing Journal 17:5, 241-244. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
116. Mats Lindell, Magnus Svensson. 2002. Among Demons and Angels: Attitudes towards system evaluation for quality
improvement in advanced vocational education. Quality in Higher Education 8:2, 127-136. [CrossRef]
117. Hkan Wiklund, Pia Sandvik Wiklund. 2002. Widening the Six Sigma concept: An approach to improve organizational
learning. Total Quality Management 13:2, 233-239. [CrossRef]
118. Jonas Hansson. 2001. Implementation of total quality management in small organizations: A case study in Sweden. Total
Quality Management 12:7-8, 988-994. [CrossRef]
119. Stefan LagrosenAssociate Professor at the School of Management and Economics, Vxj University, Sweden.. 2001.
Strengthening the weakest link of TQM from customer focus to customer understanding. The TQM Magazine 13:5,
348-354. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
120. Bengt KlefsjBengt Klefsj is Professor of Quality Technology and Management and Head of the Division of Quality
Technology and Statistics at Lule University of Technology in Sweden. He has published about 75 scientific articles and is
coauthor of 18 published books in mathematics, statistics and quality technology and management. He has been a member
of the jury of the Swedish Quality Award all the time since the start in 1992 and is also a member of the scientific board
of SIQ, the Swedish Institute for Quality. Email: Bengt.Klefsjo@ies.luth.se Hkan WiklundHkan Wiklund is Professor
of Quality Technology at the Division of Quality Technology and Statistics at Lule University of Technology in Sweden.
He also works at Mid Sweden University, Sweden. He is author of about 75 papers in international journals and conference
proceedings. He is leader of several research projects in the fields of manufacturing process control, process management and
product development. Email: Hakan.Wiklund@ter.mh.se Rick L. EdgemanRick Edgeman is Professor and Director of the
SABER Institute for SelfAssessment and Business Excellence Research at Colorado State University and Executive Director
of MAAOE, the Multinational Alliance for the Advancement of Organisational Excellence. Quality Progress identified Rick
as one of 21 Voices of Quality for the 21st Century in its January 2000 issue. He has authored more than 100 articles
and has also served as a Visiting Professor in the Quality and Innovation Research Group the Aarhus School of Business in
Denmark and in the Division of Quality Technology and Statistics at the Lule University of Technology in Sweden. E
mail: Rick.Edgeman@colostate.edu. 2001. Six sigma seen as a methodology for total quality management. Measuring Business
Excellence 5:1, 31-35. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
121. Peter E.D. LoveSchool of Architecture and Building, Deakin University Zahir IraniDepartment of Information Systems &
Computing, Brunel University Heng LiDepartment of Building & Real Estate, Hong Kong Polytechnic University Eddie
W.L. ChengDepartment of Building & Real Estate, Hong Kong Polytechnic University Raymond Y.C. TseDepartment of
Building & Real Estate, Hong Kong Polytechnic University. 2001. An empirical analysis of the barriers to implementing e

Downloaded by University of New Mexico At 08:31 16 December 2016 (PT)

commerce in smallmedium sized construction contractors in the state of Victoria, Australia. Construction Innovation 1:1,
31-41. [Abstract] [PDF]
122. S.R. Lobo, K. RamanathanInformation and communication technology supported total quality management 310-320.
[CrossRef]
123. Alfred L. Guiffrida, Kelly O. Weeks, Lihua ChenImproving Supply Chain Delivery Performance Using Lean Six Sigma
89-117. [CrossRef]
124. M. A. BejjarInformation and Communication Technology a Catalyst to Total Quality Management (TQM) 5074-5083.
[CrossRef]

You might also like