IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v34y2006i4p372-384.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The contribution of measurement and information infrastructure to TQM success

Author

Listed:
  • Taylor, W.A.
  • Wright, G.H.

Abstract

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

Suggested Citation

  • Taylor, W.A. & Wright, G.H., 2006. "The contribution of measurement and information infrastructure to TQM success," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 372-384, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:34:y:2006:i:4:p:372-384
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(04)00190-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Willard I. Zangwill & Paul B. Kantor, 1998. "Toward a Theory of Continuous Improvement and the Learning Curve," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(7), pages 910-920, July.
    2. Charles H. Fine, 1986. "Quality Improvement and Learning in Productive Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(10), pages 1301-1315, October.
    3. Maqbool Dada & Richard Marcellus, 1994. "Process Control with Learning," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 42(2), pages 323-336, April.
    4. Plenert, Gerhard, 1996. "Total Quality Management (TQM) -- Putting structure behind the philosophy," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 67-78, February.
    5. Taylor, W. A., 1997. "Leadership challenges for smaller organisations: Self-perceptions of TQM implementation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 567-579, October.
    6. Premkumar, G. & Roberts, Margaret, 1999. "Adoption of new information technologies in rural small businesses," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 467-484, August.
    7. Eisenbeis, Robert A, 1977. "Pitfalls in the Application of Discriminant Analysis in Business, Finance, and Economics," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 32(3), pages 875-900, June.
    8. Hakes, J. E., 2001. "Can measuring results produce results: one manager's view," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 319-327, August.
    9. Ritchie, L. & Dale, B. G., 2000. "Self-assessment using the business excellence model: A study of practice and process," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 241-254, July.
    10. Amit Shankar Mukherjee & Michael A. Lapré & Luk N. Van Wassenhove, 1998. "Knowledge Driven Quality Improvement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(11-Part-2), pages 35-49, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mansoor Shekarian & Mahour Parast, 2021. "Do Entrepreneurship Skills Improve Project Performance? A Project-Based Learning Perspective," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 30(2), pages 267-305, September.
    2. Yang, Yefei & Lee, Peter K.C. & Cheng, T.C.E., 2015. "Operational improvement competence and service recovery performance: The moderating effects of role stress and job resources," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 134-145.
    3. Bortolotti, Thomas & Boscari, Stefania & Danese, Pamela, 2015. "Successful lean implementation: Organizational culture and soft lean practices," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 182-201.
    4. Kayakutlu, Gülgün & Büyüközkan, Gülçin, 2008. "Assessing knowledge-based resources in a utility company: Identify and prioritise the balancing factors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(7), pages 1027-1037.
    5. P. Sarathy, 2013. "TQM practice in real-estate industry using AHP," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 2049-2063, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christopher D. Ittner & Venky Nagar & Madhav V. Rajan, 2001. "An Empirical Examination of Dynamic Quality-Based Learning Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(4), pages 563-578, April.
    2. Vits, Jeroen & Gelders, Ludo, 2002. "Performance improvement theory," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 285-298, June.
    3. Anupam Agrawal & Suresh Muthulingam, 2015. "Does Organizational Forgetting Affect Vendor Quality Performance? An Empirical Investigation," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 350-367, July.
    4. Anita L. Tucker, 2007. "An Empirical Study of System Improvement by Frontline Employees in Hospital Units," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 492-505, April.
    5. Morrison, J. Bradley, 2008. "Putting the learning curve in context," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(11), pages 1182-1190, November.
    6. Kamalini Ramdas & Taylor Randall, 2008. "Does Component Sharing Help or Hurt Reliability? An Empirical Study in the Automotive Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 922-938, May.
    7. Anita L. Tucker & Ingrid M. Nembhard & Amy C. Edmondson, 2007. "Implementing New Practices: An Empirical Study of Organizational Learning in Hospital Intensive Care Units," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(6), pages 894-907, June.
    8. Wang, Weijia & Plante, Robert D. & Tang, Jen, 2013. "Minimum cost allocation of quality improvement targets under supplier process disruption," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 388-396.
    9. Adrian S. Choo & Kevin W. Linderman & Roger G. Schroeder, 2007. "Method and Psychological Effects on Learning Behaviors and Knowledge Creation in Quality Improvement Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 437-450, March.
    10. Amit Shankar Mukherjee & Michael A. Lapré & Luk N. Van Wassenhove, 1998. "Knowledge Driven Quality Improvement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(11-Part-2), pages 35-49, November.
    11. Yimin Wang & Wendell Gilland & Brian Tomlin, 2010. "Mitigating Supply Risk: Dual Sourcing or Process Improvement?," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 489-510, September.
    12. Janice E. Carrillo & Cheryl Gaimon, 2004. "Managing Knowledge-Based Resource Capabilities Under Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1504-1518, November.
    13. Narayanan, V. G. & Davila, Antonio, 1998. "Using delegation and control systems to mitigate the trade-off between the performance-evaluation and belief-revision uses of accounting signals," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 255-282, June.
    14. Terwiesch, Christian & E. Bohn, Roger, 2001. "Learning and process improvement during production ramp-up," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 1-19, March.
    15. Biskup, Dirk & Simons, Dirk, 2004. "Common due date scheduling with autonomous and induced learning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 606-616, December.
    16. Montgomery, D. & Swinnen, G. & Vanhoof, K., 1997. "Comparison of some AI and statistical classification methods for a marketing case," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 312-325, December.
    17. Lin, Hsiou-Wei William & Lo, Huai-Chun & Wu, Ruei-Shian, 2016. "Modeling default prediction with earnings management," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 306-322.
    18. Chen, Jiguang & Hu, Qiying, 2015. "Optimal payment scheme when the supplier’s quality level and cost are unknown," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(3), pages 731-742.
    19. Hazhir Rahmandad, 2012. "Impact of Growth Opportunities and Competition on Firm-Level Capability Development Trade-offs," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 138-154, February.
    20. Nair, Anand & Narasimhan, Ram, 2006. "Dynamics of competing with quality- and advertising-based goodwill," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(1), pages 462-474, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:34:y:2006:i:4:p:372-384. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.