سهم زیرساخت های اندازه گیری و اطلاعات برای موفقیت مدیریت کیفیت جامع (TQM)

There is currently some debate about which TQM practices contribute most to superior performance outcomes. Several proponents argue that softer TQM practices such as leadership, human resource management, and customer focus have more impact than benchmarking, process analysis or performance measurement. The evidence for which TQM factors contribute most to improved performance is not yet conclusive, and sometimes contradictory. Using data from a longitudinal study of 67 TQM firms we contribute to this debate. Our central hypothesis is that measurement of key TQM practices and performance outcomes is essential for TQM success. We examine the measurement practices of this cohort of firms, and report on the changes in their measurement behavior over time. Specifically, we analyze seven dimensions of measurement relating to customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, process performance, impact of TQM on costs, impact of TQM on sales, self-assessment, and benchmarking. We calculate a measurement-intensity score for each firm, based on how many of these seven parameters were being measured, and we show that increased measurement intensity is strongly associated with perceived TQM success. Finally, using multivariate discriminant analysis, we identify eight variables that explain the level of TQM success with a classification accuracy of almost 90%. We conclude that to attain the highest levels of TQM success, firms need to engage in the measurement practices of self-assessment and benchmarking, but our data suggest that an appropriate measurement framework needs to be in place beforehand.

This paper provides further insight into a cohort of 67 firms practicing TQM. The research design is longitudinal, and has tracked their TQM implementations since 1992. The specific focus of this paper is on the measurement practices of the firms and the relationship between measurement behavior and perceived TQM success. Our core hypothesis is that, since measurement and management by fact is a key tenet of TQM, firms that gather data on parameters such as customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, and process performance will be likely to experience higher levels of success with TQM. In other words, measurement can be as much a driver of improvement as a mere confirmation. In the first study of these firms in 1992 [1], we found that many were gathering very little data on which to base their judgments of the business impact of TQM, although for some, TQM was a relatively recent phenomenon. At that time the cohort comprised 113 firms. Based on our analysis of this initial data set, we questioned the sustainability of TQM in the absence of measurement and customer focus, and highlighted the need for greater organizational awareness of performance through the practices of benchmarking and self-assessment [2]. In the second phase of this study, we found that 37% of the cohort had discontinued TQM, largely in favor of ISO9000, leaving 67 firms where TQM was still operational. These 67 firms were achieving varying levels of success with TQM, with only 17 classifying it as very successful compared to 25 reporting less success than anticipated [3].

This paper has produced five contributions to the literature. In relation to our first research question, this work remains one of a very few longitudinal studies of TQM implementation, and shows how measurement behavior has changed over time. For this cohort of 67 firms, their propensity to measure key dimensions of TQM implementation has increased significantly. Nevertheless, many of the firms continue to avoid measuring many of these parameters, with, in extremis 16 (24%) still not measuring the impact of TQM on cost efficiency and 37 (55%) not measuring employee satisfaction. In a small number of cases, measurement had been discontinued, mainly due to perceptions about the disproportionately high cost of data collection relative to the benefits. Such continuing absence of measurement leads, in our opinion, to the real possibility that these TQM programs will be discontinued due to a lack of tangible results. Our second research question was predicated on the notion that there would be a positive relationship between the extent of measurement and TQM success. By computing a measurement intensity factor, we have shown that a broader portfolio of measures is associated with higher levels of TQM success. This does not mean that the mere act of measuring necessarily leads to more success from TQM. Of at least equal importance are the methods of quantification of these outcome measures and the ways that they are communicated and used within each firm. Nevertheless, measuring seems to be an important first step in the process of establishing a cybernetic feedback loop between activities and achievements, such that employees may correct their behavior without additional management intervention [9]. The practices of self-assessment and benchmarking did not permit longitudinal comparison, since these two variables were not included in the earlier surveys. Nonetheless, these two activities are currently not widely practiced within the cohort, casting further doubt upon the continuance of many of these TQM programs.