Learning from criticisms of quality management

Abstract

Purpose – This paper aims at summing up the main criticisms concerning quality management (QM) in order to address them through objective arguments or extant research. Since its diffusion in the Occident in the 70s, QM gained as much approvals as criticisms. Therefore, with 40 years distance, it seems useful to sum up the main criticisms addressed to QM, to present a synthesis of the answers provided by researchers to these criticisms and to propose extant research when it appears that some criticisms have not received yet the adequate response. Design/methodology/approach – This paper is based on a literature review. Findings – This paper comes up with a list of the main criticisms addressed to QM. Then, main causes of criticisms are identified: ignorance of QM, confusion concerning QM definitions and theory and misuse of QM by senior managers. At last, QM organizational solutions are proposed which answer most expressed criticisms. Extant research tracks are considered for those relevant criticisms which have not been sufficiently addressed until now. Research limitations/implications – Further research will look into depicting a survey conducted among QM professionals concerning QM criticisms in their organization and confronting them to these academic results. Originality/value – This paper actualizes and completes Giroux and Landry’s (1998) article which dealt extensively with QM criticisms. Professionals will find in this paper answers to most criticisms against QM and a better understanding of the present limits of this discipline. Researchers will be provided with a state of the art concerning this sensitive topic, allowing them to go deeper in the fields that require special attention.

Four decades of research on quality: summarising, Trendspotting and looking ahead

“…Similarly, in their review of 263 QM-related papers, Kumar, Maiti, and Gunasekaran (2018) identify a need for a more detailed and solid understanding of QM's performance effects by using refined research study designs. In an overview of the main criticism concerning QM during the past 40 years, Barouch and Kleinhans (2015) contend that QM seem to have gained an equal amount of approvals as disapprovals. Evidently, the scientific debate regarding the importance and capability of quality initiatives is far from settled.…”

A Research on the Relationship between Top Managers’ Intelligence and Their Ideas about Business Process Reengineering: Consideration of Emotionality and Spirituality

“…The possibility of performance superiority encouraged many businesses to implement automatization, but the contemporary survival and competition required more radical approaches to overarch the limits of sole automatization, thus more complicated and inclusive implementations such as activity-based costing (e.g. Malmi, 1999) and total quality management (Powell, 1995) have started to be facilitated by many businesses, albeit these are claimed to be futile attempts in this current globalized business world (Barouch & Kleinhans, 2015).…”

Managing Quality in Cross-cultural Settings

“…Previous research has shown that culture and QM are related (e.g. Dean and Bowen, 1994;Mohammad Mosadegh Rad, 2006;Barouch and Kleinhans, 2015;Gambi et al, 2015). However, few studies have examined QM in MNCs.…”

“…There are distinct patterns in how certain quality practices are adopted in certain countries, and different aspects of national culture facilitate or inhibit the outcomes of QM implementation (Vecchi and Brennan, 2009;Vecchi and Brennan, 2011). In addition, many studies have indicated that organizations need to align their organizational culture with their QM values in order to succeed in managing quality (Dean and Bowen, 1994;Powell, 1995;Mak, 1999;Mohammad Mosadegh Rad, 2006;Barouch and Kleinhans, 2015). QM practices are influenced also by the cultural setting of an organization (Prajogo and Sohal, 2006;Baird et al, 2011;Gambi et al, 2015).…”