a longitudinal study of tqm implementation: factors influencing success and failure

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Omega 31 (2003) 97–111

www.elsevier.com/locate/dsw

A longitudinal study of TQM implementation: factorsin%uencing success and failure

W.A. Taylora ;∗, G.H. WrightbaSchool of Management, University of Bradford, Emm Lane, Bradford BD9 4JL, UK

bLiverpool Business School, Liverpool John Moores University, John Foster Building, Mount Pleasant,Liverpool L3 5UZ, UK

Received 29 November 2001; accepted 29 January 2003

Abstract

This is one of a very few longitudinal research studies of the link between TQM implementation and successful outcomes.The paper reports on perceived TQM success for a cohort of 109 1rms over a 5-year period. Some 42 1rms, predominantlysmall in size, had discontinued with TQM, while the remaining 67 1rms reported varying degrees of success. The data suggeststhat the size of 1rm, the nature of the customer base and the holding of ISO9000 series certi1cation has had no signi1cante9ect on TQM outcomes for this cohort. The research has also highlighted some necessary antecedents for TQM success.In particular, managers need to understand the nature and purpose of TQM, its relationship to ISO9000, and the potentialbene1ts that can accrue from its implementation. We have shown that these factors are signi1cantly associated with perceivedTQM success. They are also signi1cant for the discontinuing 1rms. Deriving success from TQM has also been shown to besigni1cantly associated with (i) the time since adoption, (ii) the inclusion of quality objectives in the strategic planning process,and (iii) the need for senior managers to take charge of TQM and to ensure that the majority of employees are involved inits implementation. While these 1ndings are supportive of such assertions in the literature, this paper provides further robustempirical evidence from a cross-section of UK companies in a longitudinal research design. This research has also contributedto the debate about the e9ects of 1rm size and ISO9000 certi1cation. The paper concludes by proposing the next phase ofanalysis of these 1rms, based on 1ve additional performance variables collected during both studies of the cohort.? 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Total Quality Management; Implementation process; Longitudinal study; Success; Failure

1. Introduction

Published research on TQM has, until recently, been con-1ned to specialist quality management or operations man-agement outlets. Gradually, TQM research has grown instature and has become established in the top general man-agement journals [1–7]. Concomitant with the acceptanceof TQM among general management researchers has been

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-1274-234325; fax: +44-1274-234355.

E-mail address: [email protected] (W.A. Taylor).

the criticism that TQM research has not been providing thecorrective function that it could, and should:

Too much of the TQM literature consists of anecdotalcase reports or before-and-after evaluation studies thatmay be of more use politically in promoting TQM (or,for skeptics, in debunking it) than they are in build-ing knowledge about TQM processes and practices. [4,p. 339].

Similarly, Dean and Bowen [2] commented that while TQMhas become a ubiquitous organisational phenomenon, it has

0305-0483/03/$ - see front matter ? 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/S0305-0483(03)00017-3

mailto:[email protected]

98 W.A. Taylor, G.H. Wright /Omega 31 (2003) 97–111

been given comparatively little research attention, and inparticular there has been little theory to explain the di9er-ences between successful and unsuccessful e9orts. What arethe determinants of successful TQM implementation, andwhy do some organisations try to implement it and subse-quently stop? While these two questions have been a primefocus of TQM research over the past decade, they remainlargely unanswered.This paper is one of the 1rst longitudinal research studies

of TQM implementation, involving a cohort of 113 com-panies. The foundation for the study began in 1992, whenthe original cohort was investigated [8,9]. Five years later,the same group of companies was re-contacted to assesswhat progress had been made with TQM and to explore theachieved levels of success. The remainder of this article is infour sections. Firstly, we review some of the key studies onTQM implementation, and highlight some of the challengesof the extant research literature. In particular we emphasisethat methodologically, most previous studies have taken asnapshot of TQM activity. Thus, in the second section wepropose a longitudinal research method for evaluating thesuccess of TQM for this cohort. In section three we presentresults from the second study of this cohort, conducted in1997. Finally we discuss the implications of these resultsand outline some research questions for future analysis ofthese data.

2. Literature review

2.1. Development of TQM research

Dale et al. [10] asserted that TQM is still in an early stageof theory development. They stressed the need for scholarlydevelopment of TQM theory and the incorporation of exist-ing management theories into its development. In so doing,they have echoed the concerns of others that too much TQMresearch is focused on descriptions of practice rather than ontheory development that is of use to managers and scholars[11,12]. While some scholarly studies have integrated TQMwith current management theories of innovation di9usion[6], organisational learning [12,13] or resource-based strat-egy [3], Dean and Bowen [2] observed a further need forTQM integration with the management literature on strategyimplementation, information processing, customer satisfac-tion and process improvement.Ghobadian and Gallear [14] underscored the dearth of

empirical research dealing speci1cally with TQM imple-mentation, and observed that knowledge about the imple-mentation process remains highly fragmented. They arguedfor a renewed focus on the process of implementing TQMand the reasons for success and failure. Moreover, in study-ing 31 leading exponents of TQM, they concluded that thereis commonality in successful implementation, and that thiscommonality lies at the deeper level of objectives and inten-tions, rather than at the activity level of method, tools and

techniques. It was in a similar vein that in 1992 we analysedthis cohort of 113 companies, focussing particularly uponmanagers’ attitudes to, and perceptions of TQM, and theirunderstanding of its nature and purpose. We regarded theseattitudes and perceptions as antecedents of implementationpractices and concomitant outcomes, see Fig. 1.Using Argyris’ [15] theory of defensive routines, we high-

lighted contradictions between TQM implementation prac-tices (theories in use) and managers espoused attitudes andperceptions (espoused theories). In 1992 we found little de-tectable dissatisfaction with TQM, although the majority ofthe cohort had only recently implemented TQM. Howeverwe speculated that, without improvement in their percep-tions of TQM and better alignment between perceptions andimplementation practices, there was likely to be an issueabout the sustainability of TQM in this cohort [9]. It wasagainst this background that the cohort was re-visited in1997, to see whether or not TQM had continued, and if so,what levels of success had been experienced.

2.2. Measuring the impact of TQM

Measurement of TQM performance outcomes is widelyrecognised as diNcult, because of a number of inter-relatedfactors. Firstly there is debate about when to measure thee9ect of a TQM intervention on performance outcomes. Ifperformance measures are taken too soon after TQM imple-mentation, the results are inconclusive. If too long a timeelapses between intervention and outcome, the measure-ment can be confounded by other exogenous and endoge-nous factors [4]. Secondly there are problems associatedwith publicly reported indices of performance such as mar-ket share, share price and pro1tability [16,17]. Market shareis self-de1ned, depending on the scoping of the market, prof-itability can easily be distorted, and share price is only anestimate of future performance and is volatile. Thirdly, forSMEs and privately owned 1rms these indices are often dif-1cult or impossible to obtain. There are no easy solutionsto these diNculties. One approach is to obtain the princi-pal measure of performance directly from the respondents,as a perceptual judgement [7]. While recognising the poten-tial for self-reporting bias, there are many precedents in theliterature for obtaining performance information on a pri-mary or perceptual basis [3,18–21]. Indeed, as Meredith [22,p. 10] argued,

the information compiled from the perceptions of keyparticipants is often closer to reality than an arti1cialreconstruction of the objective reality based on a fo-cused and limited collection of incomplete objectivedata gathered independently by researchers themselves.

2.3. The need for longitudinal studies

Powell’s [3] analysis of 39 TQM adopters was one ofthe 1rst to overcome the problem of what he described as

W.A. Taylor, G.H. Wright /Omega 31 (2003) 97–111 99

•Understanding of the purpose of TQM

•Understanding of ISO9000 and its relationship to TQM

•Initiatives to improve organisational performance

•The need to manage Quality as a Strategic Issue

•The ranking of Quality against other Strategic Issues

•Perceptions of customers' satisfaction

•Anticipated benefits of TQM

•Methods used to improve organisational performance

•Measurement of Customer Satisfaction

•Methods used to measure Customer Satisfaction

•Measuring effects of TQM on Sales and/or Costs

•Measurement of Process Performance

•Measurement of Employee Satisfaction

•Mechanisms used to involve employees

•Extent of Improvements in:

•Customer Satisfaction

•Employee Satisfaction

•Process Performance

•Extent of employee involvement

•Perception of TQM success

•Business performance

IMPLEMENTATIONOUTCOMES

ATTITUDESAND

PERCEPTIONS

IMPLEMENTATION

PRACTICES

EspousedTheories

Theoriesin use

Fig. 1. TQM research issues [8] adapted from [15].

empirical studies that did not conform to generally acceptedstandards of methodological rigor, most of which had beenconducted by consulting 1rms or quality associations withvested interests in the outcomes. While Powell found a sig-ni1cant TQM-performance correlation, he stressed the needfor a longitudinal research design to support any causal in-ference. Moreover, while he recognised the existence ofa time-lag between implementation and consistent perfor-mance advantages, his data did not permit such analysis.Westphal et al. [6] also considered the e9ect of time onperformance outcomes, with respect to the di9erent perfor-mance gains likely to accrue to early and late adopters ofTQM. They analysed data from 2712 hospitals in the USA,linking practices to multiple measures of eNciency, viz;perceived impact of TQM on costs, return on equity andFTEs per 100 admissions. By analysing the results relativeto the time of implementation, they concluded that earlyTQM adopters would be more likely to gain tangible per-formance gains while late adopters trade organisational ef-1ciency bene1ts for legitimacy bene1ts by conforming toisomorphic pressures. In highlighting the e9ect of time onTQM performance outcomes, they also supported the needfor a longitudinal research design.Several other authors have articulated the need for lon-

gitudinal studies of the e9ects of TQM implementation onorganisational outcomes, [5,7,12,23,24] yet there are nopublished examples to-date. Mandal et al. [25] reviewedprevious quality studies of Australian companies, conclud-ing that “none of the quality-related studies in Australia hascovered a long period, such as 10 years or more” (p. 576)

and that “none has discussed or tried to 1nd a relationshipbetween the di9usion of quality concepts and the incre-mental bene1ts achieved” (p. 579). In arguing for alongitudinal approach, they subsequently analysed 34 man-ufacturing companies’ quality management practices be-tween 1980 and 1994. However, this was not a longitudinalstudy in the accepted sense of gathering data at di9erenttime intervals. Rather it was a retrospective snapshot ofrespondents’ recollections over the period.Three studies of quality management practices in Aus-

tralian manufacturing companies [26,27] were conductedbetween 1991 and 1996, with the objectives of identifyingcritical success factors for TQM and the links between prac-tices and performance. The three surveys were based on dif-ferent samples drawn from a commercial database, althoughthe population was not reported. Therefore, the studies werenot of a common cohort, although there was a potential over-lap in 1rms surveyed each time. The authors experienced aconsiderable variation in response rate, from 41% in 1991to 15% in 1996, and this is one of the diNculties of lon-gitudinal research designs. They also made some pertinentobservations from their data about successful TQM imple-mentation, viz;

• Performance deteriorates when responsibility for qualityis allocated to a specialised Quality Department.

• The popularity of TQM had diminished in favour ofISO9000.

• TQM acceptance by employees depends on the attitudesof management towards quality.


• Many companies were still internally focused.• ISO9000 certi1ed companies did not perform better thannon-certi1ed companies.

• One of the primary obstacles to TQM adoption was man-agers’ lack of understanding of the principles of TQM.

In a separate study, the same authors [24,28] investigated thelink between TQM practice and organisational performance,based on secondary data from the Australian ManufacturingCouncil (1994). In their sample of 962 Australian and 379New Zealand manufacturing sites, they found that TQMwassigni1cantly related to organisational performance for sixout of their 14 dependent variables, viz; customer satisfac-tion, employee morale, delivery, productivity, cash %ow andsales growth. Their central conclusion was that the softer ele-ments of TQM, i.e. leadership, people management and cus-tomer focus were the strongest predictors of performance.In summarising their 1ndings, they too pointed to the needfor a longitudinal design, together with the need to trace theprogress of particular companies.In summary, the literature establishes some key issues and

debates about TQM implementation and its evaluation. Re-searchers agree that the time-delay between implementationand performance is signi1cant, and point to a need for lon-gitudinal studies. They also recognise the diNculties associ-ated with attribution of performance improvement to TQMimplementation practices, and indeed this causality may beimpossible to prove categorically. Finally, researchers dis-play less consensus about the methods for measurementof TQM’s impact on organisations. Some have used 1nan-cial data in the public domain, while others have relied ona wider range of performance indicators, either from sec-ondary sources or as self-reported perceptual measures.

3. Research method

This paper reports a longitudinal research study. A cohortof 113 organisations practising TQM was surveyed 1rstly in1992 and then contacted again 5 years later. The sample wasidenti1ed as part of a wider survey of quality managementpractices in 682 organisations, based on a random sample inone UK region. The original sampling frame was strati1edto take account of organisation size and industrial sector,and the respondents were representative in terms of majorindustrial sector and size of 1rm. Full details of the samplingframe and method are given in [8].In re-contacting these 113 organisations in 1997, several

steps were taken to maintain the response rate. Firstly, re-spondents were contacted by telephone to make them awareof the follow-up study. Secondly, they received a letter out-lining the objectives of this second study, and an assuranceof con1dentiality. Thirdly, a report summarising the 1992study 1ndings was included with this letter. The question-naire was mailed to the Managing Director or CEO of eachorganisation. A follow-up letter was mailed after one month

with another copy of the questionnaire, and two further tele-phone calls were made, one week and three weeks later.This resulted in a response rate of 96%. Of the remainingfour organisations, two had ceased trading and two declinedto participate. Such e9orts to boost the response rate are ob-viously productive and necessary for any longitudinal studyand the high level of returns re%ects the respondents’ inter-est in the research.Each respondent was asked to indicate his willingness

to participate in a follow up interview. Out of the 75 whoagreed, 25 one-hour interviews were conducted to obtainfurther insight into the data.The research objectives were as follows:

• To explore the degree of success that had been achievedfrom TQM over this 5-year period.

• To identify the factors that were signi1cantly associatedwith the degree of TQM success.

• To identify the reasons for discontinuance.

In recognition of the diNculties in measurement and attribu-tion of the impact of TQM implementations, a self-reported,self-referenced indicator of overall perceived success wasused as the dependent variable. This was complementedby 1ve performance outcome measures related to trends incustomer satisfaction [4,29], employee satisfaction [29,30],process performance [31,32], sales [21,33] and 1nancialperformance [34,35]. This overcame the problems of dis-closure of sensitive 1nancial data, and accounted for thein%uence of both exogenous market conditions and di9er-ent strategies adopted by the implementers. The multi-itemapproach to the dependent variable facilitated a triangulatedand meaningful context-speci1c approach to the assessmentof TQM’s impact, rather than relying on one single andunattributed variable. Thus whatever the degree of marketturbulence, or the strategic focus of the organisations, solong as the respondents believed they were gaining bene1tfrom TQM, they would be prepared to continue investingin it. The use of the overall belief of success allowed forthe expression of the perceived success of TQM on what-ever basis was meaningful to the respondents and re%ectedtheir experiences. Twenty-two independent variables iden-ti1ed as potential determinants of TQM success and impactwere measured in the questionnaire. This paper only focuseson those independent variables categorised as antecedents tothe TQM implementation process, and explores their levelsof association with TQM success.In particular, the research questions included the follow-

ing:Are higher levels of perceived TQM success associated

with:

(a) Holding ISO9000 series certi1cation?(b) Size of organisation?(c) The length of time since adoption of TQM?(d) Accurate understanding of the purpose of TQM and its

relationship to ISO9000?


0 10 20 30 40

Stopped

Unsuccessful

Less than anticipated

Quite successful

Very successful

Out

com

e

Percent

Fig. 2. Success with TQM (n = 109).

(e) Recognition of TQM as part of the organisation’sstrategic planning process, rather than as an opera-tional tool?

(f) Direct involvement of the senior management in TQM?(g) Good employee involvement practices?(h) An external customer focus, rather than an internal

problem-solving focus?

4. Results

Of the 109 responding organisations, 42 (38.5%) reportedthat they had discontinued TQM, while the remaining 67had encountered varying degrees of success (Fig. 2).The high rate of discontinuance of TQM is in line with

previously reported studies [36,37]. The main reasons givenfor discontinuance were lack of senior management com-mitment (31%), more bene1t was being gained from ISO9000 certi1cation (24%), and that TQM was too vague andintangible (13%). We interviewed 10 senior managers inthe discontinuing 1rms. Some of their reasons for stoppingTQM are included below:

ISO9000 is now our main focus. We decided to shelveTQM for the time being. It was time consuming amidsttrying to get work done, please customers and makepro1ts. In itself we thought it had merit but was diNcultto realise in actual practice.Managing Director, small switch-gear company.

TQM is far too complex to get any real bene1t from.ISO9000 is adequate, simpler and of more immediatebene1t. We will only come back to TQM if they makeit into a standard like ISO9000.Director of Engineering and Quality, small electron-

ics assembly company.

TQM was discontinued by a change of leadership andwe have absolutely no notion of pursuing it if the bosshas his way.General Manager, small sheet-metal fabrication 1rm.

There was no management leadership for TQM; nocommitment from senior management. We also had achange in top managers who were not at all interestedin the issue.Operations Manager, small precision engineering

company.

We have avoided labelling discontinuance as failure, despitethe headline-grabbing nature of the latter term. In the con-text of this research, discontinuance is taken as an indicatorthat TQM was not perceived to be suNciently successful tojustify continued investment in it. It is interesting to notethat there was a signi1cant association between discontinu-ance and size of 1rm with the majority of those discontinu-ing being small 1rms (Fig. 3).

4.1. Factors a8ecting TQM success

Later in the paper we will comment upon two other fac-tors found to be signi1cantly associated with discontinu-ance, but in the main, the paper will concentrate upon the67 1rms where TQM was still in operation. Turning then tothese 67 1rms that had continued with TQM, the followingsections report whether or not there were signi1cant fac-tors associated with the degree of perceived success. Wherepossible, we compare these latest results with our 1ndingsfrom 1992 [8,9]. This latest phase of the study was re1nedto take account of the issues identi1ed in the analysis of theearlier, 1992 results. Therefore some comparisons are notpossible.

4.1.1. ISO9000 certi:cationThere are opposing views about the value of ISO9000, and

its e9ect on successful implementation of TQM. For exam-ple, Sun [29] found performance di9erences between com-panies with and without ISO9000 certi1cation (n=316), andRao et al. [38], concluded that companies that are ISO9000registered have better quality management practices andenjoy better quality results, (n = 649). Conversely, Sohaland Terziovski [27] found that ISO9000 certi1ed compa-nies did not exhibit statistically better performance than


0 20 40 60 80 100

Small

Medium

Large

Size

of

Fir

m

Percent

Continuing Stopped

n=17

n=39

n=53

Chi Square=17.99, 2 df, p<0.01

Fig. 3. In%uence of organisation size on continuance of TQM.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Quite successful

Very successful

Per

ceiv

ed s

ucce

ss

Percent

Certified Not Certified

Chi Square = 2.62, 2df, p=0.27

n = 17

n = 25

n = 25

Fig. 4. In%uence of ISO9000 Series Certi1cation on TQM success.

non-certi1ed companies. Moreover, the impact of ISO9000certi1cation on TQM can be argued both ways. On the onehand, ISO9000 can be regarded as a stepping stone to TQM[39]. Alternatively it can create a conformance culture thatis the antithesis of continuous improvement [40]. Our datasuggest that, while holding ISO9000 certi1cation was citedby almost a quarter of the discontinuing 1rms as a factor intheir decision, there is no apparent link between ISO9000and perceived TQM success (Fig. 4).In 1992, of the original 113 1rms, only 37 (33%) also

had ISO9000 certi1cation, while a further 46 (41%) wereactively pursuing it at that time. Clearly more of this cohorthave now achieved ISO9000 registration—49 (73%) of the67 continuing with TQM now hold ISO9000 certi1cation,together with 23 (55%) of the 42 discontinuing, giving anoverall adoption rate of 66%.

4.1.2. Size of :rmThere is also debate in the literature about the in%uence of

size of 1rm on TQM implementation. Welsh and White [41]observed that small businesses were not ’little’ large busi-nesses, and that the di9erences in structures, policy makingprocedures, and utilisation of resources were such that “theapplication of large business concepts directly to small busi-nesses may border on the ridiculous”. This line of argumentwas extended to TQM by Ghobadian and Gallear [42], who

outlined the di9erences in the characteristics of SMEs andlarge 1rms, and the consequent e9ects of size di9erenceson TQM implementation. They concluded, from a sampleof four cases studies, that TQM could be readily adopted inany size of 1rm.Similarly, Ahire and Golhar [20] observed that there

were no operational di9erences in TQM implementationattributable to 1rm size, with the exception that small 1rmsin their sample (n=499) displayed a better customer focus.Powell [3] reported some evidence to the contrary (n=49),i.e. that size of 1rm was signi1cantly and negatively as-sociated with TQM success. In other words, a 1rm’s sizeimpedes successful TQM implementation. This view hasbeen supported by Hendricks and Singhal [33] who sug-gested that maintaining an e9ective TQM implementationis likely to be more diNcult for larger 1rms than smaller1rms. Their results supported this hypothesis, showing thatwhile TQM had a positive impact on pro1tability for bothsmaller and larger 1rms, the former tended to bene1t more.Fig. 3 has already suggested that a signi1cantly higherproportion of small 1rms in the cohort had discontinuedTQM. Therefore we tested for the in%uence of size of 1rmon perceived TQM success, with the hypothesis H1:

H1: That size of 1rm would be signi1cantly associated withthe perceived degree of TQM success.


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Quite successful

Very successful

Per

ceiv

ed s

ucce

ss

Percent

Small Medium Large

n = 17

n = 25

n = 25

Chi Square = 4.53, 4df, p=0.339

Fig. 5. In%uence of size of 1rm on TQM success.

The results indicate that there was no such associationbetween 1rm size and success for those continuing withTQM (Fig. 5).This 1nding is consistent with our data from the 1rst study

of this cohort in 1992 [8].

4.1.3. Size of customer baseIt was also postulated that the number of customers that

a 1rm dealt with might a9ect the degree of success fromTQM. Dealing with only a few (up to 1ve) key customers,for example as a preferred supplier might mean that TQMwasmandatory, especially for large, multinational customers[43,44]. Choi and Eboch [21] argued that such customerpressure to implement TQM might only lead to a compli-ance culture, and hence not translate into tangible improve-ment to the operational core of the business. Conversely,having a large and varied customer base might mean thatthe competition was more intense, requiring a proactive,customer-focused initiative such as TQM to compete e9ec-tively. Hence we postulated H2:

H2: That size of the customer base would be signi1cantlyassociated with the perceived degree of TQM success.

While 31% of respondents did have a small customer base,this had no e9ect on the perceived success derived fromTQM (Table 1).We did however detect a degree of compliance with cus-

tomer pressure to implement TQM echoed in respondents’comments, e.g.

We were pushed toward TQM by our main customer.Of course we went along with it to keep them happy butwe see no real bene1t for ourselves, in fact it createdbureaucracy for us. We’ve stopped at ISO9001 - againour main customer told us to get it. I suppose we willcontinue with TQM if they insist. You can’t a9ord toget on the wrong side of them.Managing Director, Medium-sized electronics com-

pany.

Our main customer presented TQM as a ‘have to do’rather than something which could have bene1ts. It wasintroduced and driven by their London based consultantand it all appeared too American in concept and content.Chief Executive, Small mechanical components

company.

4.1.4. Time since TQM adoptionPowell [3] raised the potential e9ect of time of TQM

adoption on perceived performance improvement, present-ing some evidence that long-time adopters reported bet-ter performance than short-time adopters. Westphal et al.[6] supported Powell’s 1nding, o9ering the explanation thatearly TQM adopters would be more likely to experience suc-cessful TQM implementation, on the basis that they wouldperceive more obvious opportunities for eNciency gains.Conversely, later adopters would imitate the implementationmodels of early adopters, without customising their qualitypractices to the unique problems and opportunities facingtheir organisations. Reed et al. [5] have provided a third per-spective on the e9ect of time of adoption, arguing that thetime delay between TQM implementation and performancebene1ts will be longer for 1rms with an operations orien-tation, than for those with a customer orientation. FinallyHendricks and Singhal [33] added to the debate by notingthat their data did not support any signi1cant performancedi9erences between earlier and later implementers of TQM.Based on these con%icting arguments that time of adoptioncan a9ect the perceived success of TQM, we developed thefollowing hypothesis, H3:

H3: Time of adoption of TQM will be signi1cantly associ-ated with the degree of perceived success.

The data in Table 2 support this hypothesis, with those 1rmsthat had started TQM earlier achieving more success thanthe rest.

4.1.5. Understanding of TQM’s purposePrevious research has highlighted the importance of

having a clear understanding of what TQM is about [14].Terziovski et al. [26] also commented that the primaryobstacle to adoption of quality management practices wasmanagers’ lack of understanding of the principles of TQM.In a previous paper [8], we discussed the link betweensenior managers’ understanding of the purpose of TQMand its strategic signi1cance, and their commitment oftime and resources to its implementation. We argued thata lack of understanding of the role of TQM in making thecustomer the focus of all business processes might resultin a short-term impatience for a bottom-line return on in-vestment, that could ultimately become a pre-requisite forits continuance. In 1992, only 36% of this cohort of 1rmsunderstood TQM to have this customer-oriented dimension.The majority (56%) de1ned it in more limited ways thatwere not customer-referenced, or else were con1ned to


Table 1In%uence of no. of customers on TQM success

Do you deal with only a few (¡ 5) key customers?

Degree of success Yes (%) Number of 1rms

Unsuccessful or less than anticipated 40 25Quite successful 32 25Very successful 18 17

Total 31 67Chi square = 2:358; 2 df ; p = 0:308

Table 2In%uence of time of adoption on TQM success

Degree of success When TQM commenced Total

Up to 1990 1991 onwards

Unsuccessful or less than anticipated 8 17 25Quite successful 17 8 25Very successful 12 5 17

Total 37 30 67Chi square = 8:73; 2 df ; p¡ 0:01

1xing operational problems, rather than focusing on 1ndingnew opportunities for improvement that added value to thecustomer experience.Five years on, we would have expected the general level

of understanding of TQM to have improved. Moreover, wewould have expected those 1rms with an external and proac-tive understanding of TQM to have experienced more suc-cess with TQM over this period. Hence we tested for H4:

H4: That understanding of the purpose of TQM would besigni1cantly associated with the perceived degree ofTQM success.

These latest results support this hypothesis (Fig. 6).However, there is still a high level of misunderstanding

of TQM, with 13% linking it more with product or servicequality, and 46% still viewing it in an internal and reactiveway. These misunderstandings are most prevalent amongthe less successful TQM 1rms.

4.1.6. Understanding of the TQM-ISO9000 relationshipThis potential confusion about TQM’s purpose was ex-

plored further by asking respondents about their understand-ing of the relationship between TQM and ISO9000. Ourview of ISO9000 is consistent with many other authors, i.e.it has an important role to play within TQM, by strength-ening systems and procedures [29,38,39,45] but it is onlya small part of overall TQM activity. We would have ex-

pected all respondents to have a clear understanding of howISO9000 1tted within a TQM framework. What is more, itwas hypothesised (H5) that:

H5: The degree of TQM success would be signi1cantly as-sociated with the level of understanding of the rela-tionship between ISO9000 and TQM.

The results (Table 3) show that the degree of TQM successis signi1cantly associated with understanding of the rela-tionship between ISO9000 and TQM, with 59 respondents(79%) giving, what in our view, was the correct answer.These results are also consistent with our earlier study ofthis cohort.Nevertheless, it is a concern that 21% do not appear to

really understand this relationship properly. This may haveimplications for their current TQM practices, and for thefuture continuance of TQM.The importance of understanding was further emphasised

by comparing the responses of the discontinuing 1rms withthe rest. We postulated that size of 1rm might not be theonly factor that was associated with TQM’s discontinuance,and that the understanding of the purpose of TQM and itsrelationship to ISO9000 might also be signi1cantly associ-ated with the decision to stop. As Table 4 shows, both theunderstanding of TQM and its relationship with ISO9000were signi1cantly poorer amongst the discontinuing1rms.


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Quite successful

Very successful

Per

ceiv

ed s

ucce

ss

Percent

High grade products Customer focus Problem solving

n = 17

n = 25

n = 25

Chi Square = 21.38, 4df, p < 0.01

Fig. 6. In%uence of understanding of TQM on success.

Table 3In%uence of understanding of the relationship between ISO9000 and TQM on success

What is your understanding of the relationship between TQM and ISO9000?

Degree of success ISO9000 is only Incorrect Totala part of TQM answers

Unsuccessful or less than anticipated 15 10 25Quite successful 21 4 25Very successful 17 0 17

Total 53 (79%) 14 (21%) 67Chi square = 10:37; 2 df ; p¡ 0:01

Table 4Understanding of discontinuing 1rms compared with those continuing

Status of TQM Understanding of TQM Relationship of TQM and ISO9000 Total

High Making the Problem Only a part of Incorrectgrade customer solving TQM answersproduct the focus

TQM 20 5 17 2 40 42discontinuedTQM 9 27 31 53 14 67continuing

Total 29 32 48 55 54 109Chi square = 18:627; 2df ; p¡ 0:01 Chi square = 57:078; 1df ; p¡ 0:01

4.1.7. TQM a strategic issueIn an earlier paper [8], we also argued that TQM was

likely to achieve more if it was treated as a key strategicbusiness issue rather than merely an operational one. In1992, all 113 respondents claimed that the management ofquality was a strategic issue for their organisations. Some96% ranked quality in the top three strategic issues, andover one-1fth stated that it was the prime strategic concern.

We pointed out that this was at variance with their responsesabout the purpose of TQM, where 56% had designatedTQM to be about internal problem solving at operationallevels.In this latest data, most respondents (86%) again re-

ported having documented strategic business plans. Almostthe same number (85%) also reported that these businessplans contained speci1c quality plans and objectives. Thus


Table 5Relationship between strategic quality planning and TQM success

Do your strategic plans contain speci1c quality plans and objectives?

Degree of success Yes (%) Number of 1rms

Unsuccessful or less than anticipated 56 25Quite successful 92 25Very successful 94 17

Chi square = 12:907; 2df ; p¡ 0:01

it was hypothesised (H6) that:

H6: The practice of including speci1c plans and objectivesfor quality, as part of the strategic planning process,would be signi1cantly associated with the degree ofsuccess from TQM.

A signi1cant association was found to exist (Table 5).To pursue this line of reasoning, in 1992 we compared

the consistency of the respondents’ answers about strategicconcern with the reasons why they had decided to committheir organisations to TQM, i.e. what were the bene1ts theyanticipated that TQM would bring? At that time, only 37%gave reasons speci1cally associated with customers. Mostof the reasons for implementing TQM were associated withcost reduction at operational levels, marketing reasons moresuper1cially to do with image, and human resource improve-ments, again mainly at operational levels. We observed thatthese results challenged the apparently high levels of com-mitment to the management of quality as a strategic issue.This question was repeated in 1997, again using an

open-question format to avoid any prompting of the re-spondents. The results were not dissimilar, with only 38%declaring a commitment to TQM based explicitly on im-proving their capability to respond to customers in themarketplace. The majority (62%) still gave reasons con-nected with internal issues. While these results did notshow a signi1cant association with the degree of TQMsuccess, they nevertheless support the unfolding picture ofa preponderance of internally focussed TQM initiatives.

4.1.8. Senior management involvementThis section explores how the respondents’ understand-

ing of TQM is translated into their active involvement in itsdeployment. First, we have already argued that senior ex-ecutives’ understanding of TQM and their motivations forpursing it can have a bearing on how much time, and thusleadership, they are personally prepared to commit to it.Given that the questionnaire was mailed to the ManagingDirector or CEO in each organisation, we would have ex-pected that their commitment to, and interest in, TQMwouldhave caused them to respond personally. While delegating

the completion of the questionnaire is no guarantee of lackof commitment or interest, we hypothesised (H7):

H7: That if the managing director or CEO completed thequestionnaire, this might be indicative of their commit-ment to, and interest in TQM, and further, might alsobe associated with more TQM success.

In the majority of cases (61%), the respondent was the CEOor Managing Director, with the remainder being delegatedto a middle or junior manager. This was indeed signi1cantlyassociated with the degree of success (Panel A of Table 6).This hypothesis about the involvement of senior execu-

tives and success was explored further, by asking who wasin charge of each TQM initiative. Again it was thought thatif the Managing Director or another senior manager was tak-ing personal responsibility for leading TQM, this was morelikely to lead to success than if responsibility was delegatedto, for example, a quality manager or TQM co-ordinator,[26]. Thus it was hypothesised (H8) that:

H8: The seniority of the person responsible for leadingTQM would be positively associated with TQM suc-cess.

The results (Panel B of Table 6) support this viewpoint.

4.1.9. Employee involvementFinally, given that the success of TQM depends not only

on e9ective leadership and commitment from the top, butalso on e9ective involvement of employees, we explored thepercentage of employees involved in each TQM initiative(Fig. 7).Our hypothesis (H9) was:

H9: That 1rms that have been unable to facilitate or mo-tivate the majority of their employees to become in-volved in TQM are also less likely to perceive TQMas having been successful.

The data in Fig. 7 support this hypothesis. Such lack of in-volvement, after at least 5 years, is a serious sign of weak-ness. This adds to the possibility that TQM may be at riskof discontinuance in the future for these 1rms. In 1992, we


Table 6TQM success and management involvement

Degree of success Panel A: Job title of respondent Panel B: Who is in charge of TQM Total

CEO or Middle or MD or senior QualityMD junior manager manager

manager

Unsuccessful or less 9 16 8 17 25than anticipatedQuite successful 18 7 19 6 25Very successful 14 3 15 2 17

Total 41 26 42 25 67Chi square = 11:11; 2df ; p¡ 0:01 Chi square = 16:703; 2df ; p¡ 0:01

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

20% or less

21% to 60%

More than 60%

Pro

port

ion

of

empl

oyee

s in

volv

ed

Percent

Less success than anticipated Quite successful Very successful

n = 27

n = 22

n = 15

Chi Square=21.15, 4 df, p<0.01

Fig. 7. Percentage of employees involved and TQM success.

had also explored the degree to which TQM had been de-ployed through the involvement of employees. At that time,over 64% of respondents reported that more than 20% ofemployees were involved. This has now risen to 76%.

5. Discussion

5.1. TQM success and size of :rm

This is one of the 1rst longitudinal research studies ofa cohort of 1rms practising TQM. The data reveals verymixed levels of success over the 5-year period. Only 17 ofthe 109 1rms believed that TQM had been very successful,while a further 25 perceived it to be quite successful. For thisgroup, representing 38% of the cohort, TQM appears to bedelivering tangible bene1ts of a magnitude that would justifyits continuance. At the other end of the spectrum, the samepercentage had discontinued TQM, largely because of lackof senior management commitment or because more bene1twas being derived from ISO9000. From our analysis, the factthat almost three-quarters of those discontinuing were small1rms might suggest that they did not have the resources to

sustain both ISO9000 and TQM in tandem. Faced with sucha choice, it is perhaps understandable that they would opt forthe former, given its more prescriptive and tangible nature.However, their lack of understanding of the complementarynature of both approaches may also be a contributory factor.An alternative explanation is provided by Fisher [46]

who found that smaller companies had more immediateexpectations of TQM bene1ts, exacerbated by adopting stan-dard TQM approaches o9ered by consultants. If these ben-e1ts were not forthcoming it is plausible that small 1rmsmight discontinue TQM earlier. Conversely Fisher arguedthat larger 1rms (¿ 500 employees) had a more mature ap-preciation of TQM and would wait longer for the bene1tsto materialise.Nevertheless, of the 67 1rms that were continuing with

TQM, 22 were small and of these, 12 claimed TQM waseither quite successful or very successful. It would there-fore appear that being a small 1rm does not necessarilymean that TQM will be unsuccessful. Further research inthis sub-group of small 1rms will be required to establishwhat they have done to make TQM work. More generallyhowever, size of 1rm was not associated with the degree ofreported success with TQM. Fifteen medium and large 1rms


also reported less success than anticipated. For the remain-der of the cohort, i.e. the 25 continuing with TQM who re-ported less success than anticipated, it will be interesting tosee what they do with TQM over the next few years. Eitherthey will conclude that it is not worth continuing, or elsethey will redouble their e9orts to make it more successful.Overall, this research establishes:

• The increase in popularity of ISO9000 at the expense ofTQM.

• The lack of association between ISO9000 certi1cation andTQM success.

• The in%uence of lack of management understanding ofTQM on implementation outcomes.

• The danger of allocating responsibility for TQM to aQuality Manager, and the reduced levels of success thatfollow.

• The indications that many 1rms in this cohort are stillinternally focused in their TQM activities.

These 1ndings support Sohal and Terziovski’s earlier work[26,27].The data also showed that the length of time that the 1rms

had been practising TQM had a signi1cant association withsuccess. Those that had started earlier reported more suc-cess than the rest. This is interesting because, as Westphal etal. [6] observed, early adopters of TQM are more preparedto customise it and be innovative about its implementation,and hence obtain tangible performance bene1ts. Conversely,later adopters are more likely to display tendencies to con-form, and to trade performance bene1ts for legitimacy, i.e.to adopt TQM because others have done so. This desire toconform to isomorphic pressures could explain the lowerlevels of success for this sub-group in the sample.

5.2. The in@uence of ISO9000

ISO9000 has had a prominent role in the outcomes ofTQM in these 1rms. Firstly, it has been a major reason for 101rms discontinuing TQM. We have also shown in Table 4that the understanding of the relationship between ISO9000and TQM was signi1cantly poorer among the discontinuing1rms, with 95% of them giving what we considered incorrectanswers.Secondly, holding ISO9000 certi1cation has been shown

to have no signi1cant association with success. Thirdly, un-derstanding of the relationship between TQM and ISO9000was also signi1cantly associated with success, with 21%of the cohort apparently not understanding this relationshipproperly. To believe that ISO9000 is the same as TQM, orthat it is more extensive than TQM, is an indicator that manyin this sub-group may also discontinue TQM in favour ofquality assurance certi1cation.The data has shown that over the 5-year period the pen-

etration of ISO9000 in this cohort has risen from 33% to66%. This is consistent with other research studies that have

highlighted the continued rise of this quality assurance stan-dard. We believe that this may re%ect an over-reliance on abadge of quality certi1cation rather than trusting the intrin-sic worth of quality management practices to achieve theirown impacts and outcomes. It is better to be a quality or-ganisation rather than wanting to be seen to be one.

5.3. Understanding of TQM

Managers’ understanding has also been a prominent factorin the data. Firstly, it is disappointing that many 1rms havenot understood the relationship between ISO9000 and TQMand the synergies to be derived from harnessing ISO9000within a TQM framework. It would appear that many seethe two as mutually exclusive choices. Secondly, the respon-dents’ reasons for implementing TQM were predominantly(62%) connected with internal issues. In other words, theirunderstanding of the potential bene1ts of TQM was not con-nected explicitly to improved customer responsiveness orcustomer satisfaction. Rather, they understood TQM to be ameans of improving internal eNciency, or reducing qualityproblems at operational levels, instead of a means of achiev-ing competitive advantage in the marketplace. Thirdly, therespondents’ understanding of the nature and purpose ofTQM was signi1cantly associated with the degree of TQMsuccess. In particular, those (40%) that identi1ed TQM asmaking the customer the focus of all business processes hadsigni1cantly higher degrees of success than the rest. Thiscohort has not learned much about the need for customerfocus since 1992, when only 36% explicitly related theirTQM initiatives to the customer. Finally, for the discontinu-ing 1rms, only 5 out of 42 (12%) identi1ed with our correctde1nition of TQM, which was signi1cantly poorer than forthose continuing. This lack of understanding of what TQMinvolved may well have been a contributory factor in theirdecisions to discontinue.

5.4. Involvement in TQM

Finally, we looked at the issue of senior executive involve-ment in TQM and the concomitant involvement of employ-ees. Two factors were used as indicators of senior executiveinvolvement. Firstly, who responded to the survey, and sec-ondly, who was in charge of TQM. In both cases, we found ahighly signi1cant association with TQM success. While wehave recognised that the inference that delegation of ques-tionnaire completion is not necessarily an indicator of lackof senior management commitment, the result is neverthe-less interesting. More reliance can be placed on the secondof these factors. That 81% of the cohort claiming quite suc-cessful or very successful TQM programs had the ManagingDirector or a senior manager in charge of TQM does suggestthe need for it to be led from the top of the organisation. Todo otherwise is at best, abdication and at worst, tokenism.As for employee involvement, we do believe that it is

a serious sign of weakness that so many 1rms have been


unable to deploy TQM e9ectively. The data supports theview that widespread employee involvement is signi1cantlyassociated with success. While high levels of employee in-volvement are not a suNcient condition for e9ective TQM,they are nevertheless necessary.

5.5. TQM success and performance improvement

At this point, we encounter the distinction between TQMsuccess and its link to performance improvement. We haveargued that perceived success is a necessary condition forTQM’s continuance. Conversely, if TQM is perceived asunsuccessful, why persist with it? This perception of suc-cess could well be based upon improvements to internalsystems, or product quality, rather than increased customersatisfaction or improved business performance. Equally, itcould be based upon the fact that high numbers of employ-ees are working in teams to solve problems. Nevertheless,if the employees are not working on the problems that mat-ter to customers, or if the internal improvements make noimpact on customer satisfaction, then tangible performanceimprovements may not be realised.We have acknowledged this distinction between per-

ceived success and performance improvement from theoutset. Five other variables in our study, although not dis-cussed in this paper, have addressed the performance issue.Speci1cally we asked the respondents about the measurableimprovements that had been achieved from TQM in theareas of (i) customer satisfaction, (ii) employee satisfac-tion, (iii) process management, (iv) sales and (v) 1nancialperformance. Most researchers agree that a central tenet ofTQM is management by fact, i.e. that data and informationshould be at the heart of any TQM initiative. Our analysisof the 1992 data for this cohort highlighted the lack ofmeasurement of these 1ve key parameters, and we com-mented on the need to study the sustainability of TQM inthe absence of measurement and customer focus. Furtheranalysis of this longitudinal data will give more insight intochanges in this cohort’s measurement behaviour. It willalso permit comparison of their perceptions of TQM withthe associated measurement practices, to see whether or notthey are still looking through rose-tinted spectacles.

5.6. Limitations of the research

As with any study there are limitations associated withhow the results were collected and the research methodol-ogy. To facilitate a meaningful longitudinal study we usedbroadly the same questionnaire as in 1992. This had alreadybeen extensively pilot tested, and reviewed in the light ofthe 1rst phase of responses. In the intervening 5-years wealso visited several of the participating 1rms, to ensure thatthe issues we included in the questionnaire were still rele-vant and also to extend it to address new issues. We alsorecognised the limitations of questionnaires for data collec-tion, and therefore conducted 25 follow-up interviews with

the respondents in this phase of the study to enrich the data.Nevertheless, there are still limitations in the measurementof certain variables such as management commitment, andemployee involvement. For example, we need to examinehow each respondent measures employee involvementlevels.

6. Conclusions

The research has highlighted some necessary antecedentsfor TQM success. In particular, managers need to under-stand the nature and purpose of TQM, its relationship toISO9000, and the potential bene1ts that can accrue from itsimplementation. We have shown that these factors are sig-ni1cantly associated with perceived TQM success. They arealso signi1cant for the discontinuing 1rms. Deriving suc-cess from TQM has also been shown to be associated withthe need for senior managers to take charge of TQM andto ensure that the majority of employees are involved inits implementation. While these 1ndings are supportive ofsuch assertions in the literature, this paper provides furtherrobust empirical evidence from a cross-section of UK com-panies in a longitudinal research design. This research hasalso contributed to the debates about the e9ects of 1rm sizeand ISO9000 certi1cation.Evidence is now emerging to show that TQM does de-

liver improved performance when implemented e9ectively[34,47]. Therefore we have developed a research agendato understand what makes TQM e9ective and what makesit successful. The paper is of particular interest, given thatmany organisations adopt new managerial innovationssuch as TQM, yet a smaller number are able to obtain andsustain the success of the innovation. Our next researchquestions will therefore explore whether or not those com-panies perceiving most success from TQM are also derivinghigher levels of performance improvement. To do so, wewill explore the trends in the 1ve performance variables re-ported earlier, viz; customer satisfaction, employee satisfac-tion, process management, sales and 1nancial performance.It is also likely that when we return to these 1rms for the

third phase of our study, TQM may have given way to otherimprovement initiatives. Thus, we may need to broaden theinvestigation to explore the possible rise in importance of theEFQM Excellence Model, and other performance improve-ment initiatives such as the Balanced Scorecard. If our spec-ulation proves correct, it will be interesting to see whetheror not TQM has provided a fertile platform for adoption ofthese, and other, improvement approaches and to what ex-tent they have been integrated with TQM within each 1rm.Overall, the cohort has shown some improvement in TQM

implementation over the 5-year period, but there are stillseveral indicators of fundamental weakness. Indeed, basedon their 1992 responses, we predicted that many of theseTQM initiatives would stall or die within the next few yearsand that only a minority would survive and prosper [48]. The


discontinuance of 42 out of the original 113 TQM programsis a testament to that prediction. Given this latest data, theonly surprise is that so many are still surviving.

References

[1] Belohlav JA. Quality, strategy and competitiveness. CaliforniaManagement Review 1993;35(3):55–67.

[2] Dean JW, Bowen DE. Management theory and Total Quality:improving research and practice through theory development.Academy of Management Review 1994;19(3):392–418.

[3] Powell TC. Total quality management as competitiveadvantage: a review and empirical study. StrategicManagement Journal 1995;16(1):15–37.

[4] Hackman JR, Wageman R. Total quality management:empirical, conceptual and practical issues. AdministrativeScience Quarterly 1995;40:309–42.

[5] Reed R, Lemak DJ, Montgomery JC. Beyond process: TQMcontent and 1rm performance. Academy of ManagementReview 1996;21(1):173–202.

[6] Westphal JD, Gulati R, Shortell SM. Customization orconformity? An institutional and network perspective on thecontent and consequences of TQM adoption. AdministrativeScience Quarterly 1997;42:366–94.

[7] Douglas TJ, Judge WQ. Total Quality Managementimplementation and competitive advantage: the role ofstructural control and exploration. Academy of ManagementJournal 2001;44(1):158–69.

[8] Taylor WA. Leadership challenges for smaller organisations:self-perceptions of TQM implementation. Omega: Inter-national Journal of Management Science 1997;25(5):567–79.

[9] Taylor WA. TQM implementation: organisation practices andinformation infrastructures. Omega: International Journal ofManagement Science 1998;26(6):715–27.

[10] Dale BG, Wu PY, Zairi M, Williams ART, Van der Wiele T.Total quality management and theory: an exploratory study ofcontribution. Total Quality Management 2001;12(4):439–49.

[11] Klimoski R. Guest editorial: a Total Quality special issue.Academy of Management Review 1994;19:390–91.

[12] Sitkin S, Sutcli9e KM, Schroeder RC. Distinguishingcontrol from learning in Total Quality Management: acontingency perspective. Academy of Management Review1994;19(3):537–64.

[13] Garvin DA. Building a learning organization, HarvardBusiness Review, 1993;71(4):78–91 (Reprint 93402).

[14] Ghobadian A, Gallear D. TQM implementation: anempirical examination and proposed generic model. Omega:International Journal of Management Science 2001;29:343–59.

[15] Argyris C. Overcoming organisational defences: facilitatingorganisational learning, Allyn and Bacon, 1990.

[16] Kaplan RS, Norton DP. The balanced scorecard: measures thatdrive performance. Harvard Business Review 1992;70(1):71–9.

[17] Pennings JM. Productivity: some old and new issues. In: BriefAP, editor. Productivity research in the behavioural and socialsciences. New York: Praeger, 1984. p. 127–40.

[18] Dess G. Consensus on strategy formulation and organizationalperformance: competitors in a fragmented industry. StrategicManagement Journal 1987;8(3):259–77.

[19] Covin J, Slevin D, Schultz R. Implementing strategic missions:e9ective strategic, structural and tactical chaos. Journal ofManagement Studies 1994;31:481–505.

[20] Ahire SL, Golhar DY. Quality management in large vs small1rms. Journal of Small Business Management 1996;34(2):1–13.

[21] Choi TY, Eboch K. The TQM paradox: relations among TQMpractices, plant performance and customer satisfaction. Journalof Operations Management 1998;17:59–75.

[22] Meredith JR. What is empirical research? Decision Line1995;26(2):10–11.

[23] Steel RP, Jennings KR. Making quality more than a fad.Fortune 1992;18:12–3.

[24] Samson D, Terziovski M. The relationship between totalquality management practice and organisational performance.Journal of Operations Management 1999;17:393–409.

[25] Mandal P, Shah K, Love PED. The di9usion of quality inAustralian manufacturing. International Journal of Quality andReliability Management 1999;16(6):575–90.

[26] Terziovski M, Sohal A, Moss S. Longitudinal analysis ofquality management practices in Australian organizations.Total Quality Management 1999;10(6):915–26.

[27] Sohal AS, Terziovski M. TQM in Australian manufacturing:factors critical to success. International Journal of Quality andReliability Management 2000;17(2):158–67.

[28] Terziovski M, Samson D. The link between totalquality management practice and organisational performance.International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management1999;16(3):226–37.

[29] Sun H. Total Quality Management, ISO9000 certi1cation andperformance improvement. International Journal of Qualityand Reliability Management 2000;17(2):168–79.

[30] Madhu CN, Kuei C, Lin C. A comparative analysis ofquality practice in manufacturing 1rms in the US and Taiwan.Decision Sciences 1995;26(5):621–35.

[31] Najmi M, Kehoe DF. An integrated framework forpost-ISO9000 quality development. International Journal ofQuality and Reliability Management 2000;17(3):226–58.

[32] Kayis B. Assessing the di9erences in total quality managementin implementation: behaviour of the Australian manufacturingindustry. Total Quality Management 1998;9(8):741–51.

[33] Hendricks KB, Singhal VR. Firm characteristics, total qualitymanagement and 1nancial performance. Journal of OperationsManagement 2001;19:269–85.

[34] Hendricks KB, Singhal VR. The long-run stock priceperformance of 1rms with e9ective TQM programs.Management Science 2001;47(3):359–68.

[35] Rahman S. A comparative study of TQM practice andorganisational performance of SMEs with and withoutISO9000 certi1cation. International Journal of Quality andReliability Management 2001;18(1):35–49.

[36] Burrows P. TQM reality check: it works, but it’s not cheapor easy. Electronic Business 1992;18:47–54.

[37] Economist 1992; April: 67.[38] Rao SS, Ragunathan TS, Solis LE. Does ISO9000 have

an e9ect on quality management practices? An internationalempirical study. Total Quality Management 1997;8(6):335–46.

[39] Van der Wiele T, Brown A. Venturing down the TQM pathfor SMEs. International Small Business Journal 1998;16(2):50–67.


[40] Stephens KS. ISO9000 and total quality. Quality ManagementJournal 1994;2(1):57–71.

[41] Welsh J, White J. A small business is not a little big business.Harvard Business Review 1981;59(4):18–32.

[42] Ghobadian A, Gallear D. TQM and organization size. Inter-national Journal of Operations and Production Management1997;17(2):121–63.

[43] Choi TY, Wasti SN. Institutional pressures and organisationallearning: American-owned automotive parts suppliers andJapanese shop-%oor production methods. In: Liker J, Ettlie J,Campbell J, editors. Engineered in Japan: Japanese technologymanagement practices. New York: Oxford University Press,1992.

[44] Neal JA, Tromley CL. From incremental change to retro1t:creating high-performance work systems. Academy ofManagement Executive 1995;9:42–54.

[45] Quazi HA, Padibjo SR. A journey toward totalquality management through ISO9000 certi1cation—a studyon small and medium-sized enterprises in Singapore.International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management1998;15(5):489–508.

[46] Fisher TJ. The view from the top: chief executives’perceptions of total quality management. Australian Journalof Management 1993;18(2):181–96.

[47] Easton GS, Jarrell SL. The e9ects of total quality managementon corporate performance: an empirical investigation. Journalof Business 1998;71(2):253–307.

[48] Taylor WA. TQM and the need for organisationalself-assessment: some empirical evidence. InternationalJournal of Total Quality Management 1995;6(1):3–12.

a longitudinal study of tqm implementation: factors influencing success and failure

Documents