INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL

Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

TQMformanufacturingexcellence:Factorscriticaltosuccess

SinglaNitin1,KhandujaDinesh2,Singh TejinderPaul3
1DepartmentofMechanicalEngineering,BabaBandaSinghBahadurEngineeringCollege,
FatehgarhSahib,Punjab,India.
2AssociateProfessor, MechanicalEngineeringDepartment,NITKurukshetra,Haryana,
3Director,SymbiosisInstituteof Technology,SymbiosisInternationalUniversity,Pune.
nitintiet@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
ThecriticalsuccessfactorsofTQMcanbedescribedasbestpracticesorwaysinwhichfirms
& their employees undertake business activities in all key processes. TQM is seen as a
relatively new concept and a way for the organizations to improve the quality of their
productsandservices.TQMhas beenplayinganincreasingly importantrole inthesurvival
andgrowthofcompaniesinmanufacturingsector.Manyfirmshavearrivedattheconclusion
that effective TQM implementation can improve their competitive abilities and provide
strategicadvantagesinthemarketplace.Manyapproacheshavebeenusedforimplementation
of TQM. These approaches form an integral part of several International Quality
Awards/NationalQuality Awardsdevelopedbygovernmentsofvariouscountriesaswell as
many frameworks developed by individual researchers. Further each Quality
Award/frameworkhas itsowndifferentsetofcriticalsuccess factors.Itthereforecreatesa
lot of confusion for the manufacturing firms, as to which critical success factors to choose
and which not, so as to implement the concept of TQM for achieving manufacturing
excellence.Thepurposeofthispaper istoidentifya setofcritical success factorsofTQM
implementation by comparing a set of 24 awards/frameworks as given by various agencies
andresearchers.Theoutcomeofthisstudyisacomprehensivelistofmostimportantcritical
success factorsof TQM implementation required for sustaining or achieving manufacturing
excellence.
Keywords: Total Quality Management (TQM), Critical Success factors (CSFs), National
QualityAward(NQA)
1.Introduction
Best will survive is the slogan of the top class business organizations. In recent years
increasing internationalization and globalization of markets have made it necessary for the
organizations to improve their effectiveness and for this many have targeted the area of
quality (Cao et al, 2000). With increasing international pressure from the international
community to meet the World Trade organization guidelines, the governments will not be
abletomaintainprotectionistpolicieslikerestrictions,tariffsanddifferenttypesofsubsidies
for local industries(Khan,2003).This hasaddedpressureonsmall manufacturers(Singlaet
al,2008).Producingeverythingrightthefirsttimeeverytimeisveryimportant.Accordingly
all manufacturing firms seek to adopt and implement a set of operations management
practicesthathavebeensuccessfulelsewhereandthatwill helpthemtoidentifychanges in
the environment and to respond proactively through continuous improvement (Fassoula, D,
2006). One form of operations management practices is TQM which has received great

219

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

attention in last two decades (Jung et al, 2006). Total Quality Management thus assumes a
greatimportanceintheprevailingmanufacturingscenario.TQMisacultureinherentinthis
culture is a total commitment to quality and an attitude expressed by everybodys
involvementintheprocessofcontinuousimprovementofproductsandservicesthroughthe
useofinnovativescientificmethods.TQMisnotastepbysteptechniquebutitisaculture.
This culture varies from company to company. Implementation of TQM in an organization
woulddemanddesigningaproceduretakingintoaccountthefactorsandforcesprevalentin
thatorganization.Thisdemandsthataflexibleapproachistobeusedforimplementationof
TQMandthiscanbenamedasFlexibleSystemsMethodology.Theconceptofflexibilityin
organizationalcontextreferstotheabilitytoprecipitateintentionalchanges,tocontinuously
respondtounanticipatedchangesandtoadjusttotheunexpectedconsequencesofpredictable
changes (Bahrami, 1992). Flexibility is also defined as the ability to change or react with
little penalty in time, effort, cost or performance (Upton, 1994). The concept of flexibility
dwellsonthreecentralissuesofcontinuum,freedomofchoiceanddynamicinterplay,which
arehighlyinterrelated.
The three basic components that define the dynamic interplay of reality in flexible system
managementparadigmaresituation,actorandprocess.Thesituationistobemanagedbyan
Actor through a flexibly evolved management process. Flexible Systems Methodology
bridges the gap between hard system based techniques and soft system based techniques
(Singh et al, 1996). FSM has got four phases: the first phase involves Clarifying the
Context,throughdetailedreviewofexistingliterature.ThesecondphaseUnderstandingthe
Situation involves a survey of various industrial organizations. The third phase Assessing
the Actors Capability involves conducting detailed case studies in some of the surveyed
organizations for finding out more details. Phase four of the study aims at Evolving a
managementProcesswhichisspecifictotheclassandcategoryoftheindustry.Thisphase
takesintoaccount,theinformationcollectedinallthepreviousphasesanditsanalysisinthe
light of expert opinion to evolve a management process. In this paper an attempt has been
made to discuss the phase I of the FSM methodology i.e. clarifying the context and thus
provideauniversallyacceptedframeworkwhichwillcontainalltheimportantCSFsofTQM.
The task has been carried out by carrying a detailed literature review of fourteen different
frameworks as developed by various researchers and that of criteria given by 10 different
NationalQualityawards.
2.LiteratureReview
An extensive literature has been carried outto select the various TQM frameworks forthis
study.Primarilyliteraturerelatedtotwodifferenttypesofframeworkshasbeenanalyzedviz.
award based frameworks and researcher based frameworks. Award based frameworks are
meant mainly for the organizations seeking recognition. There are more than hundreds of
National Quality Awards existing in different categories but amongst them most renowned
NationalQualityAwardsareMalcolmBaldrigeNationalQualityAward(MBNQA)ofUSA,
Deming Prize (DP) of Japan and European Quality Award (EQA). These award based
frameworks are used by many organizations to assess and benchmark their level of TQM
implementation.Hendricks&Singhal(2000)havequotedthatthesequalityawardsareproxy
for effective implementation of TQM. Other type of comparison is made between the
frameworksdevelopedbyvariousresearchersknownasresearcherbasedframeworks.These

220

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

aretheframeworksdevelopedbyaparticularrenownedresearcherduetohisvastexperience
inthefieldofTQM.Thefirstsurveywhichattemptedtoidentifythecriticalsuccessfactors
ofTQM,wasdonebySaraphetal(1989).Someoftheotherimportantframeworksgivenby
researchersincludethatbyFlynnetal(1995)whichhasgivendetails11onCSFsofTQM
andbyAhireetal(1996)whichcovers12CSFsofTQM.FrameworkbyZhangetal(2000)
gives11CSFsofTQMandinadditionofthesestudies,severalotherempiricalstudieshave
alsoattemptedtogiveasetofvariousCSFsofTQM.Thusalargenumberofframeworks,
awardbasedaswellasresearcherbased,areavailableinliteratureformanufacturingunitsto
assess their own level of TQM implementation and therefore making it difficult for the
organizationstodecideuponwhichsetofCSFstochoose.FurtherTQMisnotastepbystep
technique,ratheritisaculturewhichvariesfromcompanytocompany.Thusimplementation
of TQM in an organization would demand designing a procedure taking into account the
factors and forces prevalent in that organization. (Singla et al, 2008). Table 1 has enlisted
various frameworks based on National Quality Awards and table 2 has enlisted various
researcherbasedframeworkscomparedinthisstudy.
Table1:ListofNationalQualityAwards
S.No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Name
MalcolmBaldrigeNationalQualityAward(1999)
DemingPrize(1996)
EuropeanFoundationforQualityManagement(1994)
RajivGandhiNationalQualityAward(Tanetal,2002)
IMCRamakrishnaBajajNationalQualityAward)
JapanQualityAward(Khooetal,2003)
SouthAfricanExcellenceAward(HuiandChuan,2002)
Golden PeacockNationalQualityAward
AustrlianBusinessExcellenceAward(HuiandChuan,2002)
TheGermanQualityAward(Zinketal,1998)

Abbreviationused
MBNQA
DP
EFQM
RGNQA
IMCRBNQA
JQA
SAEA
GPNQA
ABEA
GQA

Table2:ListofResearcherBasedFrameworks
S.No NameoftheframeworkalongwithResearcher.
AninstrumentformeasuringTQMimplementationforChinesemanufacturing
1
companiesbyZhangetal(2000)
AninstrumentformeasuringfactorsofqualitymanagementbySaraphetal(1989)
2
Aframeworkforinternationalqualitymanagementresearchdevelopmentand
3
validationofameasurementinstrumentbyRaoetal(1999)
DevelopmentandvalidationofTQMimplementationconstructsbyAhireetal(1996)
4
TheimpactofQualitymanagementpracticesonperformance&competitive
5
advantagebyFlynnetal(1995)
APathanalyticmodeoftheoryofqualitymanagementmethodsbyAndersonetal
6
(1995)
AnempiricalinvestigationofcriticalTQMfactorsusingexploratory factoranalysis
7
byTamini(1995)
CriticalsuccessfactorsofTQMimplementationinHongKongindustriesbyAntony
8

221

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

9
10
11
12
13
14

ISSN 09764259

etal(2002)
SelfassessmentofTQMprogramsbyWuetal(1997)
AssessmentofqualitymanagementperformanceinorganizationsbyLee&Quazi
(1999)
MeasuringCriticalfactorsofTQM,MeasuringbusinessexcellencebyMotwani
(2000)
CriticalsuccessfactorsoftotalqualitymanagementbySeetharamanetal(2006)
CriticalsuccessfactorsforSPCimplementationinUKsmallandmediumenterprises:
somekey ndingsfromasurveybyrungasamyetal(2002)
TheimplementationoftotalqualitymanagementintheNHS:howtoavoidfailureby
Nwabueze&Kanji(1997

3.NationalQualityAwards:Acomparison
Table 3 shows the comparison of various National Quality Awards with respect to 24
differentCSFsofTQMimplementation.SymbolXinfrontofparticularCSFssignifiesits
inclusioninaparticularNationalAwardCategory.Thelastcolumnofthetablesignifiesthe
frequencyofoccurrenceofaparticularCSFsinallNationalQualityAwardcategoriestaken
together. The data of frequency of occurrence of CSFs in various award categories taken
together is also shown in figure 1 in the form of a histogram. The figure depicts the CSFs
which get maximum frequency of occurrence and these are Strategic Quality Planning,
Process Flow Management, Education & Training, Customer Orientation, Employee
Empowerment & Involvement, Internal Quality Results and External Quality Results. All
these gotthe maximum scoreof 10 and this implies that all the NQAs have included these
seven CSFs in their award framework. CSF of Top Management Support has got a good
score of 09 out of 10 and this shows that importance of this CSF is also emphasized by
maximum frameworks and only one NQA has not included it in its framework. The CSFs,
whichgottheleastscoreof1,areVision&PlanStatement,Benchmarking,UnityofPurpose,
Organization, Standardization, Maintenance and Future Plans, thus showing their least
importanceintermsofvariousNQAframeworks.Table4depictsthetenbestCSFsi.e.those
CSFswhichattainedamaximumscore,inthedescendingorderandTable5depictstheTen
CSFs which got the poor score i.e. those CSFs which attained the minimum score of
frequencyofoccurrenceintheascendingorder

SAEA

GPNQA

ABEA

GQA

Frequenc
yof
Occurrenc

JQA

IMCRBN
QA

Education&Training

RGNQA

EFQM

TopManagementSupport

DP

MBNQA

Table3:ComparisonofvariousNationalQualityAwards

09

10

Vision&PlanStatement

01

CustomerOrientation

SupplierQualitymanagement

X
X

10
03

222

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

EmployeeEmpowerment&
Involvement
ProcessFlowManagement

10

10

Reward&Recognition

Benchmark

StrategicQualityPlanning

Information,Evaluation&Analysis

ProductDesign
ProductQuality

UnityofPurpose

01
X

10

02

03
01

InternalQualityResults

10

ExternalQualityResults

10

QualitySystemimprovement

02

Organization

01

Standardization

01

Maintenance

01

Futureplans

01

ImpactonEnvironment/Society

Resources

Marketfocus

05

04

03

To pM anag ement Sup p or t

FrequencyofOccurenceofCSF's(AwardBased Ed ucat ion&Tr aining

Comparison)
V i s i on&P l an St a t ement

Cust o mer Orient at ion

Sup p lierQualit ymanagement

12

EmployeeEmp owerment &Invo lvement

Frequencyofoccurence

Pro cessFlo wM anag ement

10

Reward &Recog nit io n

B enchmar k
St r at eg icQualit yPlanning

Inf o rmat io n,Evaluat io n&A nalysis

Pro d uct Desig n
Pro d uct Qualit y

Unit yo f Pur po se
Int ernalQualit yResult s

Ext er nalQualit yResult s

Qualit ySyst emimp ro vement
Org anizat io n

St and ar dizat io n
M aint enance

Fut ur ep lans
Imp act onEnviro nment / So ciet y
Reso ur ces

CriticalSuccessfactors

M arket f o cus

Figure1:FrequencyofOccurrenceofCSF's(AwardBasedComparison)
223

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

Table4:ListofBestTenCSFsGettingHighestScore(AwardBased)
S.No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

ListofBestTenCSFsGettingHighestScore
StrategicQualityPlanning
ProcessflowManagement
Education&Training.
CustomerOrientation
EmployeeEmpowerment&Involvement
InternalQualityResults
ExternalQualityResults
TopManagementSupport
Reward&Recognition
Information,Evaluation&Analysis

Score(outof
10)
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
09
07
07

Table5:ListofBestTenCSFsGettingLowestScore(AwardBased)
S.No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

ListofTenCSFsGettingLowestScore
Vision&Planstatement
Benchmark
UnityofPurpose
Organization
Standardization
Maintenance
FuturePlans
Productdesign
ProductQuality
QualitySystemImprovement

Score(outof
10)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
2

4.Researcherbasedframeworks:AComparison
Table6showsthecomparisonofvariousframeworksassuggestedbyindividualresearchers
withrespectto26differentCSFsofTQMimplementation.SymbolXinfrontofparticular
CSFssignifiesitsinclusioninaparticularframework.Thelastcolumnofthetablesignifies
thefrequencyofoccurrenceofaparticularCSFinallframeworkstakentogether.
The data of frequency of occurrence of CSFs in various research based frameworks taken
togetherisalsoshown in figure2 inthe formof ahistogram.This figuredepictstheCSFs,
which got maximum frequency of occurrence. Top Management Support has got the
maximumscoreof14andthisimpliesthatalltheresearchershaveincludedthisCSFintheir
framework. CSFs of Education & Training, Customer Orientation, and Information,
Evaluation&Analysis,EmployeeEmpowerment&Involvementhavealsogotagoodscore,
whichshowsthatimportanceoftheseCSFsisalsoemphasizedbymaximumresearchers.

224

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

TopManagementSupport
Education&Training
Vision&PlanStatement
CustomerOrientation
SupplierQuality
Management
EmployeeEmpowerment&
Involvement
ProcessflowManagement
StatisticalProcessControl
Reward&Recognition
Benchmark
StrategicQualityPlanning
Information,Evaluation&
Analysis
ProductDesign
ProductQuality
PerceivedQualityMarket
outcome
UnityofPurpose
InternalQuality Results
ExternalQualityResults
QualitySystemimprovement
Innovation&Technology
RoleofQualityDepartment
Qualitycitizenship
ContinuousImprovement
Communicationtoimprove
Quality
Providingassuranceto
employees
OrganizationalStructure

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X X X X
X X
X
X

X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X
X

X X X X X X

X X

X X
X X X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X X X
X
X

X X

X X
X X

X X X X

X X X X X X X

X X X X X
X

X X

X
X

X X
X X

X
X

09
07
04
04
04
04
11

04
03
03

02
01
02

X
X

11
07

01
01

X
X

14
13
01

06
01
01

X
X X

Frequencyof
Occurrence

Nwabuezeet

Rungasamy

Seetharaman

Motwani

Leeetal

Wuetal

Antonyetal

Flynnetal
Andersonet
al
Tamini

Ahireetal

SubbaRaoet

Saraphetal

Zhangetal

Table6:ComparisonofvariousResearcherbasedframeworks

X
X X

X X

05
01

X
X

01

The CSFs, which got the least score of 1, are Vision & Plan Statement, Product Quality,
Percieved Quality Market Outcomes, Quality System Improvement, Innovation &
Technology, Quality Citizenship, Providing assurance to Employees and Organizational
Structure, thus showing their least importance in terms of various researcher based
frameworks.

225

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

FrequencyofOccurenceofCSF's(ResearcherBased
Comparison)
Top M anag ementSup p ort
Educatio n&Training

16

V ision&PlanSt atement
Custo merOrient at ion

14

Sup plierQualityM anag ement

frequencyofOccurence

Emp lo yeeEmpo werment&Invo lvement

Pro cessflo wM anagement

12

StatisticalPro cessContro l
Reward&Recog nitio n

10

B enchmark
StrategicQualityPlanning
Info rmat ion,Evaluatio n&A nalysis

Pro ductDesig n
Pro ductQuality

PerceivedQualit yM arketo ut co me
UnityofPurp ose
InternalQualit yResults

Ext ernalQualityResults
Qualit ySystemimp ro vement

Inno vatio n&Technolo g y

Roleo fQualit yDepartment
Qualit ycitizenship

Continuo usImprovement
Communicatio ntoimpro veQuality

CriticalSucessfactors

Pro vid ingassurancet oemplo yees

Org anizatio nalStruct ure

Figure2:FrequencyofOccurrenceofCSF's(ResearcherBasedComparison)

Table7depictsthetenbestCSFsi.e.thoseCSFswhichattainedamaximumscoreinthe
descending order and table 8 depicts the ten CSFs which got the poor score i.e. those
CSFs which attained the minimum score of frequency of occurrence in the ascending
order
Table7:ListofBestTenCSFsGettingHighestScore(ResearcherBased)
S.No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

ListofBestTenCSFsGettingHighestScore
TopManagementSupport
Education&Training
CustomerOrientation
Information,Evaluation&Analysis
EmployeeEmpowerment&Involvement
SupplierQualitymanagement
ProcessflowManagement
ProductDesign
Benchmark
StrategicQualityPlanning

Score(outof
14)
14
13
11
11
9
7
7
6
4
4

226

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

Table8:ListofBestTenCSFsGettingLowestScore(ResearcherBased)
S.No

ListofTenCSFsGettingLowestScore
Vision&PlanStatement
ProductQuality
PerceivedQualityMarketoutcome
QualitySystemimprovement
Innovation&Technology
Qualitycitizenship
Providingassurancetoemployees
OrganizationalStructure
RoleofQualityDepartment
ContinuousImprovement

Score(outof14)
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
02
02

AbriefdiscussionaboutthebestCSFsthatgotthehighestScoreaspertable4&7is
givenbelow:
1. Strategic Quality Planning: It demands the integration of quality and customer
satisfaction issues into strategic and operational plans. This integration allows
organizations to set clear priorities establish clear target area for improvement
activities and allocates resources to the most important things to be done (Godfrey,
1993).
2. Process flow Management: This factor emphasizes systems and procedures for
addingvaluestoprocesses,increasingqualitylevelsandraisingproductivityperyear
(Motwani, 2001). Deming (1986) stated that improving product quality should not
dependonmassinspection,whichistoolate,ineffectiveandcostlybutshoulddepend
onimprovementonproductionprocess.
3. Top Management Support/Leadership: Top Management Support/Leadership has
provedtobethekeyinthecontinuousqualityimprovementprocessandthedriverof
quality management practices (Crossby, 1979 Deming, 1982 Garvin 19831984
Gibson, 1990 Gilbert 1990 Gryna, 1991 Juran 1986 Leonard and Sasser, 1982
Steeples,1992).
4. EducationandTraining:Withinanorganizationonlyagoodeducationandtraining
programmehelpsinstartingasuccessfulqualityculture.Trainingandeducationatall
levels is vital to success of TQM. It should cover all aspects of TQM, from the
generalconcepts,throughthedevelopmentofcustomerfocus,tothemeasurementof
quality and should include information about effective team working and use of
problemsolvingtechniques(NwabuezeandKanji,1997).
5. CustomerOrientation:Meetingtheneedsandrequirementsofcustomersisthemain
focus of TQM. Efforts by companies must not be only restricted to merely meeting
specifications, reducing defects and errors or eliminating complaints, these must

227

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

emphasizedesigningnewproductsandrespondingrapidlytochangingconsumerand
marketdemands.(EvansandLindsay,1999).
6. Employee Empowerment and Involvement : Empowerment of employees is
involving them in organizational planning, have the abilities and tools to perform
tasks well and can trust and be trusted by management (Raiborn and Payne, 1996).
Employee empowerment means that workers are prepared for and are authorized to
fullyparticipateinworkandsafetyplanning(Weinstein,1996).
7. InternalQualityResults:Thefirstandimmediategoalofmostqualitymanagement
practices is to improve internal quality performance measures (Steeples, 1992).
Internal quality performance (waste, rework etc) is improved when the product
components are designed in such a way that is easy to manufacture and assemble.
(Raoetal,1999).
8. External Quality Results: Good quality practices resulting in the improvement of
internal quality performance will lead to the improvement of external performance
suchascompetitivemarketposition,profitabilityandcustomersatisfaction.(Deming
19821986).Whencompaniesdelivergoodquality,theygeneratesatisfiedcustomers
whorewardtheorganizationwithcontinuouspatronageandfavorablewordofmouth
advertisingthusresultinginexternalqualityperformance.(Raoetal,1999).
9. Reward and Recognition: Firms that are serious about achieving quality and
customer satisfaction must integrate theses aspects to their recognition and reward
system. Johnston & Daniel cited rewards and recognition as one of the enablers,
which maximizesemployeespotential and involvementand indoing sobecomeone
of the main contributors to the companys journey to quality (Johnston and Daniel,
1991).
10. Information Availability, Evaluation and Analysis: A key part of the quality
management infrastructure is information system [Godfrey, 1993]. Continuous
Quality improvement relies on steady flow of accurate information about processes
that generate a companys products & from various constituencies like workers,
agents,vendorsandcustomers(Crossby,1979Deming,1986Ishikawa,1985Juran,
1986). Analysis of this information allows management to make effective decisions
onQuality relatedissuesandtasks.(Juran,1986).
11. SupplierQualityManagement:ItisanimportantaspectofTQMsincematerialsand
purchased parts areoften a major sourceof quality problems (Zhang et al, 2000). It
can be defined as the set of supplier related quality management practices for
improvingsuppliersqualityofproductsandservices.(Mannetal,1992).
12. Product Design: Product design translates customer expectations for functional
requirementsintospecificengineeringandqualitycharacteristics,whichcanbecalled
specifications. Sound product design can contribute to the improvement of product
quality to be betterthan thatofthe competitorsthus increasing a firms competitive
advantageinmarketplace(Juran&Gryna,1993).

228

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

13. Benchmarking: it is a systematic method by which organizations can measure

themselvesagainstthebestindustrypractices.Itpromotesbestsuperiorperformance
byprovidinganorganizedframeworkthroughwhichorganizationslearnhowthebest
inclassdothethings,understandhowthesebestpracticesdifferfromtheirownand
implementchangetoclosethegap(Besterfieldetal,2007).
5.Conclusions
ThepaperattemptstoclassifythevariousCSFsaccordingtotheir frequencyofoccurrence
invariousNationalQualityAwards(NQAs)andaccordingtopreferenceasgivenbyvarious
researchers intheirframeworks.Thepapergivesawhoopingcomparisonof24frameworks
asgiven by variousNQAsand14 individualresearchers inthe lightof26CSFsofTQM.
Fromthestudy,itwasfoundthattherearecommonalitiesaswellasdifferencesintermsof
CSFs suggested by various frameworks. The study also gives the details of the ten best
CSFs, which are highly emphasized by most of the NQAs 7 researchers seperately.
ImplementationoftheseCSFswilladdtothecompetitivepositionofamanufacturingfirm
andthusprovidesafirmwithstrategicadvantageinthe marketplace.Thepaperalsoenlists
the ten least significant CSFs. Although the study includes a whooping comparison of 24
frameworksand26CSFs,yetthelistisincomplete,asthecomparisonofmanyotherCSFs
can be done in the light of some more NQAs of various other countries and also of more
researcher based frameworks. Further the importance of particular CSF may vary from
companytocompanyandfromcountrytocountry,thusthescore(frequencyofoccurrence)
of a particular CSF may vary accordingly. Future research can be suggested in terms that
theseCSFscanbeclubbedtogethertodevelopaframeworkwhichcanbeempiricallytested
throughaquestionnairesurveytogetmoreaccurateresults.
6.References
1.

Ahire,S.L.,Golhar,D.Y.,Waller,M.A.(1996),Developmentandvalidationof
TQMimplementationconstructs,DecisionSciences,27(1),pp 2356.

2.

American Quality Foundationand Ernst & Young (1992),International Quality

study: The definitive study of the best international Quality management
practices,Cleveland,OH,thoughtleadershipseries.

3.

Anderson J., Rungtusanatham, M., Schroeder, Rand Devraj, S. (1995), A Path

analyticmodeofatheoryofQualitymanagementmethod,Decisionsciences,26
(5),pp637658.

4.

Antony,J.,Leung,K.,Knowles,G.andGosh,S.(2002),Criticalsuccessfactors
of TQM implementation in Hong Kong industries, International Journal of
Quality andReliabilityManagement,19(5),pp55166.

5.

Bahrami, H. (1992), The emerging flexible organization: perspective from

SiliconValley,CaliforniaManagementReview,34(4), pp3352.

229

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

6.

Baidoun, S.& Zairi, M. (2003), A proposed model for TQM implementation in

Palestiniancontext,TQM&BusinessExcellence,14(10),pp11931211.

7.

Bester field, D.H., Besterfield, C., Besterfield, G.H., Besterfield, M. (2007),

TotalQualityManagement,Thirdedition,Pearson prenticehall.

8.

Cao, G., Clarke, S., & Lehaney, B. (2000),A systematic view of organizational
change&TQM,TheTQMMagazine,12(3),pp 186194.

9.

Crossby.P.(1979),Qualityisfree:TheartofmakingQualitycertain,McGraw
Hill,NewYork,NY.

10. CrossbyP.(1989),LetsTalkQuality:96Questionsthat youalwayswantedto

askPhilcrossby,McgrawHill,NewYork,NY.
11. Deming, W., E. (1982), Quality, Productivity and Competitive Position, MIT
InstituteforAdvancedEngineeringstudy,Cambridge,MA
12. Deming,W.,E. (1986),Outofthecrisis,CambridgeuniversityPress,Cambridge
13. Deming prize (1996), Guide for overseas companies, Union of Japanese
scientistandEngineers,Tokyo,Japan
14. Easton, G.S. (1993), The 1993 state of U.S. Total Quality management: A
Baldrige Examiners perspective, California Management Review, 35(3), pp 32
54.
15. European foundation for quality management (1994), Self assessment based on
theEuropeanmodelfortotalqualitymanagement:Guidelinesforidentifyingand
addressingbusinessexcellenceissues,Brussels,Belgium.
16. Evans,J.R.andLindsay,W.,M. (1999), Themanagementandcontrolofquality,
4th edition,SouthWesterncollegepublishing,Cincinnati,Ohio,U.S.
17. Fassoula, D.(2006),Transforming the supply chain, Journal of Manufacturing
Technologymanagement,17(6),pp84860.
18. Feigenbaum,A.V.(1961), TotalQuality control,McGrawHill,London.
19. Flynn, B.B., Scgroeder, R.G., and Sakakibara, S.(1995), The impactof quality
management practices on performance and competitive advantage, Decision
sciences,26(5),pp659691.
20. Garvin,D.,A.(1983),Qualityontheline,HarvardBusinessReview,pp6575.
21. Garvin,D.,A.(1984),JapaneseQualityManagement,TheColumbiaJournalof
Business,19(1),pp312.

230

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

22. Gibson, T.C. (1990). Helping leaders accept leadership of Total quality
management,QualityProgress,November,pp.4547.
23. Gilbert,R.J.(1990).AreyouCommitted,QualityProgress,pp4548.
24. Godfrey, A.B. (1993). Ten areas for future research in Total Quality
Management,QualitymanagementJournal,4(1),pp4770.
25. Gryna,F.M.(1991).Thequalitydirectorofthe90s,QualityProgress,pp51
54.
26. Hendricks, K., B. and Singhal, V., R. (2000). The impact of Total Quality
management on financial performance: evident from quality award winners,
availableatwww.cometch.be/nl/uk/articles.php10k
27. Hui, K.H., & Chuan, T., K. (2002). Nine approaches to organizational
excellence,Journal oforganizationalexcellence,22(1),pp5365.
28. Ishikawa,K.(1985).WhatisTotalqualitycontrol?,TheJapaneseway,prentice
hall,EnglewoodCliffs,NJ.
29. Jarrar,Y and Zairi, M. (2000).Best Practice transfer for future competitiveness:
Astudyofbestpractices,TotalQualityManagement,11(4/5/6),pp734740.
30. Johnston, C., G., and Daniel M., J. (1991). Customer satisfaction through
Quality: an international perspective, The conference board of Canada, Ottawa,
Ontario,Canada.
31. Jung, J., and Wang, Y. (2006). Relationship between TQM and continuous
improvement of International Project management, CIIPM Technovation, 26(5
6),pp71622.
32. JuranJ.M.(1974).QualityControlHandbook,McgrawHill,London.
33. Juran,J.M.(1986).QualityTrilogy,QualityProgress,August,pp1424.
34. Juran.,J.,M.&Gryna,F.M.(1993).Qualityplanning&Analysis,Thirdedition,
Mcgrawhill,Inc,newYork
35. Khan,J.,H.(2003).ImpactofTotalQualitymanagementonproductivity,The
TQMmagazine,15(6),pp374380
36. Khoo, H.H. and Tan, K.C. (2003). Managing for quality in USA & Japan:
differencesbetweenMBNQA,DP&JQA,TheTQMMagazine,15(1),pp1424.
37. Lee,P.M.andQuazi,H.(1999).Assessmentofqualitymanagementperformance
in organizations, Working Paper, Nanyang Business School, Nanyang
TechnologicalUniversity,Singapore.

231

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

38. Leonard,F.andSasser,W.E.(1982).The inclineofquality,HarvardBusiness

Review,pp.16371.
39. Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Award, (1991). Criteria for performance
excellence,nationalInstituteofstandard&technology,Unitedstates,department
ofcommerce,Gaithersburg,MD

40. Mann,R.S.(1992).Thedevelopmentofaframeworktoassistinimplementation
of TQM, PhD thesis, department of industrial studies, university of Liverpool,
UK
41. Motwani, J. (2001). Measuring critical factors of TQM, Measuring Business
Excellence,5(2),pp2730.
42. Nwabueze, U & Kanzi, G.K., (1997). The implementation of total quality
managementintheNHS:Howtoavoidfailure,TotalQualitymanagement,8(5),
pp265280.
43. Oakland, J.S. (1993). Total Quality Management, ButterworthHeinemann,
Oxford.
44. Raiborn,C&Payne,D.(1996).TQM:JustwhattheEthicistordered,Journalof
BusinessEthics,15(9),pp963972
45. Rao, S.S., Solis, L.E., Ragunathan, T.S. (1999). A framework for International
Quality Management research: Development & Validation of a measurement
instrument,TotalQualitymanagement,10(7), pp10471075.
46. Rungasamy,S.,Antony,J.andGhosh,S.(2002). CriticalsuccessfactorsforSPC
implementation in UK small and medium enterprises: some key findings from a
survey,TheTQMMagazine,14(4),pp 21724.
47. Saraph,J.V.,GeorgeBenson,P.,andShroeder,R.G.(1989).Aninstrumentfor
measuring the critical factors of quality management, Decision sciences, 20(4),
pp811829.
48. Seetharaman,A.,Sreenivasan,J.andBoon,L.P.(2006).Criticalsuccessfactors
ofTotalQualityManagement,QualityandQuantity,40(1),pp67595.
49. Singh,T.P.,Khamba,J.S.,Sushil.(1996).Aframeworkforflexiblemanagement
of technology, International conference on Technology management, Istanbul,
Turkey,June2426.
50. Singla,N.andSingh,T.P.(2008).FlexibleSystemsMethodologyApproachfor
TQM Implementation in Industry, Proceeding of an International Conference
Glogift08,StevensInstituteofTechnology,Hoboken,NJ,pp169177.

232

INTERNATIONALJOURNALOFAPPLIEDENGINEERINGRESEARCH,DINDIGUL
Volume2,No 1,2011
Copyright2010AllrightsreservedIntegratedPublishingAssociation
REVIEWARTICLE

ISSN 09764259

51. Steeples, M.M. (1992). The corporate guide to the Malcolm Baldrige National
QualityAward,BusinessOneIrwin,Homewood,IL.
52. Tamimi, N. (1995). An empirical investigation of critical TQM factors using
exploratoryfactoranalysis,InternationalJournalofProductionResearch,33(11),
pp304151.
53. Tan, K.C., and Khoo, H.H.(2002). Indian Society, Total Quality and the Rajiv
GandhiNationalQualityAward,Journalofmanagementdevelopment,21(6),pp
417426.
54. Upton, D.M. (1994). The management of manufacturing flexibility, California
Managementreview,36(2),pp 7289.
55. Weinstein, M.B. (1996). Improving safety programme through Total quality,
OccupationalsafetyHazards,58(8),pp4246.
56. Wu, H.Y., Wiebe, H. and Politi, J. (1997). Selfassessment of Total Quality
Managementprograms,EngineeringManagementJournal,9(1),pp 2531.
57. www.goldenpeacockawards.com/pdf/GPNQA.pdf viewedon06/01/2010
58. www.imcrbnqa.com/IMCRBNQA_Awards/criteria,aspex viewedon27/12/2009.
59. Zairi,M.(1994).MeasuringPerformanceforBusinessresults,chapman&hall,
London.
60. Zhang, Z., Waszink, A., and Wijngard, J. (2000).An instrument for measuring
TQM implementation for Chinese manufacturing companies, International
JournalofQualityandreliabilitymanagement,17(7),pp730755.
61. Zink,K.J.,andVoss,W.(1998).Quality inGermanyanoverview,TheTQM
Magazine,10(6),pp458463.

233