2010 Oxford Business & Economics Conference Program
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-1-9
“Critical Success Factors (CSFs) of TQM : A literature review & Analysis”
Jha, U.C¹ & Sunand Kumar²
Abstract
This paper represents a review of the literature on critical success factors (CSFs) of Total
Quality Management (TQM) and supported by various philosophies of TQM. Such factors are
considered as conducive to the success of TQM implementation.
Critical Success Factors (CSFs) are internal or external factors that can seriously affect the firm
for better or worse. They provide an early warning system for management and a way to avoid
surprises or missed opportunities. In the context of TQM, it is essential that the organizations
identify a few key critical success factors, which should be given special attention for ensuring
successful implementation of TQM program.
The present study will guide the researchers in selecting the reliable set of CSFs for empirical
studies. Industries can benefit by adopting the results of this study for effective implementation of
TQM.
Keywords: TQM; CSF; Implementation; Empirical
¹ Prof. U.C. Jha, Professor & Head, Department of Mechanical Engg., Kanpur Institute of
Technology, Kanpur(UP) India. E Mail: uc_jha@rediffmail.com
² Prof. Sunand Kumar, Department of Mechanical engg., National Institute of Technology,
Hamirpur(HP) India. E Mail: sunand@nitham.ac.in
1. INTRODUCTION
June 28-29, 2010
St. Hugh’s College, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
1
2010 Oxford Business & Economics Conference Program
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-1-9
Today, quality management has become one of the important forces leading to organizational
growth and a company’s success in national and international markets.
To be successful in the marketplace, each part of the organization must work properly
together towards the same goals, recognizing that each person and each activity affects and
in turn is affected by others. To improve competitiveness, organizations are looking for
a higher level of effectiveness across all functions and processes and are choosing
TQM as a strategy to stay in business. The increased awareness of senior executives, who
have recognized that quality is an important strategic issue, is reflected as an important
focus for all levels of the organization. This requires defining and implementing several factors
(identified as critical factors in this paper).
Many companies are frustrated in their effort to improve quality through TQM because these
companies have exclusively focused on financial measures instead of quality measures . Other
studies, in the recent past also observed the failure of TQM. These failures are due to the too
much- too soon effort without proper foundation and focus . Manufacturing firms, therefore, need
to understand the TQM CSFs for the successful implementation of TQM. Therefore, there is a
pressing need to establish TQM CSFs for manufacturing firms. This paper examines the TQM
frameworks developed by scholars and businesses and develops the TQM CSFs for
manufacturing firms.
1.1 Understanding Total Quality Management (TQM)
Total Quality Management has many definitions. Gurus of the total quality management
discipline like Deming, Juran, Crosby, Ishikawa and Feigenbaum defined the concept in different
ways but still the essence and spirit remained the same. According to Deming, quality is a
continuous quality improvement process towards predictable degree of uniformity and
dependability. Deming also identified 14 principles of quality management to improve
productivity and performance of the organization. Juran defined quality as “fitness for use.”
According to him, every person in the organization must be involved in the effort to make
products or services that are fit for use. Crosby defines quality as conformance to
requirements. His focus has been on zero defects and doing it right the first time. Ishikawa also
emphasized importance of total quality control to improve organizational performance.
According to him quality does not only mean the quality of product, but also of after sales
service, quality of management, the company itself and the human life. Feigenbaum defined total
quality as a continuous work processes, starting with customer requirements and ending with
customer’s satisfaction.
Definitions of quality have changed with the passage of time with changing customer’s needs and
requirements. But the essence has more or less been to develop an approach to problem solving,
conformation to standards for customer satisfaction. With management functions getting
complex, approaches to managing quality in functional areas are becoming difficult.
Organizations, which have successfully use TQM principles, have customer and quality
embedded in their corporate strategy. Any organization is a system of interrelated units. For TQM
to succeed, all of the components within the organization must be collectively involved. Initially,
organizations implemented TQM in the hope that improvement in the shop-floor activities would
solve all existing productivity and quality problems.
Later, they have realized that TQM is much more than just shop-floor improvements. The
definitions of quality incorporate factors like top management commitment, leadership, team
work, training and development, rewards and recognition, involvement and empowerment of
June 28-29, 2010
St. Hugh’s College, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
2
2010 Oxford Business & Economics Conference Program
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-1-9
employees etc. These critical factors are the foundation for transformational orientation to create
a sustainable improvement culture for competitive advantage on a continuous basis.
According to Selladurai Raj, TQM interventions or activities must be guided by four change
principles, namely work processes, variability, analysis, and continuous improvement. Product
design and production processes must be improved; variance must be controlled to ensure high
quality; data must be systematically collected and analyzed in a problem-solving cycle; and
commitment made to continuous learning by the employees about their work.
2. SELECTION AND ANALYSIS OF TQM FRAMEWORKS
An extensive literature survey has been carried out to select TQM frameworks for this study. The
relevant literature has revealed that different countries have adopted similar TQM frameworks in
the form of quality awards with a different title. Today, there are more than a hundred quality
awards existing in different countries. However, all these quality awards are basically derived
from three basic and prestigious awards: the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award
(MBNQA), the European Quality Award (EQA) and the Deming Prize. This study, therefore,
includes only these three basic awards as TQM frameworks along with other frameworks
developed by scholars. Furthermore, through the study of TQM literature, eleven TQM
frameworks developed by researchers have been selected. In total, fourteen important TQM
frameworks viz. Deming prize, MBNQA, EQA, Saraph et al., Oakland, Flynn et al., Babbar and
Aspelin, Ahire et al., Black and Porter, Pheng and Teo, Ang et al., Zhang et al., Nwabueze and
Thiagarajan et al., were chosen from the TQM literature for the purpose of establishing TQM
CSFs for the construction industry. A detailed analysis of the frameworks with respect to CSFs is
carried out and presented in Table 1 Based on the frequency analysis, the CSFs are prioritised as
shown in Table 2.
Table 1: List of CSFs as recommended by various authors
June 28-29, 2010
St. Hugh’s College, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
3
2010 Oxford Business & Economics Conference Program
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-1-9
Source: Wali, Deshmukh and Gupta, 2003
Table 1. Analysis of TQM Frameworks
Juran Ishikawa
1974 1976
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Crosby Feigen- Deming Garvin Saraph Lu & Porter
Motwani Powel Black
1979
Baum
1986
1987
et. al.
Sohal &Parker et. al.
1995 &
1983
1989
1993 1993
Porter
1995
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
*Note: 1 - Top management commitment; 2 - Strategic quality management;
3 - Process quality management; 4 - Design quality management; 5 - Education and Training; 6 Supplier quality management; 7 - Customer satisfaction; 8 - Employee empowerment and
involvement; 9 - Business results; 10 - Information and Analysis; 11 - Benchmarking; 12 Resources; 13 - Impact on society and environment; 14 - Statistical process control; 15 - Culture.
Table 2. Prioritisation of CSFs
June 28-29, 2010
St. Hugh’s College, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
4
2010 Oxford Business & Economics Conference Program
Sr. Critical Success Factors
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Top
management
commitment and leadership
Customer focus
Information and analysis
Training
Supplier management
Strategic Planning
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-1-9
No.
of
studies
in
which
the
factor was
extracted
No.
of
country
categories
in which
the factor
is present
67
23
21
53
53
50
47
38
Employee Involvement
32
Human
Resource 26
Management
Process management
26
Teamwork
22
Product & Service Design
21
Process Control
21
Benchmarking
16
Continuous improvement
16
Employee empowerment
16
Quality assurance
15
Social responsibility
10
Employee satisfaction
9
17
19
17
16
18
16
13
9
11
8
12
10
6
12
9
6
Table 2: Most commonly extracted factors across the 76 studies and the 23 countries
Source: Sila and Ebrahimpour, 2003
The basic concerns & issues for the Deming Prize is given in Table 3 as below:
1. Policy
2. Organization and its Management
3. Education and Dissemination
4. Collection, Dissemination and use of Information on Quality
5. Analysis of Data
6. Standardization
7. Control
8. Quality assurance
9. Results
10. Planning for the future
Table 3: Broad categories for the Deming Application Prize
Source: Total Quality: Management, Organization & Strategy (1999), Evans & Dean
June 28-29, 2010
St. Hugh’s College, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
5
2010 Oxford Business & Economics Conference Program
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-1-9
In an attempt to establish empirically validated factors that influence successful
implementation of TQM, Black and Porter (1996) have identified ten factors which affect
successful implementation of TQM. They are:
(i) Corporate quality culture
(ii) Strategic quality management
(iii) Quality improvement measurement system
(iv) People and customer management
(v) Operational quality planning
(vi) External interface management
(vii) Supplier’s partnerships
(viii) Teamwork structures
(ix) Customer satisfaction orientation
(x) Communication of improvement information
An early exploratory attempt to arrive at CSF in the Indian context was made by
Motwani, Mahmoud and Rice (1994) wherein they arrived at nine critical factors for
effective management of quality in Indian manufacturing industry. As the TQM literature in India
moved from introductory level discussion on TQM (Lakhe & Mohanty 1994) to more robust
research work, the emphasis also shifted from a mere duplicating of western models of quality to
trying to develop indigenous models. Wali, Deshmukh and Gupta (2003) made a review of
various critical success factors which different authors including the founding fathers of TQM
like Deming, Juran, Ishikawa, Crosby, Feigenbaum, and Garvin had recommended. Wali,
Deshmukh and Gupta started from the early work of identification of the critical success factors
(CSF) by Saraph, Benson and Schroeder (1989) to the more recent one by Ahire, Golhar and
Waller (1996). From there, they attempted to identify the critical success factors (CSF) for
adoption of TQM in the Indian context. Their study claims that these ‘CSFs are derived based on
actual practices followed by Indian organizations and it was based on a statistically validated
instrument and factor analysis. It was not based on constructing a priori set of pre-defined CSFs
and then matching it with actual practice’ (Wali, Deshmukh & Gupta 2003, p. 12).
The study by Wali, Deshmukh and Gupta (2003) is perhaps the first comprehensive
empirical study of quality practices in the Indian context. Thus it is worthwhile to look in
detail at the twelve factors identified by them. They are listed below in decreasing order of
importance.
3. ESTABLISHMENT OF CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
The frequency analysis shown in Tables 1. and 2. revealed that 13 out of the 14 frameworks
have three CSFs in common: process management, education and training, and customer
satisfaction. The analysis further revealed that 11 out of the 14 frameworks have four CSFs in
common, viz., top management commitment, supplier quality management, employee
empowerment and involvement and information and analysis. The strategic quality management
and design quality management CSFs have their presence in nine and eight frameworks
respectively. Quality culture, CSF, however, occurs only in the Black and Porter framework
(Black and Porter, 1996). However there is ample evidence from the literature on the
culture and success of quality initiatives. For instance, these researchers, Ahire and Ravichandran
(2001), Ambroz (2004), Butch and Rivers (2001), Chan and Tse (2003), Jabnoun and Anwar
(2002), Jenner et al. (1998), Laszlo (1998), Lewis (1996), Manley (1998), Perry (1997), Roney
(1997), Sinclair and Collins (1994), Waldman and Gopalakrishnan (1996), and Youssef and Zairi
June 28-29, 2010
St. Hugh’s College, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
6
2010 Oxford Business & Economics Conference Program
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-1-9
(1995) have all emphasised the importance of organizational culture for the implementation of
quality initiatives in their studies.
Culture is more powerful than anything else in the
organization. Culture, ``how we do things around here in order to succeed,'' is an organization's
way of behaving, identity, pattern of dynamic relationships, ``reality,'' or genetic code (Schneider,
1994). It has everything to do with implementation and how success is actually achieved. No
management idea, no matter how good, will work in practice if it does not fit the culture.
Therefore, quality culture is considered as one of the important CSFs of TQM.
Thus, the examination of of TQM frameworks has revealed that not all the frameworks are
comprehensive, but in many respects these frameworks complement one another. Therefore, a
blending salient feature of these frameworks is the best approach for the establishment of critical
factors for construction quality management.
Therefore, the following ten CSFs have emerged out of the above analysis:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Top management commitment
Quality culture
Strategic quality management
Design quality management
Process management
Supplier quality management
Education and training
Empowerment and involvement
Information and analysis
Customer satisfaction.
(i) Leadership, Creativity and quality strategy: Successful quality performance requires that the
leadership is dedicated to quality. It must also provide initiative and resource support. It must
enable creativity to be nurtured and accordingly chalk out the strategy. Given the importance of
leadership, it is not surprising to find that, in all quality awards, leadership issues are placed at the
top of the list of criteria. Such leadership will drive quality strategy in an organisation and nurture
creativity.
(ii) Worker – Manager interaction : This means that healthy interaction between worker and
manager is important from quality point of view. The manager provides the direction for
improvement and accordingly, workers are motivated to take initiative. In case of any
difficulty, the worker interacts with the manager to improve the situation.
(iii) Results and Recognition : Crosby (1979) considers recognition as one of the most
important steps of the quality improvement process. The organisation should reward their
employees for their contribution to quality. There should be a quick recognition system for
outstanding performance by the employees. These rewards may not be purely financial.
(iv) Work culture : The work culture must be very conducive. There should be an active
interaction amongst the peers and support from supervisors. The critical importance of the
employee’s involvement in the quality process of an organisation should be based on the belief
that the best process innovation idea comes from the people actually doing the job.
(v) Information and Data management : Information is the critical enabler of TQM. This
June 28-29, 2010
St. Hugh’s College, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
7
2010 Oxford Business & Economics Conference Program
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-1-9
factor emphasises that the key processes are regulary measured and quantified. There should be
focus on benchmarking which provides a stimilus for improvement. The facts and information
should be made available to all. This is mainly relevant for managing quality costs.
(vi) Customer Focus : Quality should be customer driven. …. Employees should be well
aware of the concept of internal and external customers. They should care about meeting and
exceeding the customer expectations. There must be a focus on customer feedback and
accordingly the process should be driven.
(vii) Value and ethics : It is important for the people in an organisation to live up to the
highest ethical standards. There should be perception of fair treatment to all. The organization
must be guided by the value and ethical standards.
(viii) Communication across the organization: Effective communication channels must exist in
the organization between various work units. With the help of information technology,
comunication can be made effective. Effective communication is vital in aligning the workforce
towards corporate expectations.
(ix) Team working: According to Crosby (1979), team work is a critical element of TQM.
Teamwork delivers synergistic enhancement of quality efforts. Employees must demonstrate
cooperative behaviour and positive attitude towards working in a team.
(x) Congenial inter – personal relations : The atmposphere in the organisation must be
highly congenial to promote active interaction. There must be mutual respect and faith
among employees.
(xi) Delegation and empowerment: In a TQM setting, both delegation and empowerment are
required. People must share responsibility for the success or failure of their work.
(xii) Process improvement: Employees must identify opportunities for continuous
improvement. If employee involvement is key to the attainment of customer satisfaction,
managing the process is key to engaging an organisation’s employees to take responsibilities for
what they are doing in relation to satisfying the customers.
5. CONCLUSION
The analysis of fourteen of the most prominent TQM frameworks has revealed that out of
fifteen CSFs, nine CSFs, are common in most of the frameworks. The analysis further pointed out
that none of the frameworks are comprehensive. Apart from the Black and Porter framework,
quality culture CSF does not exist in other frameworks even though there is ample evidence in the
literature on the culture and success of quality initiatives. Using the nine common CSFs and the
quality culture CSF, ten TQM CSFs are proposed for constuction firms, namely, top management
commitment, quality culture, strategic quality management, design quality management, process
management, supplier quality management, education and training, empowerment and
involvement, information and analysis, and customer satisfaction. These CSFs presented act as a
guide for construction organizations contemplating a TQM initiative.
June 28-29, 2010
St. Hugh’s College, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
8
2010 Oxford Business & Economics Conference Program
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-1-9
REFERENCES
1. Ambroz, M. (2004). Total quality system as a product of the
empowered corporate culture. The TQM Magazine, Vol. 16. No.
2, pp. 93-104.
2. Ang, C. L., Davies, M. and Finlay, P N.( 2000). Measures to
assess the impact of information technology on quality
management, International Journal of Quality and Reliability
Management, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 42-65.
3. Babbar, S. and Aspelin, D. (1994). J. TQM it is as easy as ABC.
The TQM magazine, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 32-38.
4. Black, S. And Porter, L. (1996). Identification of critical factors
of TQM. Decision Sciences, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 1-21.
5. Brah, S.A.; Tee, S.S.L. and Rao, B. M. (2002), “Relationship
between TQM and performance of Singapore companies”,
June 28-29, 2010
St. Hugh’s College, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
9
2010 Oxford Business & Economics Conference Program
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-1-9
International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol.
19 No. 4, pp. 356-379.
6. Culp, G., Smith, A., and Abbott, J. (1993). “Implementing TQM
in consulting engineering firm.” J. Management in Engineering,
Vol.9, No. 4, pp. 340-356.
7. Flynn, B., Schoeder, R. and Sakibaba, S. S. (1994).
A
framework for quality management research and associated
measurement instrument. Journal of Operations Management,
Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 339-366.
8. Harjeev, K., Sharma, D.D. and Sharma, R.(2007). Critical
Success Factors for Implementation of TQM in the Indian
Manufacturing Industry. The Icfai Journal of Operation
Management, Vol.6, No. 3, pp. 46-58.
9. Jha, U.C., (2009) “Competitiveness of Indian Manufacturing
Industry : An Empirical Analysis” in Manufacturing Technology
Today (under Publication).
10. Jha, U.C. and Sunand Kumar (2008) “Impact of TQM on firm’s
performance : An Empirical Analysis of Indian Manaufacturing
Industry” at 12th International SOM Conference , Indian Institute
of Technology , Kanpur
11. Jha, U.C., (2006) “Measuring the Competitiveness of Indian
Manufacturing Industry” at Summit on Indian Manufacturing
Competitiveness , Indian School of Business , Hyderabad
12. Jha, U.C., (2004) “ World Class Manufacturing – An Indian
Perspective” at National Conference of Mechanical Engg.
(COMET), Institute of Technology , BHU (India)
12.
Kaynak, H. (2003), “The relationship between total quality
management practices and their effects on firm performance”,
Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 21, pp. 405–435.
12. Elvin B. Hendricks and V. R. Singhal (2001a), “Firm
characteristics, total quality management, and financial
performance” Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 19 No.3,
pp 269-285.
13. Laszlo, G. P.(1998). Implementing a quality management
program-3 Cs of success: commitment, culture, cost. The TQM
Magazine, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp.281-287.
14. Lewis, D. (1996). The organizational culture saga - from OD to
TQM: a critical review of the literature. Part 2 - applications. J.
June 28-29, 2010
St. Hugh’s College, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
10
2010 Oxford Business & Economics Conference Program
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-1-9
Leadership and Organization Development, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp.
9-16.
15. Motwani, J., Ashok K., Mohamed, A.Y. and Essam M. (1997),
“Forecasting quality of Indian manufacturing organizations : An
exploratory analysis”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 8 No.6,
pp. 361-374.
16. Oakland, J.S. (1993). Total Quality Management: The Route to
Improving Performance. Butterworth-Hienman Limited, Oxford,
pp. 128 – 157.
17. Rao, S.S., Raghu-Nathan, T.S. and Solis, L.E. (1997), “A
comparative study of quality practices and results in India,
China and Mexico”, Journal of Quality Management, Vol. 2,
pp. 235-250.
18. Rao, S.S., Solis, L.E. and Raghunathan, T.S. (1999), “A
framework for international quality management research:
development and validation of a measurement instrument”, Total
Quality Management, Vol. 10 No. 7, pp. 1047-1075.
19. Samson, D. and Terziovski, M. (1999), “The relationship between
total quality management practices and operational performance”,
Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 17, pp. 393-409.
20. Saraph, J. V., George Benson, P., and Shroeder, R. G. (1989).
An instrument for measuring the critical factors of quality
management. Decision sciences, Vol. 20, No.4, pp. 811-829.
21. Thiagarajan, T., Zairi, M. and Dale, B.G. (2001). A proposed
model of TQM implementation based on an empirical study of
Malaysian industry. International Journal of Quality and
Reliability Management, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 289-306
22. Wali; Deshmukh and Gupta (2003). Critical success factors of
TQM: a select study of Indian organizations. Production
Planning & Control, Volume 14, Issue 1, pages 3 - 14
23. Youssef, M. A., and Zairi, M. (1995). Benchmarking critical
factors for TQM part-II – empirical results from different parts
of the world. J. Benchmarking for Quality Management and
Technology, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 3-19.
24. Zhang, Z., Waszink, A. and Wijngaard, J. (2000). An instrument
for measuring TQM implementation for Chinese manufacturing
companies. International Journal of Quality and Reliability
Management, Vol. 17, No. 7, pp. 730-755.
June 28-29, 2010
St. Hugh’s College, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
11
2010 Oxford Business & Economics Conference Program
June 28-29, 2010
St. Hugh’s College, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
ISBN : 978-0-9742114-1-9
12