Total Quality Management Project
Content
Total quality management Project Topic Of Project: Past, Present & Future Of TQM By: Shivam khandelwal TY E 3283 PRN:09020621252
About Total Quality Management
The definition of quality depends on the role of the people defining it. Most Consumers have a difficult time defining quality, but they know it when they see it. For example, although you probably have an opinion as to which manufacturer of athletic shoes provides the highest quality, it would probably be difficult for you to define your quality standard in precise terms. Also, your friends may have different opinions regarding which athletic shoes are of highest quality. The difficulty in defining quality exists regardless of product, and this is true for both manufacturing and service organizations. Think about how difficult it may be to define quality for products such as airline services, child daycare facilities, college classes, or even textbooks. Further complicating the issue is that the meaning of quality has changed over time. Today, there is no single universal definition of quality. Some people view quality as “performance to standards.” Others view it as “meeting the customer’s needs” or “satisfying the customer.” Let’s look at some of the more common dentitions of quality.
TQM is a management philosophy that supports the process of continuous improvement within an organization and where total emphasis is placed on the customer. In the socioeconomic viewpoint, TQM defines the customer as all members of society and facets of environment that interact with the activities of the company. A company that integrates sustainable development within its’ TQM management processes could set itself apart from the competition, and perhaps force its’ competition to include sustainable development within their own operational considerations as well, thereby benefiting society as a whole. This trend should also reduce the demand from society to governments for mandates controlling business practices. The very nature of TQM, and how it is implemented, requires sustainable development policy consideration. If it is not considered, then quality management for that firm will likely fail, and it will probably lose its’ competitive advantage.
The Evolution Of TQM The concept of quality has existed for many years, though its meaning has changed and evolved over time. In the early twentieth century, quality management meant in- specting products to ensure that they met specifications. In the 1940s, during World War II, quality became more statistical in nature. Statistical sampling techniques were used to evaluate quality, and quality control charts were used to monitor the production process. In the 1960s, with the help of so-called “quality gurus,” the concept took on a broader meaning. Quality began to be viewed as something that encompassed the entire organization, not only the production process. Since all functions were responsible for product quality and all shared the costs of poor quality, quality was seen as a concept that affected the entire organization. The meaning of quality for businesses changed dramatically in the late 1970s. Be- fore then quality was still viewed as something that needed to be inspected and corrected. However, in the 1970s and 1980s many U.S. industries lost market share to foreign competition. In the auto industry, manufacturers such as Toyota and Honda became major players. In the consumer goods market, companies such as Toshiba and Sony led the way. These foreign competitors were producing lower-priced products with considerably higher quality. To survive, companies had to make major changes in their quality programs. Many hired consultants and instituted quality-training programs for their employees. A new concept of quality was emerging. One result is that quality began to have a strategic meaning. Today, successful companies understand that quality provides a competitive advantage. They put the customer first and define quality as meeting or exceeding customer expectations. Since the 1970s, competition based on quality has grown in importance and has generated tremendous interest, concern, and enthusiasm. Companies in every line of business are focusing on improving quality in order to be more competitive. In many industries quality excellence has become a standard for doing business. Companies that do not meet this standard simply will not survive. As you will see later in the chapter, national quality awards and quality certifications that are coveted by businesses demonstrate the importance of quality. The term used for today’s new concept of quality is total quality management or TQM. Figure 5-3 presents a timeline of the old and new concepts of quality. You can see that the old concept is reactive, designed to correct quality problems after they occur. The new concept is proactive, designed to build quality into the product and process design.
Total Quality Management: Past Along with many other modern management practices TQM originated and was developed within Japanese industry after the Second World War. Japan was a defeated nation with few natural resources and an inability to feed a population of 90 million, by it's self. The future lay in successfully exporting consumer products across the world market, yet it had a reputation for shoddy goods and management systems that were described as "feudal" and "despotic". General Douglas McArthur realised the need for radical change and was responsible for the regeneration of the Japanese economy. Key to this was the dismissal of the old management and their systems, replacing them with younger men capable of making the changes needed to develop their economy. As a result the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE) was formed, one of their first actions was to invite a well-known American statistician Dr. W. Edwards Deming, to present his ideas to them. Deming addressed the top business leaders in Japan, including managers from Companies which are now household names, Sony, Nissan, Mitsubishi and Toyota. They introduced new management methods, TQM being a key one. This led to Japan being the world leader in quality and productivity. Deming had made a highly significant contribution during the war in increasing America's industrial efficiency. After the war was won, although well received by engineers and scientists, top management did not respond to his ideas. Industry went back to the old established ways of trying to meet consumer market opportunities. In Japan however Deming found a much more receptive audience, his ideas once implemented led during the 80s, to American business being battered by Japan's superior industrial practices. In order to compete and survive, the rest of the world was forced to take his ideas seriously, adopting "Japanese methods" such as TQM and Lean Manufacturing. TQM started with Elton Mayo’s Hawthorne experiments from 1927 through 1932. These experiments showed that workers participation in decision-making improves productivity. In the 1940’s US was in World War II. WWII pushed standardization, statistical control, and best manufacturing practices. In the 1950s Edward Deming taught statistical methods an Dr.Juran taught quality management techniques to the Japanese.
Armand Feigenbaun wrote Total Quality Control. This became the first work that started many Total Quality Management theories. In 1954 Abraham Maslow created a pyramid of self actualization needs. In terms of work productivity, the lower levels of needs must be met prior to employees performing at higher levels. The needs in order are 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Physiological which is to eat, sleep, and have shelter Safety which is to have economic and physical security Belonging which is to be accepted by family and friends Esteem which is to be held in high regard Self actualization which is to achieves ones best
In the 1960s Douglas McGregor formed the Theory X and Theory Y leadership models. A Theory X leader applies a negative approach to management. They assume most workers really do not like to work and try to avoid work. A Theory Y leader believes workers want to do a good job. They believe workers will offer solutions to problems and participate in problem solving events. An involved employee is a productive employee. In 1968 the Japanese shaped the phrase Total Quality Control. TQC is a companywide quality control philosophy. This philosophy drove Japan to the world quality leader in the 1970s. For the most part, Japan remains the quality leader. However the world has significantly closed the gap. In the 1980 the U.S. Navel Air Systems coined the TQM phrase. The Navy based most of the principles on the Japanese Total Quality Control philosophy. Many companies adopted TQM during the 80s. TQM spread like wild fire. Many companies saw significant gains in productivity. However many companies started the program and failed miserably because they weren't willing to change. In the 1990s' TQM evolved. Experts introduce new methods that supported TQM. These include Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma. Organizations could now become certified to ISO 2009.The Malcom Baldridge National Quality Award (MBNQA) was created for the US. MBNQA auditors give this award to companies who show the most outstanding quality management practices. In the 2000s, ISO revised ISO 9001 to focus more on business planning, quality management and continuous improvement. Other certification standards were created including AS9100 for aerospace, TS16949 for automotive, ISO 14001 for environmental, TL9000 for electronics, and ISO 17025 for laboratories. These standards all include the ISO 9001 elements.
Total Quality Management: Present The techniques of total quality management (TQM) with the concepts of sustainable development have been applied to socioeconomic policy. It is applied primarily to the typical business concern. Business, through local and international trade, has a profound impact on the ability of a culture to provide basic human needs, and other goods and services. Therefore, commerce and how it conducts itself internally and interacts with its operating environment is axial to the success of sustainable development. Long-term business management requires the successful management of losses and gains; and, so it is with sustainable development. Sustainable development can be defined as the management of losses and gains resulting from the degradation of environmental factors that affect the ability of life, any life, to survive, now or in the future. The "winners and losers" of environmental impact are often defined by the decisions made directly from those entities conducting commerce. The very nature of TQM, and how it is implemented, requires sustainable development policy consideration. If it is not considered, then quality management for that firm will likely fail, and it will probably lose its’ competitive advantage. GATHERING INFORMATION The major steps in the implementation of TQM yield a marked similarity to those processes for implementing sustainable development in Our Common Future. One of the first concerns suggested by Our Common Future is the development of long term strategies for achieving the company objectives for sustainable development. Before tactics can be applied, a definition of the goals, and time line, need to be established. In process of information gathering following question must be askedWhat is your company's definition of sustainable development? If your company could make only one change towards sustainable development, what would it be? What would be the major focus of sustainable development that our customers would like us to incorporate the most? What do our customers think is best about our current socioeconomic policies? What do they think are the worst aspects?
What will our customers be expecting from us, in terms of sustainable development in two years? Five years? What are the sustainable development policies and trends of our competitors? What development policies would our associates or employees favor most? The least? What is our company’s image and how will it be affected by development programs? What is the main reason your company is considering to be sustainable? This process of information gathering should be feasible for almost any firm to accomplish. The resource demands posed by each question can be kept as simple as necessary. COOPERATION This leads to a second recommendation for implementation. It encourages the development of processes that will lead to greater cooperation between economic, public and other multinational entities. The creation of a government controlled data base as suggested above might serve as a corner stone of this goal. Facilitating sustainable development as a feature of TQM requires that all decisions be made in reference to the customer. Cooperation in this process can deteriorate between the public and private sector when variations of the definition for the term customer occur. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE It is suggested that the policies of sustainable development should be integrated into an existing TQM program. TQM organizations should have at least one quality circle management team established. A quality circle management team is made up of different stakeholders at all levels within the organization that share some common area of responsibility. The members of the team can change depending upon the objectives, function, size and organizational structure of the company. TRAINING The relationship between education and sustainable development is paramount education and the dissemination of knowledge as related to socioeconomic policies should occur on multiple levels:
Government sustainable development educational efforts directed specifically to business and society. Professional sustainable development research efforts directed to all members of society. Sustainable development educational programs directed to all members of the TQM quality circle. TQM quality circle derived sustainable development educational programs directed to all stakeholders of the business entity. TQM quality circle derived sustainable development educational programs directed to customers. Stakeholder feedback to government agencies or other relevant nongovernment agencies (NGOs). The processes of educational training might be one of the more costly areas of implementing sustainable development. Fortunately, training is a continuous function of TQM. Sustainable development should become another extension of that training. Along with the principles of sustainable development, TQM quality circles will also need to be trained on the decision making processes best applied to the management of sustainable development EVALUATION The process of evaluation is critical to successful management. Our Common Future encourages the evaluation of three phases for managing towards sustainable development: First, evaluate your company’s activities in terms of ecological impact; then implement a plan towards sustainable development policy. Then, evaluate the success and failures of your policy. Finally, evaluate potential reorganization strategies for increased ecological considerations within activities associated with trade, energy usage and other operating factors. "A systematic, documented, periodic, and objective evaluation is needed of how well the organization is performing in the area of sustainable development, not only to facilitate management control practices but also to asses compliance with company policies, including meeting regulatory
requirements. Sustainable development reporting is a demanding concept that and goes beyond environmental reporting. It requires that companies asses their performance in both the environment and the economy in terms of quality of life today and for future generations.". MANAGING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT As we have seen, the processes of gathering information, cooperation, organizational structure, training and evaluation are major areas of concern within the framework of managing a sustainable development program. The brainstorming of even the simplest socioeconomic program can usually produce a process of unlimited freedom in design as compared to other typical operations within the business entity. Such freedom can create policies, which if not carefully designed, will expose the business entity to consequences of higher risk. The TQM quality circle must consider the theme of risk management not only in its traditional management functions but also in the design evaluation of its sustainable development programming. Our Common Future suggests that a sustainable development program is a complex system, which should be designed in consideration of risks. These considerations should include human factors safety design, accident prevention, and liabilities for unintended damages, sabotage, and ecological or economic damages as a result of improper integration. CONCLUSION TQM is offered as a management tool that can be used for organizational and sustainable development implementation. The characteristics of TQM closely parallel the objectives for managing towards sustainable development as outlined in Our Common Future. Business is recognizing the adoption of sustainable development policy as a competitive advantage. TQM quality circles must consider sustainable policy management as a necessary feature of each product or service life cycle. Sustainable development policy should become a key aspect of the marketing mix and will be allocated and financed as a promotional expenditure. TQM is offered as a systems approach for implementing sustainable development. The methodology of TQM should reduce the risks associated with the administration of socioeconomic policy and provide a way to achieving the goals of sustainable development. THE FUTURE OF QUALTIY MANAGEMENT
The future of total quality management (TQM) is determined by determining the scope and depth of the influencing or driving factors that will shape the body of knowledge, known as TQM, into the future. The rapid rate of change in global and niche markets has increased pressure on organizations to become more competitive. TQM is not immune from such changes. Rather, TQM theory and practice must continually adapt to be in the vanguard of such change and potential future changes. Overall, the report indicate that both the mechanistic and organismic aspects of TQM will continue into the future, along with the continual representative development of initiatives to meet current and future organizational change. Furthermore, the TQM discourse will remain a challenging research area for both academics and practitioners. developments to the quality management system should meet the following objectives:
provide authoritative, publicly accessible information on academic quality and standards in higher education command public, employer and other stakeholder confidence meet the needs of the funding bodies and of institutions meet the relevant needs of all students rely on robust evidence-based independent judgement support a culture of quality enhancement within institutions work effectively and efficiently. The quality movement provided a solid foundation on which many U.S. companies managed their return to strong growth following the difficult 1980s and early 1990s. These quality systems and processes have subsequently become major influences in businesses throughout Asia, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and Micronesia. At the same time, however, powerful new global economic forces were radically changing the concepts of quality and how it was managed. These forces now make it essential that quality managers face the future with quality-based management programs that fit the new business era, rather than continuing with systems that may have worked in the recent past. Several trends will impact quality management’s future. This article examines them and the strategies that organizations should implement as a result. Demanding customers By the end of this decade, well over 1 billion men and women, and the companies that provide products and services to them, will make up an increasingly demanding customer base in common
markets or regional trade alliances throughout the Americas, Asia and Europe. Moreover, this figure probably will increase as we proceed into the 21st century, now within the practical time horizon for realistic corporate business planning. At the heart of accelerating sales and market shares that pacesetter international companies enjoy today is an unflagging responsiveness to the demanding global customer. Surveys conducted by General Systems Co. indicate that when a global market consumer is satisfied with quality, he or she tells six others about the product or service; if that person is dissatisfied, 22 others hear about it. When it comes to transactions within industries, data show that a satisfied industrial customer is seven to eight times more likely to buy again from the same supplier than from its competitors. That’s the power of complete quality satisfaction in today’s markets. As this global economy reaches out to world businesses, it becomes clear that quality is becoming not only the international business language for worldwide trade networks but also that worldwide economic and social forces are fundamentally changing quality concepts and management. Improved quality now means an increase in value as well as right performance, service, design and economy for global customers. This differs from quality control’s former focus on defect reduction alone. Understanding and speaking this new quality language -- and transforming quality processes accordingly -- is a principal goal of successful companies that are becoming sales growth and earnings profitability leaders in the new global economy. A closer look at the global economic, social and trade forces upon which these companies have been built can offer some insight into their success. Shifting customer value expectations Perhaps most important is the fundamental shift in customer value expectations in the global marketplace. Ongoing surveys of customer buying patterns throughout major international markets indicate that nine out of 10 buyers make quality their primary purchasing standard, as compared with three or four out of 10 a decade ago. As customers, they increasingly approach quality as a buying discipline, which they measure by their total-value perception of the product as well as the organization that produces it. This means that the quality of the steel or the merchandising service customers receive is an important part -- but just a part -- of the complete support, billing accuracy and delivery reliability package they expect to buy.
For example, routinely and properly washing automobiles as part of a dealer service call is a simple but nonetheless expected service that many customers identify as a value differentiator. The service shows that the dealer cares, and customers appreciate saving the time and effort. They assume, correctly or incorrectly, that a responsible dealer can accomplish any technical action. Similarly, the voluntary elimination by a mobile communications company of a few dead spots on a main trucking route is one of the primary buyer-value reasons customers cite for their return sales with that company rather than with its competitors. For consumers, this attitude is driven by a need to improve their standard of living. For business buyers, it’s driven by economic pressures that demand reliable, predictable equipment and services without time-consuming failures or other hidden costs. These buyers expect a level of quality that is essentially perfect for their needs, affordable and user-determined. This demand for complete customer satisfaction indicates a profound social shift for both global consumers and business buyers. Organizations that continue to concentrate solely on defect reduction overlook their customers new buyer-value expectations. This is most evident in the disparity between many companies quality satisfaction measurements. Some companies point proudly to their quality improvement data -- i.e., defect reduction -- even as customer surveys indicate that buyers believe quality hasn’t improved -- i.e., increased in quality value -- and they are therefore curtailing their business with these companies.
Economic pressures Another force is the overwhelming economic pressure on organizations. Like a giant pair of scissors, the pressure closes in on many of them from opposing directions. One is the strong upward pressure due to increasing costs despite concerted containment efforts; the other is a severe downward pressure on the price of goods due to market changes. To compound matters, even after years of cost accounting, many organizations still don’t know what things really cost as a foundation for true cost reduction. For example, some companies have adopted a slash-and-burn costreduction approach. However, unless it’s synchronized with specific improvements in process, cost reduction produces the same results as weight reduction without a change in lifestyle: It doesn’t stick. Instead, it leads to more cost reduction, more restructuring and corporate-navel contemplating. As a result, these
companies become out of touch with rapid changes in new markets, new employee attitudes and new management approaches. The key is to directly link customer value enhancement with cost. Improving quality also improves an organization overall -- from marketing and design to operations and distribution. Therefore, cost must include not only operations and sales but also delivering customer satisfaction. General Systems survey data show that, at many companies, this accounts for as much as 25 percent of sales, much of it for quality failures. For companies in which total quality has been correctly managed, the figure is 10 percent or less. Total quality initiatives have established teamwork processes that, by improving quality for customers, have greatly reduced the costs accrued from failing to deliver customer satisfaction. These reductions help support quality value-enhancement programs as well as bottom-line net operating income. Shareholders and investors can understand such reductions. New management approaches These two forces -- the shift in customer value expectations and new economic pressures -- lead to a third force: innovative management approaches to human leadership. These approaches reject the notion that good management and successful improvement means getting the ideas out of the boss’s head and into the workers hands. Organizations that embrace this approach to business improvement become increasingly estranged from their customers, employees and suppliers. Top-down planning only serves to isolate organizations from their customers buying habits. It encourages an atmosphere of intimidation with suppliers rather than a partnership. Under the old-school management regime, human resource improvement programs hardly fare better. They are keyed to flashy motivational seminars, combined with regular doses of management speech making. But when employees return to their jobs to apply what they� heard, they face the same old ve ambiguous management practices and continue to thread their way through autonomous departmental islands without any bridges between them. A very different foundation for business success will characterize competitive organizations in the future. These quality leadership companies will: Make quality the epicenter of increasing revenue growth and competitive leadership.
Achieve complete customer satisfaction by offering essentially perfect goods and services whose quality the customer determines. Accelerate sales and earnings growth through quality failure reduction. Innovate in product and service leadership and cycle-time management. Restore the fizz to jobs by using tools and resources to encourage employee participation in quality improvement. Develop effective supplier partnerships. Create a seamless quality value network among customer, producer and supplier relationships. Provide environmental and safety leadership. Ensure that quality remains the company’s international business language. Companies that can implement these processes won’t travel under any single national passport, nor any particular cultural or social identity. But they will share certain quality management characteristics. In particular, they will: Consider their basic objective as continuously accelerating value for customers, investors and employees. Emphasize that market-driven means quality according to what their customers, not the company, say it is. Lead by a combination of passion, discipline and populism, with a bias for improvement and an emphasis on communication. Recognize that sustained growth demands increasing customer satisfaction, cost leadership, human resource effectiveness and integration with their supplier base -- all four, all the time. Foster a deep commitment to fundamental business improvement through knowledge, skills, democratic problem solving and teamwork.
About Total Quality Management
The definition of quality depends on the role of the people defining it. Most Consumers have a difficult time defining quality, but they know it when they see it. For example, although you probably have an opinion as to which manufacturer of athletic shoes provides the highest quality, it would probably be difficult for you to define your quality standard in precise terms. Also, your friends may have different opinions regarding which athletic shoes are of highest quality. The difficulty in defining quality exists regardless of product, and this is true for both manufacturing and service organizations. Think about how difficult it may be to define quality for products such as airline services, child daycare facilities, college classes, or even textbooks. Further complicating the issue is that the meaning of quality has changed over time. Today, there is no single universal definition of quality. Some people view quality as “performance to standards.” Others view it as “meeting the customer’s needs” or “satisfying the customer.” Let’s look at some of the more common dentitions of quality.
TQM is a management philosophy that supports the process of continuous improvement within an organization and where total emphasis is placed on the customer. In the socioeconomic viewpoint, TQM defines the customer as all members of society and facets of environment that interact with the activities of the company. A company that integrates sustainable development within its’ TQM management processes could set itself apart from the competition, and perhaps force its’ competition to include sustainable development within their own operational considerations as well, thereby benefiting society as a whole. This trend should also reduce the demand from society to governments for mandates controlling business practices. The very nature of TQM, and how it is implemented, requires sustainable development policy consideration. If it is not considered, then quality management for that firm will likely fail, and it will probably lose its’ competitive advantage.
The Evolution Of TQM The concept of quality has existed for many years, though its meaning has changed and evolved over time. In the early twentieth century, quality management meant in- specting products to ensure that they met specifications. In the 1940s, during World War II, quality became more statistical in nature. Statistical sampling techniques were used to evaluate quality, and quality control charts were used to monitor the production process. In the 1960s, with the help of so-called “quality gurus,” the concept took on a broader meaning. Quality began to be viewed as something that encompassed the entire organization, not only the production process. Since all functions were responsible for product quality and all shared the costs of poor quality, quality was seen as a concept that affected the entire organization. The meaning of quality for businesses changed dramatically in the late 1970s. Be- fore then quality was still viewed as something that needed to be inspected and corrected. However, in the 1970s and 1980s many U.S. industries lost market share to foreign competition. In the auto industry, manufacturers such as Toyota and Honda became major players. In the consumer goods market, companies such as Toshiba and Sony led the way. These foreign competitors were producing lower-priced products with considerably higher quality. To survive, companies had to make major changes in their quality programs. Many hired consultants and instituted quality-training programs for their employees. A new concept of quality was emerging. One result is that quality began to have a strategic meaning. Today, successful companies understand that quality provides a competitive advantage. They put the customer first and define quality as meeting or exceeding customer expectations. Since the 1970s, competition based on quality has grown in importance and has generated tremendous interest, concern, and enthusiasm. Companies in every line of business are focusing on improving quality in order to be more competitive. In many industries quality excellence has become a standard for doing business. Companies that do not meet this standard simply will not survive. As you will see later in the chapter, national quality awards and quality certifications that are coveted by businesses demonstrate the importance of quality. The term used for today’s new concept of quality is total quality management or TQM. Figure 5-3 presents a timeline of the old and new concepts of quality. You can see that the old concept is reactive, designed to correct quality problems after they occur. The new concept is proactive, designed to build quality into the product and process design.
Total Quality Management: Past Along with many other modern management practices TQM originated and was developed within Japanese industry after the Second World War. Japan was a defeated nation with few natural resources and an inability to feed a population of 90 million, by it's self. The future lay in successfully exporting consumer products across the world market, yet it had a reputation for shoddy goods and management systems that were described as "feudal" and "despotic". General Douglas McArthur realised the need for radical change and was responsible for the regeneration of the Japanese economy. Key to this was the dismissal of the old management and their systems, replacing them with younger men capable of making the changes needed to develop their economy. As a result the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE) was formed, one of their first actions was to invite a well-known American statistician Dr. W. Edwards Deming, to present his ideas to them. Deming addressed the top business leaders in Japan, including managers from Companies which are now household names, Sony, Nissan, Mitsubishi and Toyota. They introduced new management methods, TQM being a key one. This led to Japan being the world leader in quality and productivity. Deming had made a highly significant contribution during the war in increasing America's industrial efficiency. After the war was won, although well received by engineers and scientists, top management did not respond to his ideas. Industry went back to the old established ways of trying to meet consumer market opportunities. In Japan however Deming found a much more receptive audience, his ideas once implemented led during the 80s, to American business being battered by Japan's superior industrial practices. In order to compete and survive, the rest of the world was forced to take his ideas seriously, adopting "Japanese methods" such as TQM and Lean Manufacturing. TQM started with Elton Mayo’s Hawthorne experiments from 1927 through 1932. These experiments showed that workers participation in decision-making improves productivity. In the 1940’s US was in World War II. WWII pushed standardization, statistical control, and best manufacturing practices. In the 1950s Edward Deming taught statistical methods an Dr.Juran taught quality management techniques to the Japanese.
Armand Feigenbaun wrote Total Quality Control. This became the first work that started many Total Quality Management theories. In 1954 Abraham Maslow created a pyramid of self actualization needs. In terms of work productivity, the lower levels of needs must be met prior to employees performing at higher levels. The needs in order are 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Physiological which is to eat, sleep, and have shelter Safety which is to have economic and physical security Belonging which is to be accepted by family and friends Esteem which is to be held in high regard Self actualization which is to achieves ones best
In the 1960s Douglas McGregor formed the Theory X and Theory Y leadership models. A Theory X leader applies a negative approach to management. They assume most workers really do not like to work and try to avoid work. A Theory Y leader believes workers want to do a good job. They believe workers will offer solutions to problems and participate in problem solving events. An involved employee is a productive employee. In 1968 the Japanese shaped the phrase Total Quality Control. TQC is a companywide quality control philosophy. This philosophy drove Japan to the world quality leader in the 1970s. For the most part, Japan remains the quality leader. However the world has significantly closed the gap. In the 1980 the U.S. Navel Air Systems coined the TQM phrase. The Navy based most of the principles on the Japanese Total Quality Control philosophy. Many companies adopted TQM during the 80s. TQM spread like wild fire. Many companies saw significant gains in productivity. However many companies started the program and failed miserably because they weren't willing to change. In the 1990s' TQM evolved. Experts introduce new methods that supported TQM. These include Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma. Organizations could now become certified to ISO 2009.The Malcom Baldridge National Quality Award (MBNQA) was created for the US. MBNQA auditors give this award to companies who show the most outstanding quality management practices. In the 2000s, ISO revised ISO 9001 to focus more on business planning, quality management and continuous improvement. Other certification standards were created including AS9100 for aerospace, TS16949 for automotive, ISO 14001 for environmental, TL9000 for electronics, and ISO 17025 for laboratories. These standards all include the ISO 9001 elements.
Total Quality Management: Present The techniques of total quality management (TQM) with the concepts of sustainable development have been applied to socioeconomic policy. It is applied primarily to the typical business concern. Business, through local and international trade, has a profound impact on the ability of a culture to provide basic human needs, and other goods and services. Therefore, commerce and how it conducts itself internally and interacts with its operating environment is axial to the success of sustainable development. Long-term business management requires the successful management of losses and gains; and, so it is with sustainable development. Sustainable development can be defined as the management of losses and gains resulting from the degradation of environmental factors that affect the ability of life, any life, to survive, now or in the future. The "winners and losers" of environmental impact are often defined by the decisions made directly from those entities conducting commerce. The very nature of TQM, and how it is implemented, requires sustainable development policy consideration. If it is not considered, then quality management for that firm will likely fail, and it will probably lose its’ competitive advantage. GATHERING INFORMATION The major steps in the implementation of TQM yield a marked similarity to those processes for implementing sustainable development in Our Common Future. One of the first concerns suggested by Our Common Future is the development of long term strategies for achieving the company objectives for sustainable development. Before tactics can be applied, a definition of the goals, and time line, need to be established. In process of information gathering following question must be askedWhat is your company's definition of sustainable development? If your company could make only one change towards sustainable development, what would it be? What would be the major focus of sustainable development that our customers would like us to incorporate the most? What do our customers think is best about our current socioeconomic policies? What do they think are the worst aspects?
What will our customers be expecting from us, in terms of sustainable development in two years? Five years? What are the sustainable development policies and trends of our competitors? What development policies would our associates or employees favor most? The least? What is our company’s image and how will it be affected by development programs? What is the main reason your company is considering to be sustainable? This process of information gathering should be feasible for almost any firm to accomplish. The resource demands posed by each question can be kept as simple as necessary. COOPERATION This leads to a second recommendation for implementation. It encourages the development of processes that will lead to greater cooperation between economic, public and other multinational entities. The creation of a government controlled data base as suggested above might serve as a corner stone of this goal. Facilitating sustainable development as a feature of TQM requires that all decisions be made in reference to the customer. Cooperation in this process can deteriorate between the public and private sector when variations of the definition for the term customer occur. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE It is suggested that the policies of sustainable development should be integrated into an existing TQM program. TQM organizations should have at least one quality circle management team established. A quality circle management team is made up of different stakeholders at all levels within the organization that share some common area of responsibility. The members of the team can change depending upon the objectives, function, size and organizational structure of the company. TRAINING The relationship between education and sustainable development is paramount education and the dissemination of knowledge as related to socioeconomic policies should occur on multiple levels:
Government sustainable development educational efforts directed specifically to business and society. Professional sustainable development research efforts directed to all members of society. Sustainable development educational programs directed to all members of the TQM quality circle. TQM quality circle derived sustainable development educational programs directed to all stakeholders of the business entity. TQM quality circle derived sustainable development educational programs directed to customers. Stakeholder feedback to government agencies or other relevant nongovernment agencies (NGOs). The processes of educational training might be one of the more costly areas of implementing sustainable development. Fortunately, training is a continuous function of TQM. Sustainable development should become another extension of that training. Along with the principles of sustainable development, TQM quality circles will also need to be trained on the decision making processes best applied to the management of sustainable development EVALUATION The process of evaluation is critical to successful management. Our Common Future encourages the evaluation of three phases for managing towards sustainable development: First, evaluate your company’s activities in terms of ecological impact; then implement a plan towards sustainable development policy. Then, evaluate the success and failures of your policy. Finally, evaluate potential reorganization strategies for increased ecological considerations within activities associated with trade, energy usage and other operating factors. "A systematic, documented, periodic, and objective evaluation is needed of how well the organization is performing in the area of sustainable development, not only to facilitate management control practices but also to asses compliance with company policies, including meeting regulatory
requirements. Sustainable development reporting is a demanding concept that and goes beyond environmental reporting. It requires that companies asses their performance in both the environment and the economy in terms of quality of life today and for future generations.". MANAGING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT As we have seen, the processes of gathering information, cooperation, organizational structure, training and evaluation are major areas of concern within the framework of managing a sustainable development program. The brainstorming of even the simplest socioeconomic program can usually produce a process of unlimited freedom in design as compared to other typical operations within the business entity. Such freedom can create policies, which if not carefully designed, will expose the business entity to consequences of higher risk. The TQM quality circle must consider the theme of risk management not only in its traditional management functions but also in the design evaluation of its sustainable development programming. Our Common Future suggests that a sustainable development program is a complex system, which should be designed in consideration of risks. These considerations should include human factors safety design, accident prevention, and liabilities for unintended damages, sabotage, and ecological or economic damages as a result of improper integration. CONCLUSION TQM is offered as a management tool that can be used for organizational and sustainable development implementation. The characteristics of TQM closely parallel the objectives for managing towards sustainable development as outlined in Our Common Future. Business is recognizing the adoption of sustainable development policy as a competitive advantage. TQM quality circles must consider sustainable policy management as a necessary feature of each product or service life cycle. Sustainable development policy should become a key aspect of the marketing mix and will be allocated and financed as a promotional expenditure. TQM is offered as a systems approach for implementing sustainable development. The methodology of TQM should reduce the risks associated with the administration of socioeconomic policy and provide a way to achieving the goals of sustainable development. THE FUTURE OF QUALTIY MANAGEMENT
The future of total quality management (TQM) is determined by determining the scope and depth of the influencing or driving factors that will shape the body of knowledge, known as TQM, into the future. The rapid rate of change in global and niche markets has increased pressure on organizations to become more competitive. TQM is not immune from such changes. Rather, TQM theory and practice must continually adapt to be in the vanguard of such change and potential future changes. Overall, the report indicate that both the mechanistic and organismic aspects of TQM will continue into the future, along with the continual representative development of initiatives to meet current and future organizational change. Furthermore, the TQM discourse will remain a challenging research area for both academics and practitioners. developments to the quality management system should meet the following objectives:
provide authoritative, publicly accessible information on academic quality and standards in higher education command public, employer and other stakeholder confidence meet the needs of the funding bodies and of institutions meet the relevant needs of all students rely on robust evidence-based independent judgement support a culture of quality enhancement within institutions work effectively and efficiently. The quality movement provided a solid foundation on which many U.S. companies managed their return to strong growth following the difficult 1980s and early 1990s. These quality systems and processes have subsequently become major influences in businesses throughout Asia, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and Micronesia. At the same time, however, powerful new global economic forces were radically changing the concepts of quality and how it was managed. These forces now make it essential that quality managers face the future with quality-based management programs that fit the new business era, rather than continuing with systems that may have worked in the recent past. Several trends will impact quality management’s future. This article examines them and the strategies that organizations should implement as a result. Demanding customers By the end of this decade, well over 1 billion men and women, and the companies that provide products and services to them, will make up an increasingly demanding customer base in common
markets or regional trade alliances throughout the Americas, Asia and Europe. Moreover, this figure probably will increase as we proceed into the 21st century, now within the practical time horizon for realistic corporate business planning. At the heart of accelerating sales and market shares that pacesetter international companies enjoy today is an unflagging responsiveness to the demanding global customer. Surveys conducted by General Systems Co. indicate that when a global market consumer is satisfied with quality, he or she tells six others about the product or service; if that person is dissatisfied, 22 others hear about it. When it comes to transactions within industries, data show that a satisfied industrial customer is seven to eight times more likely to buy again from the same supplier than from its competitors. That’s the power of complete quality satisfaction in today’s markets. As this global economy reaches out to world businesses, it becomes clear that quality is becoming not only the international business language for worldwide trade networks but also that worldwide economic and social forces are fundamentally changing quality concepts and management. Improved quality now means an increase in value as well as right performance, service, design and economy for global customers. This differs from quality control’s former focus on defect reduction alone. Understanding and speaking this new quality language -- and transforming quality processes accordingly -- is a principal goal of successful companies that are becoming sales growth and earnings profitability leaders in the new global economy. A closer look at the global economic, social and trade forces upon which these companies have been built can offer some insight into their success. Shifting customer value expectations Perhaps most important is the fundamental shift in customer value expectations in the global marketplace. Ongoing surveys of customer buying patterns throughout major international markets indicate that nine out of 10 buyers make quality their primary purchasing standard, as compared with three or four out of 10 a decade ago. As customers, they increasingly approach quality as a buying discipline, which they measure by their total-value perception of the product as well as the organization that produces it. This means that the quality of the steel or the merchandising service customers receive is an important part -- but just a part -- of the complete support, billing accuracy and delivery reliability package they expect to buy.
For example, routinely and properly washing automobiles as part of a dealer service call is a simple but nonetheless expected service that many customers identify as a value differentiator. The service shows that the dealer cares, and customers appreciate saving the time and effort. They assume, correctly or incorrectly, that a responsible dealer can accomplish any technical action. Similarly, the voluntary elimination by a mobile communications company of a few dead spots on a main trucking route is one of the primary buyer-value reasons customers cite for their return sales with that company rather than with its competitors. For consumers, this attitude is driven by a need to improve their standard of living. For business buyers, it’s driven by economic pressures that demand reliable, predictable equipment and services without time-consuming failures or other hidden costs. These buyers expect a level of quality that is essentially perfect for their needs, affordable and user-determined. This demand for complete customer satisfaction indicates a profound social shift for both global consumers and business buyers. Organizations that continue to concentrate solely on defect reduction overlook their customers new buyer-value expectations. This is most evident in the disparity between many companies quality satisfaction measurements. Some companies point proudly to their quality improvement data -- i.e., defect reduction -- even as customer surveys indicate that buyers believe quality hasn’t improved -- i.e., increased in quality value -- and they are therefore curtailing their business with these companies.
Economic pressures Another force is the overwhelming economic pressure on organizations. Like a giant pair of scissors, the pressure closes in on many of them from opposing directions. One is the strong upward pressure due to increasing costs despite concerted containment efforts; the other is a severe downward pressure on the price of goods due to market changes. To compound matters, even after years of cost accounting, many organizations still don’t know what things really cost as a foundation for true cost reduction. For example, some companies have adopted a slash-and-burn costreduction approach. However, unless it’s synchronized with specific improvements in process, cost reduction produces the same results as weight reduction without a change in lifestyle: It doesn’t stick. Instead, it leads to more cost reduction, more restructuring and corporate-navel contemplating. As a result, these
companies become out of touch with rapid changes in new markets, new employee attitudes and new management approaches. The key is to directly link customer value enhancement with cost. Improving quality also improves an organization overall -- from marketing and design to operations and distribution. Therefore, cost must include not only operations and sales but also delivering customer satisfaction. General Systems survey data show that, at many companies, this accounts for as much as 25 percent of sales, much of it for quality failures. For companies in which total quality has been correctly managed, the figure is 10 percent or less. Total quality initiatives have established teamwork processes that, by improving quality for customers, have greatly reduced the costs accrued from failing to deliver customer satisfaction. These reductions help support quality value-enhancement programs as well as bottom-line net operating income. Shareholders and investors can understand such reductions. New management approaches These two forces -- the shift in customer value expectations and new economic pressures -- lead to a third force: innovative management approaches to human leadership. These approaches reject the notion that good management and successful improvement means getting the ideas out of the boss’s head and into the workers hands. Organizations that embrace this approach to business improvement become increasingly estranged from their customers, employees and suppliers. Top-down planning only serves to isolate organizations from their customers buying habits. It encourages an atmosphere of intimidation with suppliers rather than a partnership. Under the old-school management regime, human resource improvement programs hardly fare better. They are keyed to flashy motivational seminars, combined with regular doses of management speech making. But when employees return to their jobs to apply what they� heard, they face the same old ve ambiguous management practices and continue to thread their way through autonomous departmental islands without any bridges between them. A very different foundation for business success will characterize competitive organizations in the future. These quality leadership companies will: Make quality the epicenter of increasing revenue growth and competitive leadership.
Achieve complete customer satisfaction by offering essentially perfect goods and services whose quality the customer determines. Accelerate sales and earnings growth through quality failure reduction. Innovate in product and service leadership and cycle-time management. Restore the fizz to jobs by using tools and resources to encourage employee participation in quality improvement. Develop effective supplier partnerships. Create a seamless quality value network among customer, producer and supplier relationships. Provide environmental and safety leadership. Ensure that quality remains the company’s international business language. Companies that can implement these processes won’t travel under any single national passport, nor any particular cultural or social identity. But they will share certain quality management characteristics. In particular, they will: Consider their basic objective as continuously accelerating value for customers, investors and employees. Emphasize that market-driven means quality according to what their customers, not the company, say it is. Lead by a combination of passion, discipline and populism, with a bias for improvement and an emphasis on communication. Recognize that sustained growth demands increasing customer satisfaction, cost leadership, human resource effectiveness and integration with their supplier base -- all four, all the time. Foster a deep commitment to fundamental business improvement through knowledge, skills, democratic problem solving and teamwork.
