A framework for Crosby’s quality principles using ISM and MICMAC approaches

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine Philip B. Crosby’s 14 quality principles and analyze the interaction between them. Hitherto no research has been published on the implementation of total quality management (TQM) using Crosby’s 14 principles. To fill this gap, interpretive structural modeling (ISM) and Matrix Impact Cross-Reference Multiplication Applied to a Classification (MICMAC) analysis have been designed to prioritize, sequence and categorize variables to find both the dependence and driving power of these variables. Design/methodology/approach At the initial stage experts from industry as well as from academia were contacted to provide an input for ISM methodology and examine interactions between identified variables. In this approach, interpretations of the interrelationships among variables have been discussed, whereas MICMAC analysis is used to discover dependence and driving power. Findings The results of the investigation revealed that “Management Commitment,” “Quality Improvement Team,” “Quality Awareness,” “Supervisor Training,” “Goal Setting” and “Cost of Quality Evaluation” are strategic requirements; “Corrective Action,” “Zero Defects Day” and “Error Cause Removal” are tactical requirements. “Recognition,” “Quality Measurement,” “Quality Councils” and “Do It Over Again” are operational requirements for TQM applications. Originality/value ISM is used as a part of this research to provide valuable insights into interrelationships among Crosby’s quality principles through a systematic framework. The research opens up a new focus area on the implementation of TQM for services as well as for the manufacturing industry.

Quality cost management in the SMEs of Poland

“…The origin and evolution of TQM, differences between the approach of most important gurus to quality management and the widely accepted vision of TQM have been presented, among others, by Martínez-Lorente et al , (1998) and Weckenmann et al (2015). Each quality management (QM) guru defines his own set of “key practices” that are essential to achieve highest quality results (Juran and Gryna, 1980; Deming, 1996, for Crosby's 14 quality principles, see, for example, Agrawal, 2019).…”

Adopting a digital transformation strategy to enhance business network commons regeneration: an explorative case study

“…Digitalization allows speed in the process of quality certification of the entire value chain. Moreover, Omega obtained the important certification "Equalitas" owing to the error-removal tactics to improve quality (Agrawal, 2019) applied during the process mapping activities performed to build the digital architecture.…”

Modeling enablers of knowledge management process using multi criteria decision making approach

“…To operationalize this, we have used two experts – two from industry and two from academics. The ISM methodology has been used to g contextual relationships among the enablers (Agrawal, 2019a). For analyzing the enablers in establishing structural self-interaction matrix (SSIM), the following four notations have been used (Warfield, 1974; Mandal and Deshmukh, 1994; Agrawal, 2019a, 2019b): “V” – enabler i impacts enabler j; “A” – enabler j impacts enabler i; “X” – enabler i and j impacts each other; and “O” – enabler i and j are not related to each other. …”

“…The reachability set of an enabler comprises an enabler itself as we as all other enablers that are affected by it, however, the antecedent set of an enabler contains itself and all the enablers that affect it. Thereafter, the intersection of these sets is achieved for all other enablers (Agrawal, 2019a, 2019b). The enablers having the same intersection set and the reachability set, give top-level in the ISM hierarchy (Kannan and Haq, 2007).…”