IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v36y2008i5p825-837.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A grounded theory research approach to building and testing TQM theory in operations management

Author

Listed:
  • McAdam, Rodney
  • Leonard, Denis
  • Henderson, Joan
  • Hazlett, Shirley-Ann

Abstract

Total quality management (TQM) has continued to develop as a strategic business improvement approach in organisations and within the Operations Management literature. Strategic TQM is a dynamic phenomenon, reflecting the complexity and technology development in the business environment. Therefore, this conception of TQM has led to significant challenges with regards to developing suitable models and research methodology where traditional, and normative research data, includes survey responses associated with deductive theory and testing. Such data, and its use, is often premised on cause and effect rationality and fails to supply deep rich data to address meanings, phenomena and complex socio-political events, which is a feature of strategic TQM. The primary aim of this paper is to develop strategic TQM models which are representative of the dynamic and complex elements of organisations and their environments. A secondary aim is to examine theory building in relation to TQM by using Grounded Theory research methods to fulfil the primary aim of the paper. The data includes longitudinal interviews; practitioner reflexivity; social constructionist groups; critical action learning teams and multiple and longitudinal cases, which was analysed and integrated using quality-based rules within Grounded Theory.

Suggested Citation

  • McAdam, Rodney & Leonard, Denis & Henderson, Joan & Hazlett, Shirley-Ann, 2008. "A grounded theory research approach to building and testing TQM theory in operations management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 825-837, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:36:y:2008:i:5:p:825-837
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(06)00035-1
    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. Todd H. Chiles & Thomas Y. Choi, 2000. "Theorizing TQM: An Austrian and Evolutionary Economics Interpretation," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 185-212, March.
    2. Nelson P. Repenning, 2002. "A Simulation-Based Approach to Understanding the Dynamics of Innovation Implementation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 109-127, April.
    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. Barbara J. Jennings & Eric D. Vugrin & Deborah K. Belasich, 2013. "Resilience certification for commercial buildings: a study of stakeholder perspectives," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 184-194, June.
    2. Hardcopf, Rick & Gonçalves, Paulo & Linderman, Kevin & Bendoly, Elliot, 2017. "Short-term bias and strategic misalignment in operational solutions: Perceptions, tendencies, and traps," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1004-1021.
    3. Ali Nazarian & Mohsin Shahzad & Xiangan Ding & Andrea Appolloni, 2024. "Do TQM Instigate Sustainable Development: Identifying the Key Role of Green Innovation and Knowledge Management," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(1), pages 2499-2524, March.

    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. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    2. Philippe DUEZ & Ioan RADU & Cleopatra SENDROIU & Mihai CIOC, 2009. "Considerations regarding the Formulation of the Organisational Strategy through Simulation Techniques," REVISTA DE MANAGEMENT COMPARAT INTERNATIONAL/REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE MANAGEMENT, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 10(3), pages 504-517, July.
    3. Stefan N. Groesser & Niklas Jovy, 2016. "Business model analysis using computational modeling: a strategy tool for exploration and decision-making," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 61-88, February.
    4. John Qi Dong, 2021. "Technological choices under uncertainty: Does organizational aspiration matter?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(5), pages 898-916, May.
    5. Benabderrazik, K. & Kopainsky, B. & Tazi, L. & Joerin, J. & Six, J., 2021. "Agricultural intensification can no longer ignore water conservation – A systemic modelling approach to the case of tomato producers in Morocco," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    6. Hazhir Rahmandad & Jerker Denrell & Drazen Prelec, 2021. "What makes dynamic strategic problems difficult? Evidence from an experimental study," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(5), pages 865-897, May.
    7. Cisnetto, Valentina & Barlow, James, 2020. "The development of complex and controversial innovations. Genetically modified mosquitoes for malaria eradication," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(3).
    8. Florian Kapmeier & Paulo Gonçalves, 2018. "Wasted paradise? Policies for Small Island States to manage tourism‐driven growth while controlling waste generation: the case of the Maldives," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 172-221, January.
    9. Philipp Wunderlich & Andreas Größler & Nicole Zimmermann & Jac A. M. Vennix, 2014. "Managerial influence on the diffusion of innovations within intra-organizational networks," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(3), pages 161-185, July.
    10. Giulio Mangano & Giovanni Zenezini & Anna Corinna Cagliano & Alberto De Marco, 2019. "The dynamics of diffusion of an electronic platform supporting City Logistics services," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 182-198, December.
    11. Sudharshan, Devanathan & Furrer, Olivier & Arakoni, Ramesh A., 2013. "Robust Imitation Strategies," FSES Working Papers 446, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    12. Felicjan Rydzak & Paul A. Monus, 2018. "Shaping organizational network structure to enable sustainable transformation," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 255-283, January.
    13. Hana Tomaskova & Martin Kopecky, 2020. "Specialization of Business Process Model and Notation Applications in Medicine—A Review," Data, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-42, October.
    14. Andrijana Horvat & Vincenzo Fogliano & Pieternel A Luning, 2020. "Modifying the Bass diffusion model to study adoption of radical new foods–The case of edible insects in the Netherlands," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-23, June.
    15. Jing Xia & Wei Liu & Sang-Bing Tsai & Guodong Li & Chien-Chi Chu & Kai Wang, 2018. "A System Dynamics Framework for Academic Entrepreneurship," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-25, July.
    16. Manuel E. Sosa, 2011. "Where Do Creative Interactions Come From? The Role of Tie Content and Social Networks," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, February.
    17. Kirsten Martin & Bidhan Parmar, 2012. "Assumptions in Decision Making Scholarship: Implications for Business Ethics Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 105(3), pages 289-306, February.
    18. Huotari, Pontus & Järvi, Kati & Kortelainen, Samuli & Huhtamäki, Jukka, 2017. "Winner does not take all: Selective attention and local bias in platform-based markets," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 313-326.
    19. Stefan Groesser & Niklas Jovy, 2016. "Business model analysis using computational modeling: a strategy tool for exploration and decision-making," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 61-88, February.
    20. Carlos Ferreira Peralta & Maria Francisca Saldanha & Paulo Nuno Lopes & Paulo Renato Lourenço & Leonor Pais, 2021. "Does Supervisor’s Moral Courage to Go Beyond Compliance Have a Role in the Relationships Between Teamwork Quality, Team Creativity, and Team Idea Implementation?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 168(4), pages 677-696, February.

    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:36:y:2008:i:5:p:825-837. 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.