This article was downloaded by: [University of Liverpool]On: 14 November 2014, At: 22:57Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Click for updates

Total Quality Management & BusinessExcellencePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ctqm20

Antecedents of TQM implementationcapability: a review with a conceptualmodelKanwal Nasima, Muhammad Zahid Iqbala & Iram A. Khana

a Department of Management Sciences, COMSATS Institute ofInformation Technology (CIIT), Park Road, Islamabad, PakistanPublished online: 14 Jun 2013.

To cite this article: Kanwal Nasim, Muhammad Zahid Iqbal & Iram A. Khan (2014) Antecedents ofTQM implementation capability: a review with a conceptual model, Total Quality Management &Business Excellence, 25:11-12, 1395-1409, DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2013.807682

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2013.807682

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Antecedents of TQM implementation capability: a review with aconceptual model

Kanwal Nasim∗, Muhammad Zahid Iqbal and Iram A. Khan

Department of Management Sciences, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology (CIIT),Park Road, Islamabad, Pakistan

Despite a large body of knowledge on total quality management (TQM), there is hardlyany research undertaken on the capability of an organisation to implement thisimportant tool. This paper attempts to fill this gap, and thus, proposes a conceptualframework of TQM implementation capability. This framework includes integratedrelationships based on several constituent models, that is, management commitment,affective communication, person–environment fit and organisational support. Theseven propositions, derived from these elements, highlight the dynamic relationshipbetween the antecedents of TQM implementation capability. Different humanresource concepts such as management commitment towards customers andorganisation, quality team development through behavioural change and readiness tolearn, person–environment fit, affective commitment and organisational support inthe form of contextual support and structural support are used as antecedents forthis purpose. The proposed framework can help organisations make the process ofTQM implementation effective through developing or enhancing their TQMimplementation capability.

Keywords: TQM implementation capability; management commitment;organisational support; quality teams; change management

1. Introduction

Total quality management (TQM) is an integrated process for achieving competitive

advantage through continuously improving practices according to the requirement of cus-

tomers (Khamalah & Lingaraj, 2007; Kumar, Choisne, Grosbois, & Kumar, 2009; Mann,

2008; Thiagaragan & Zairi, 2001). Due to its importance, a large body of literature dis-

cusses the efficacy and effectiveness of TQM implementation (Aghazadeh, 2002;

Dahlgaard-Park, 2012; Li, Markowski, Xu, & Markowski, 2008; Sila, 2007; Yusuf,

Gunasekaran, & Dan, 2007). However, as the subsequent review of literature shows,

there is hardly any model to explain how an organisation can develop its capability to suc-

cessfully implement TQM and successfully handle the resistance to change that hampers

its implementation. This is also because of the superficial knowledge and insufficient

understanding of the process of TQM implementation (Dahlgaard-Park, 2011). It is this

gap in the literature that this paper aims to fill.

The main focus of this paper is on the soft (behavioural) aspects of TQM before its

implementation, rather than its hard (technical) aspects relevant to the implementation

process itself. Thus far, little research has been undertaken on the soft aspects, and that

too mainly focuses on theoretical insight into a pre-implementation phase instead of a fra-

mework to successfully implement it (Akgun, Dayan, & Benedetto, 2008; Baidoun, 2004;

# 2013 Taylor & Francis

∗Corresponding author. Email: kanwal.nasim@yahoo.com

Total Quality Management, 2014

Vol. 25, No. 12, 1395–1409, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2013.807682

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Bou & Beltran, 2005). Papers that talk about soft aspects discuss management

commitment (Dahlgaard-Park, 2012; Soltani, Lai, & Gharneh, 2005; Soltani, Lai,

Javadeen, & Gholipour, 2008), reading about TQM, attending training courses, attending

conferences, consulting experts and visiting organisations for the purpose of benchmark-

ing (Baidoun & Zairi, 2003). Some attention has also been paid to team development (Liu,

Wang, & Cao, 2011; Lycke, 2003; Vicek, Koksal, & Ozdemirel, 2005) and other soft

aspects (Kumar, Kumar, Grosbois, & Choisne, 2009; Venkateswarlu & Nilakant, 2005).

Dahlgaard-Park (2012) presents a Trinity Model of human needs and its constituents as

critical motivational factors. Though not directly relevant to the theme of this paper, it

indirectly contributes to understanding of TQM implementation capability through a

better grasp of the human psyche.

Organisations exist and work in different structures, cultures and environments which

make them diverse, complex and living organisms. This makes it impossible to directly

jump to TQM implementation without understanding the dynamics of potential change

associated with each organisation (Candido & Santos, 2011; Cua, McKone, & Schroeder,

2001; Simard & Rice, 2006). Bypassing or ignoring this resistance will result in failure in

the implementation of TQM. Therefore, literature suggests that before implementing

TQM, the capability of an organisation for managing change should be developed

(Achim, 2003; Alpkan, Bulut, Gunday, Ulusoy, & Kilic, 2010).

This paper attempts to answer a set of three questions that would help in developing an

understanding of TQM implementation capability: What is the role of (i) human resource

practices, (ii) management commitment and (iii) organisational support in developing

TQM implementation capability? Furthermore, this paper proposes an integrated frame-

work for TQM implementation capability, focusing on the soft aspects of TQM and its

related factors. The model also develops seven testable propositions that discuss the

relationship of these factors with each other to develop the capability to successfully

implement TQM and achieve organisational excellence. In addition, measures for

certain constructs have also been given along with limitations and suggestions for

future research.

2. Methodology

Because of the diverse nature of the literature on different TQM constructs, a methodologi-

cal approach has been pursued for this review (Iqbal & Khan, 2011; Tranfield, Denyer, &

Smart, 2003). Domain analysis was undertaken to select the relevant literature. Based on

that, main search terms (viz. organisational commitment, quality team development,

person–environment fit, affective communication and organisational support) were used

for searching research articles in selected databases. Of 22 databases available at our uni-

versity campus, 15 were irrelevant. However, only five databases (Taylor & Francis,

Emerald, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink and JSTOR) could be accessed at the time of

research (Figure 1). We started with Taylor & Francis, followed by Emerald, ScienceDir-

ect, SpringerLink, JSTOR and an open access search engine, Google scholar, to avoid

duplication of articles. Only articles with their themes related to management/business

were downloaded (Figure 2).

To organise the material and find answers to the questions posed, related research

articles were perused at various steps whilst focusing on title, abstract and key words of

the articles. In the next step, an overview of articles was undertaken to download only

those that were relevant (N ¼ 485). Thereafter, articles were skim-read and those with

unnecessary details were eliminated. The process produced 90 articles that met our

1396 K. Nasim et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

criteria. Table 1 shows the details of articles supporting the concepts under study. Figures

3–6 provide journal-, year-, study type- and country-wise details, respectively. Based on

the structured review of these articles, together with discussions with subject matter

experts and colleagues, the TQM implementation capability model is proposed (Figure 7).

3. Antecedents of TQM implementation capability

3.1. Management commitment

Management commitment is considered a sine qua non for the implementation of TQM in

any organisation. It can be achieved through the behaviours, attitudes and perceptions of

Figure 1. Selection of databases and articles.

Figure 2. Selected databases and articles.

Total Quality Management 1397

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Table 1. Articles covering major areas of the topic under study.

No. Major areas Articles

1 TQM implementationcapability

Achim (2003), Aghazadeh (2002), Ahire and O’Shaughnessy(1998), Ahire, Golhar, and Waller (1996), Anderson,Rungtusanathan, and Schroeder (1994), Baidoun (2004),Baidoun and Zairi (2003), Bhat and Rajashekhar (2009),Candido and Santos (2011), Chase (1993), Cua et al. (2001),Dahlgaard-Park (2011), Das, Paul, and Swierczek (2008),Hansson, Backlund, and Lycke (2003), Hellsten and Klefsjo(2000), Hill and Collins (2000), Hill and Wilkinson (1995),Jayaram, Ahire, and Dreyfus (2010), Jun, Cai, and Peterson(2004), Khamalah and Lingaraj (2007), Krasachol and Tannock(1999), Kumar, Kumar, et al. (2009), Kumar, Choisne, et al.(2009), Li et al. (2008), Mann (2008), Prajogo and Sohal(2001), Prajogo and Brown (2006), Rahman (2004), Rahmanand Bullock (2005), Saremi, Mousavi, and Sanayei (2009), Sila(2007), Simard and Rice (2006), Tan (1997), Tari (2005),Taylor (1997), Thiagaragan and Zairi (2001), Venkateswarluand Nilakant (2005), Vermeulen (1997) and Yam, Tam, Tang,and Mok (2005), Yong and Pheng (2008)

2 Person–environment fit Andrews, Baker, and Hunt (2011), Cable and DeRue (2002), Deciand Ryan (2001), Edwards and Cooper (1990), Edwards andHarrison (1993), Grant (2008), Greguras and Diefendorff(2009), Hunter and Hunter (1984), Jackson et al. (1991), Janz,Colquit, and Noe (1997), Kristof (1996), Li and Hung (2010),Meyer, Gonzalez, and Ferrın (2008), Meyer, Hecht, Gill, andToplonytsky (2010), Song and Chathoth (2011), Vigoda-Gadotand Meiri (2008), Vilela, Gonzalez, and Ferrin (2008), Vogeland Feldman (2009), Werbel and DeMarie (2005), Werbel andJohnson (2001) and Wheeler, Gallagher, Brouer, and Sablynski(2007)

3 Quality teamdevelopment

Acuna, Gomez, and Juristo (2009), Akgun, Lynn, and Ynlmaz(2006), Akgun et al. (2008), Barad and Kayis (1994), Dayanand Benedetto (2008), Hotzman and Anderberg (2011),Huffmeier and Hertel (2011), Liu et al. (2011), Lu, Xiang,Wang, and Wang (2011), Lycke (2003), Macfarlane,Greenhalgh, Schofield, and Desombre (2004), Malinowski,Weitzel, and Keim (2008), Randeree and Ninan (2011),Rickards and Moger (2000), Scott (1997), Sessa, London,Pingor, Gullu, and Patel (2011), Smith and Offodile (2008),Sudhakar, Farooq, and Patnaik (2011), Vicek et al. (2005) andYusuf et al. (2007)

4 Managementcommitment

Babakus, Yavas, Karatepe, and Avci (2003), Bou and Beltran(2005), Dahlgaard-Park (2012), Goffin and Szwejczewski(1996), Gonzalez and Guillen (2002), Heinsman, de Hoogh,Koopman, and van Muijen (2008), Kim, Leong, and Lee(2005), Pool and Pool (2007), Rodrıguez, Perez, and Gutierrez(2008), Soltani et al. (2005, 2008) and Valentine, Godkin, andLucero (2002)

5 Organisational support Alpkan et al. (2010), Hochwarter, Kacmar, Perrewe, and Johnson(2003), Lee, Lee, Olson, and Chung (2010), Lin (2010), Soltani(2007) and Valentine, Greller, and Richtermeyer (2006)

1398 K. Nasim et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Figure 3. Journal-wise sample articles.

Figure 4. Ageing of sample articles.

Figure 5. Study type-wise sample articles.

Total Quality Management 1399

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

senior executives towards TQM implementation (Hochwarter et al., 2003) and emphasis

on issues concerning customer focus and organisational commitment (Prajogo & Sohal,

2001; Soltani et al., 2008; Valentine et al., 2006; Werbel & Johnson, 2001). In the presence

of top management commitment, other constructs, such as continuous improvement, sup-

plier quality management, product innovation, employee involvement, benchmarking,

education and training, reward and recognition, customer focus (Hill & Wilkinson,

1995; Tari, 2005) and overall quality implementation (Ahire & O’Shaughnessy, 1998),

can improve automatically without putting in extra effort.

Management commitment can be achieved through leadership, which ensures product

and process conformance, management by process, face-based management, training and

Figure 6. Country-wise sample articles.

Figure 7. TQM implementation capability model.

1400 K. Nasim et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

team work (Gonzalez & Guillen, 2002). Once it is achieved, it may lead to job satisfaction,

learning organisation (Pool & Pool, 2007) and behavioural change (Heinsman et al.,

2008). Top management commitment may also develop teams. If teams and managers

communicate with each other on different issues, the capability to successfully implement

TQM can be enhanced (Hellsten & Klefsjo, 2000; Lu et al., 2011). Core competencies

(both intellectual and emotional) as well as core values (common ‘encoded’ traits and

virtues) can help in building lasting interpersonal relationships (Dahlgaard-Park, 2012).

In fact, the participation of employees is proportionate with the level of commitment

shown by the top management (Ahire et al., 1996; Babakus et al., 2003; Rahman, 2004).

It is also important to understand the external environmental and internal barriers that

impede team effectiveness. Some soft factors such as team climate and team diversity can

also affect team performance (Sudhakar et al., 2011). Similarly, team autonomy can also

play a crucial role in minimising complexity in team formation (Soltani et al., 2005). All

these factors can be optimised for results through the active involvement and commitment

of top management in the overall process of team formation. Thus, consistent with Goffin

and Szwejczewski (1996), we propose that

PROPOSITION 1. High/low level of top management commitment may lead to effective/inef-fective quality team development.

3.2. Affective communication

Quality team development can be of core importance in participative and learning organ-

isations (Macfarlane et al., 2004). There can be a strong relationship between management

commitment, quality team development and the fit between TQM agents and employees

(Jayaram et al., 2010), which depends on trust, commitment, communication (Scott,

1997) and cohesiveness among employees (Acuna et al., 2009). Emphasis on continuous

team improvement and their proper training according to the requirements and learning

intentions of team members may also contribute to team effectiveness (Sessa et al.,

2011). Team development and team effectiveness are, therefore, important criteria for

ensuring TQM implementation capability.

Factors, such as process, design, contextual support, training, commitment and most

importantly, affective communication, may lead to effective team development (Barad

& Kayis, 1994; Janz et al., 1997; Rickards & Moger, 2000). The development of effective

quality teams also depends on the psychological traits of team members (Randeree &

Ninan, 2011) that can help them share their knowledge, skills and cognitive ideas for

enhancing team performance (Dong, Ryun, & Robert, 2008). Team intelligence, readiness

to learn and behavioural change are also required during team development, which may

ensure information acquisition, information implementation and dissemination, unlearn-

ing, thinking, improvisation, sense-making and institutional memory (Akgun et al.,

2006). Affective flow of information for learning purposes is possible only because of

affective communication between the management and quality teams.

After team development, the next step is enhancing the performance of quality teams

through leadership interventions. For effective team development, the team members

should have expectations about results, share team processes and roles in achieving objec-

tives. This should be accomplished along with readiness to learn and behavioural change

(Hotzman & Anderberg, 2011). The team performance can also be made more effective by

facilitative communication between team members and leaders in order to develop the best

fit between them. Thus, we propose that

Total Quality Management 1401

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

PROPOSITION 2. Affective communication may mediate the relationship between manage-ment commitment and quality team development.

3.3. Person–environment fit

It is a fit between the characteristics of a person and the environment in which he/she is

working. It is important to study this fit because the successful activities of an organisation

depend upon it. Perception of fit can forecast the intentions of an employee to remain part

of the organisation or to quit it (Dayan & Benedetto, 2008; Grant, 2008). Person–environment

fit can be improved if organisation and employees have support in terms of task significance in

job performance, relational mechanics, perceived social impact (degree to which employees

feel that their actions impact others in the same environment), perceived social worth (degree

to which employees feel that they are valued by others), conscientiousness (degree to which

employees tend to be disciplined, goal-oriented, dependable, organised and persistent) and

pro-social values (degree to which individuals consider others’ welfare as a more important

principle in life) (Meyer et al., 2010). A high/low fit would lead to high/low performance

and low/high induced strain and stress (Edwards & Cooper, 1990; Edwards & Harrison,

1993). Person–environment fit is a combination of person–organisation fit, person–job fit

and person–team fit (Vogel & Feldman, 2009; Werbel & DeMarie, 2005).

Person–organisation fit. Degree of alignment between what an organisation offers and

what its employees want is called Person–organisation fit (Greguras & Diefendorff, 2009;

Vilela et al., 2008). Strong person–organisation fit reflects common views about organis-

ational goals, strategy, adoption of new ideas or practices and values, as well as strong

identification of tasks, transparency, goal orientation, responsiveness, principles and stan-

dards in the work environment. Presence of this fit may ensure the commitment of employ-

ees towards the organisation (Andrews et al., 2011; Meyer et al., 2008) and their

satisfaction with their jobs (Song & Chathoth, 2011; Vigoda-Gadot & Meiri, 2008;

Wheeler et al., 2007). This creates a synergistic effect and enhances the capabilities of

implementing TQM (Yong & Pheng, 2008).

Person–job fit. Person–job fit means that an employee has the skills and abilities to

best meet the requirements of the job and through these, people feel more confident to

perform their jobs effectively, leading to optimal performance (Cable & DeRue, 2002;

Deci & Ryan, 2001; Hunter & Hunter, 1984; Li & Hung, 2010). Compatibility among

employees and team members facilitates communication and enhances workplace inter-

actions. Persons who share common values may find it easier to work with each other

and develop strong bonds than people who espouse different values (Jackson et al., 1991).

Person–team fit. The match between members and team is called person–team fit.

Person–team fit is necessary in terms of the development of interpersonal capability (Mal-

inowski et al., 2008). A good person–environment fit occurs when team members have

characteristics similar to the existing team members in terms of values, ideas, norms

and beliefs (Kristof, 1996). Based on the above discussion, we suggest that

PROPOSITION 3. Effectively developed quality teams may lead to a better person–environment fit.

PROPOSITION 4. A better person–environment fit may enhance TQM implementationcapability.

3.4. Role of organisational support

Organisational support is required at all levels to develop capabilities to implement TQM

(Kim et al., 2005; Soltani, 2007). Different forms of support can occur at different levels in

1402 K. Nasim et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

an organisation such as management support, allocation of free time, work discretion, per-

formance-based reward systems and tolerance for risk taking (Malinowski et al., 2008;

Yam et al., 2005). Generally, support is divided into two categories:

Structural support. Structural support includes support from different hierarchal levels

in the organisation such as support from top management (Smith & Offodile, 2008). It is a

form of task-related support (Huffmeier & Hertel, 2011; Lin, 2010) and is also called

formal support (Lee et al., 2010). Top management may develop a task agenda to

address the issues pertaining to TQM implementation (Hansson et al., 2003). It may try

to support the teams by bridging the gap between the members of the quality team and

their environment, job and organisation, which may lead to better employees’ motivation.

Top management commitment can be achieved through support from the organisation and

support also triggers commitment from top management.

Contextual support. Contextual support, also called affective support (Huffmeier &

Hertel, 2011) or informal support (Lee et al., 2010), includes support in the form of facil-

itative communication, interpersonal support and cognitive support (Malinowski et al.,

2008). It is a support received from both the internal and external environments in

which an employee is working (Hill & Collins, 2000). Contextual support also means

interacting with team processes to improve their overall effectiveness (Janz et al., 1997).

Both forms of support can moderate all the proposed relationships of commitment

(Rodrıguez et al., 2008; Valentine et al., 2002), and their absence at any level can

hinder the successful implementation of TQM (Masters, 1996). Considering the impor-

tance of organisational support and its role in implementation capability, the following

propositions are developed:

PROPOSITION 5. Organisational support may moderate the relationship between manage-ment support and quality team development.

PROPOSITION 6 Organisational support may moderate the relationships between qualityteam development and person–environment fit.

PROPOSITION 7. Organisational support may moderate the relationships between person–environment fit and effective TQM implementation capability.

4. Value of TQM implementation capability model

Most of the studies reviewed in the paper either discuss different approaches or methods or

steps to implement TQM (e.g. Al-Khalifa & Aspinwall, 2008; Kulkarni, 2005; Prajogo &

Brown, 2006; Saremi et al., 2009). However, how to develop the capability to implement

TQM has been a missing link in the TQM implementation chain (Aboelmaged, 2010). This

aspect is normally ignored in organisations, and they go headlong into TQM implemen-

tation in the name of quality without realising that there are certain antecedents to

TQM that are required for its successful implementation (Anderson et al., 1994; Chase,

1993; Jun et al., 2004). Problems such as resistance from employees which occur at the

time of the implementation process will not occur if the capability is properly developed

(Bhat & Rajashekhar, 2009; Krasachol & Tannock, 1999; Rahman & Bullock, 2005; Tan,

1997; Taylor, 1997; Vermeulen, 1997). This is the important contribution of this study, to

the existing body of knowledge as it provides a model for the development of the capa-

bility to implement TQM in organisations.

This model also contributes to the economics of quality by reducing costs and prevent-

ing failure through proper planning of the TQM implementation process. Developing

TQM implementation capability will ensure that this process is smooth and effective. It

Total Quality Management 1403

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

is pertinent to add that though not all costs can be reduced, adopting our model can help in

avoiding additional costs and failures.

This model can be empirically tested to examine the validity of the constructs and the

proposed relations of these constructs with each other. Based on empirical evidence,

further additions and improvements can be made in this model. For this purpose,

already developed measures can be used. For top management commitment, the eight-

item scale developed by Das et al. (2008) or the instrument of Joseph, Rajendran, and

Kamalanabhan (1999) can be used. For the assessment of team development, the question-

naire developed by Jones and Bearly (1993) can help. Different fits can be measured

through selecting and adapting different items of Holland and Nichols (1964). To assess

the capability to implement TQM, questions relevant to the construct can be asked.

Finally, for assessing organisational support, the reduced eight-item scale of Eisenberger,

Huntington, Hutchison, and Sowa (1986) can be used. All the scales should be adapted

after considering the environment and focus group of the study.

This model can be applied in a variety of organisations seeking positive change

through quality improvements. This will enhance the quality awareness of employees

and their involvement at every step of TQM implementation by keeping them in the

loop. For this purpose, more training will be required in team management for implement-

ing this framework. As TQM implementation takes a long time, adoption of this frame-

work may help organisations prepare themselves in advance for its implementation.

The study has focused on the majority of dimensions required for the development of

TQM implementation capability. One major limitation is the testing of this model to assess

its validity. Second, external factors have not been incorporated in this model, which may

impact the process of team development or management support. So, in future, empirical

research needs to be done to test the fitness of the model and review the proposed relation-

ships outlined in the paper.

5. Conclusion

TQM implementation is part and parcel of an organisation these days. The domains of

TQM identified in the paper are top management leadership, people management,

quality information management, customer management, process management, supplier

management, learning and continuous improvement. Synergic impact of these domains

develops TQM implementation capability among the change or quality agents. For this

purpose, the focus should be on both hard and soft aspects of TQM.

The paper highlights that effective implementation capability of TQM depends upon

properly managed human resources in an organisation, management commitment, affec-

tive communication in the quality team development, person–environment fit and the

crucial role of organisational support and feedback. The presence of these elements will

ensure the development of TQM implementation capability in an organisation, a pre-

requisite for successful and effective TQM implementation.

Creating TQM implementation capability is a long and arduous process. It is less about

money, and more about careful, meticulous and focused planning based on the strategic

vision and goals of an organisation. This capability, as the previous discussion unfolds,

is holistic, ubiquitous and permeating in nature. It is also painstakingly slow to develop

as the organisational culture needs to adapt to the new TQM ethos. The ensuing change

will encompass all facets of the organisation.

This requires greater focus on recruiting quality change agents, training in team man-

agement, development and implementation of affective and effective communication

1404 K. Nasim et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

strategies to assimilate managers and workers at different levels into the mainstream

change agenda, leading to harmony and fusion in the organisation where person–organis-

ation, person–job and person–team become one and are blended to conceive a flexible

and open learning organisation with TQM implementation capability.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the editor and an anonymous referee for useful comments

and suggestions to improve the quality of this paper.

References

Aboelmaged, M.G. (2010). Six sigma quality: A structured review and implications for futureresearch. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 27(3), 268–317.

Achim, W. (2003). Relationship-specific factors influencing supplier involvement in customer newproduct development. Journal of Business Research, 56(9), 721–733.

Acuna, S.T., Gomez, M., & Juristo, M. (2009). How do personality, team processes and task charac-teristics relate to job satisfaction and software quality? Information and Software Technology,51(3), 627–639.

Aghazadeh, S.M. (2002). Implementation of total quality management in the managed care industry.The TQM Magazine, 14(2), 79–91.

Ahire, S.H., & O’Shaughnessy, K.C. (1998). The role of top management commitment in qualitymanagement: An empirical analysis of the auto parts industry. International Journal ofQuality Science, 3(1), 5–37.

Ahire, S.L., Golhar, D.Y., & Waller, M.A. (1996). Development and validation of TQM implemen-tation constructs. Decision Sciences, 27(1), 23–56.

Akgun, A.E., Dayan, M., & Benedetto, A.D. (2008). New product development team intelligence:Antecedents and consequences. Information & Management, 45(4), 221–226.

Akgun, A.E., Lynn, G.S., & Ynlmaz, C. (2006). Learning process in new product development teamsand effects on product success: A socio-cognitive perspective. Industrial MarketingManagement, 35(2), 210–224.

Al-Khalifa, K., & Aspinwall, E. (2008). Critical success factors of TQM: A UK study. InternationalJournal of Productivity and Quality Management, 3(4), 430–443.

Alpkan, L., Bulut, C., Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G., & Kilic, K. (2010). Organizational support for entre-preneurship and its interaction with human capital to enhance innovative performance.Management Decision, 48(5), 732–755.

Anderson, J.C., Rungtusanathan, M., & Schroeder, R.G. (1994). A theory of quality managementunderlying the Deming management method. Academy of Management Review, 19(3),472–509.

Andrews, M.C., Baker, T., & Hunt, T.G. (2011). Values and person–organization fit: Does moralintensity strengthen outcomes? Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 32(1),5–9.

Babakus, E., Yavas, U., Karatepe, O.M., & Avci, T. (2003). The effect of management commitmentto service quality on employees’ affective and performance outcomes. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science, 31(3), 272–286.

Baidoun, S. (2004). The implementation of TQM philosophy in Palestinian organization: A proposednon-prescriptive generic framework. The TQM Magazine, 16(3), 174–185.

Baidoun, S., & Zairi, M. (2003). A proposed model of TQM implementation in the Palestiniancontext. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 14(10), 1193–1211.

Barad, M., & Kayis, B. (1994). Quality teams as improvement support system (ISS): An Australianperspective. Management Decision, 32(6), 9–57.

Bhat, K.S., & Rajashekhar, J. (2009). An empirical study of barriers to TQM implementation inIndian industries. The TQM Magazine, 21(3), 261–272.

Bou, J.C., & Beltran, I. (2005). Total quality management, high commitment human resource strat-egy and firm performance: An empirical study. Total Quality Management & BusinessExcellence, 16(1), 71–86.

Total Quality Management 1405

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Cable, D.M., & DeRue, D.S. (2002). The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit per-ceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(5), 875–884.

Candido, C.J.F., & Santos, S.P. (2011). Is TQM more difficult to implement than other transforma-tional strategies? Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 22(11), 1139–1164.

Chase, G.W. (1993). Effective total quality management (TQM) process for construction. Journal ofManagement in Engineering, 9(4), 433–443.

Cua, K.O., McKone, K.E., & Schroeder, R.G. (2001). Relationships between implementation ofTQM, JIT, and TPM and manufacturing performance. Journal of Operations Management,19(6), 675–695.

Dahlgaard-Park, S.M. (2011). The quality movement – where are you going? Total QualityManagement & Business Excellence, 22(5), 493–516.

Dahlgaard-Park, S.M. (2012). Core values – the entrance to human satisfaction and commitment.Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 23(2), 125–140. doi:10.1080/14783363.2012.655067

Das, A., Paul, H., & Swierczek, F.W. (2008). Developing and validating total quality management(TQM) constructs in the context of Thailand’s manufacturing industry. Benchmarking: AnInternational Journal, 15(1), 52–72.

Dayan, M., & Benedetto, A.D. (2008). Procedural and interactional justice perceptions and teamwork quality. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 23(8), 566–576.

Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2001). The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.

Dong, Y.H., Ryun, K.H., & Robert, M. (2008). An exploratory study on Meta skills in softwaredevelopment teams: Antecedent cooperation skills and personality for shared mentalmodels. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(1), 47–61.

Edwards, J.R., & Cooper, C.L. (1990). The person–environment fit approach to stress: Recurringproblems and some suggested solutions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11(4),293–307.

Edwards, J.R., & Harrison, R.V. (1993). Job demands and worker health: Three dimensional reex-amination of the relationship between person–environment fit and strain. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 78(4), 628–648.

Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizationalsupport. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500–507.

Goffin, K., & Szwejczewski, M. (1996). Is management commitment to quality just a given? TheTQM Magazine, 8(2), 26–31.

Gonzalez, T.F., & Guillen, M. (2002). Leadership ethical dimension: A requirement in TQMimplementation. The TQM Magazine, 1(3), 150–164.

Grant, A.M. (2008). The significance of task significance: Job performance effects, relational mech-anisms, and boundary conditions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 108–124.

Greguras, G.J., & Diefendorff, J.M. (2009). Different fits satisfy different needs: Linking person–environment fit to employee commitment and performance using self-determination theory.Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 465–477.

Hansson, J., Backlund, F., & Lycke, L. (2003). Managing commitment: Increasing the odds for suc-cessful implementation of TQM, TPM or RCM. International Journal of Quality andReliability Management, 20(9), 993–1008.

Heinsman, H., de Hoogh, A.H.B., Koopman, P.L., & van Muijen, J.J. (2008). Commitment, control,and the use of competency management. Personnel Review, 37(6), 609–628.

Hellsten, U., & Klefsjo, B. (2000). TQM as a management system consisting of values, techniquesand tools. The TQM Magazine, 12(4), 238–244.

Hill, F.M., & Collins, L.K. (2000). A descriptive and analytical model of organizational transform-ation. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 17(9), 966–983.

Hill, S., & Wilkinson, A. (1995). In search of TQM. Employee Relations, 17(3), 8–25.Hochwarter, W.A., Kacmar, C., Perrewe, P.L., & Johnson, D. (2003). Perceived organizational

support as a mediator of the relationship between politics perceptions and work outcomes.Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63(3), 438–456.

Holland, J.L., & Nichols, R.C. (1964). The development and validation of an indecision scale: Thenatural history of a problem in basic research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 11(1),27–34.

1406 K. Nasim et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Hotzman, Y., & Anderberg, J. (2011). Diversify your teams and collaborate: Because great mindsdon’t think alike. Journal of Management Development, 30(1), 75–92.

Huffmeier, J., & Hertel, G. (2011). Many cheers make light the work: How social support triggersprocess gains in teams. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 26(3), 185–204.

Hunter, J.E., & Hunter, R.F. (1984). Validity and utility of alternative predictors of job performance.Psychological Bulleting, 96(1), 72–98.

Iqbal, M.Z., & Khan, R.A. (2011). The growing concept and uses of training needs assessment: Areview with proposed model. Journal of European Industrial Training, 35(5), 439–466.

Jackson, S.E., Brett, J.F., Sessa, V.I., Cooper, D.M., Julin, J.A., & Peyronnin, K. (1991). Somedifferences make a difference: Individual dissimilarity and group heterogeneity as correlatesof recruitment, promotions, and turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(5), 675–689.

Janz, B.D., Colquit, J.A., & Noe, R.A. (1997). Knowledge worker team effectiveness: The role ofautonomy, interdependence, team development, and contextual support variables.Personnel Psychology, 50(4), 877–904.

Jayaram, J., Ahire, S.L., & Dreyfus, P. (2010). Contingency relationships of firm size, TQM dur-ation, unionization, and industry context on TQM implementation-A focus on total effects.Journal of Operations Management, 28(4), 345–356.

Jones, J.E., & Bearly, W.L. (1993). Group development assessment (GDA questionnaire and trainerguide). King of Prussia, PA: Organization Design and Development.

Joseph, I.N., Rajendran, C., & Kamalanabhan, T.J. (1999). An instrument for measuring total qualitymanagement implementation in manufacturing-based business units in India. InternationalJournal of Production, 37(10), 2201–2215.

Jun, M., Cai, S., & Peterson, R. (2004). Obstacles to TQM implementation in Mexico’s MaquiladoraIndustry. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 15(1), 59–72.

Khamalah, J.N., & Lingaraj, B.P. (2007). TQM in the service sector: A survey of small businesses.Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 18(9), 973–982.

Kim, W.G., Leong, J.K., & Lee, Y. (2005). Effect of service orientation on job satisfaction, organ-izational commitment, and intention of leaving in a casual dining chain restaurant.International Journal of Hospitality Management, 24(2), 171–193.

Krasachol, L., & Tannock, J.D.T. (1999). A study of TQM implementation in Thailand.International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 16(5), 416–432.

Kristof, A.L. (1996). Person–organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations,measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49(1), 1–49.

Kulkarni, S. (2005). Graph theory and matrix approach for performance evaluation of TQM in Indianindustries. The TQM Magazine, 17(6), 509–526.

Kumar, U., Kumar, V., Grosbois, D.D., & Choisne, F. (2009). Continuous improvement of perform-ance measurement by TQM adopters. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence,20(6), 603–616.

Kumar, V., Choisne, F., Grosbois, B., & Kumar, U. (2009). Impact of TQM on company’s perform-ance. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 26(1), 23–37.

Lee, D.H., Lee, S.M., Olson, D.L., & Chung, S.H. (2010). The effect of organizational support onERP implementation. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 110(2), 269–283.

Li, C.K., & Hung, C.H. (2010). An examination of the mediating role of person–job fit in relationsbetween information literacy and work outcomes. Journal of Workplace Learning, 22(5),306–318.

Li, L., Markowski, C., Xu, L., & Markowski, E. (2008). TQM-A predecessor of ERP implemen-tation. International Journal of Production Economics, 115(2), 569–580.

Lin, H. (2010). An investigation into the effects of IS quality and top management support on ERPsystem usage. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 21(3), 335–349.

Liu, J., Wang, W., & Cao, K. (2011). Leader political skill and team performance: A moderatedmediation model. Nankai Business Review, 2(1), 5–22.

Lu, Y., Xiang, C., Wang, B., & Wang, X. (2011). What affects information systems developmentteam performance? An exploratory study from the perspective of combined socio-technicaltheory and coordination theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 811–822.

Lycke, L. (2003). Team development when implementing TPM. Total Quality Management &Business Excellence, 14(2), 205–213.

Macfarlane, F., Greenhalgh, T., Schofield, T., & Desombre, T. (2004). RCGP quality team develop-ment programme: An illuminative evaluation. Quality Safety Health Care, 13(5), 356–362.

Total Quality Management 1407

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Malinowski, J., Weitzel, T., & Keim, T. (2008). Decision support for team staffing: An automatedrelational recommendation approach. Decision Support Systems, 45(3), 429–447.

Mann, R. (2008). Revisiting a TQM research project: The quality improvement activities of TQM.Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 19(7–8), 751–761.

Masters, R.J. (1996). Overcoming barriers to TQM’s success. Quality Progress, 29(5), 53–55.Meyer, B.B., Gonzalez, J.A.V., & Ferrın, P.F. (2008). Person–organization fit, OCB and perform-

ance appraisal: Evidence from matched supervisor–salesperson data set in a Spanishcontext. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(8), 1005–1019.

Meyer, J.P., Hecht, T.D., Gill, H., & Toplonytsky, L. (2010). Person–organization (culture) fit andemployee commitment under conditions of organizational change: A longitudinal study.Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(3), 458–473.

Pool, S., & Pool, B. (2007). A management development model measuring organizational commit-ment and its impact on job satisfaction among executives in a learning organization. Journalof Management Development, 26(4), 353–369.

Prajogo, D.I., & Brown, A. (2006). Approaches to adopting quality in SMEs and the impact onquality management practices and performance. Total Quality Management & BusinessExcellence, 17(5), 555–556.

Prajogo, D.I., & Sohal, A.S. (2001). TQM and innovation: A literature review and research frame-work. Technovation, 21(9), 539–558.

Rahman, S. (2004). The future of TQM is past. Can TQM be resurrected? Total Quality Management& Business Excellence, 15(4), 411–422.

Rahman, S., & Bullock, P. (2005). Soft TQM, hard TQM, and organisational performance relation-ships: An empirical investigation. The International Journal of Management Science, 33(1),73–83.

Randeree, K., & Ninan, M. (2011). Leadership and teams in business: A study of IT projects inUnited Arab Emirates. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 4(1), 28–48.

Rickards, T., & Moger, S. (2000). Creative leadership processes in project team development: Analternative to Tuckman’s stage model. British Journal of Management, 11(4), 273–283.

Rodrıguez, N.G., Perez, M.J.S., & Gutierrez, J.A.T. (2008). Can a good organizational climate com-pensate for a lack of top management commitment to new product development? Journal ofBusiness Research, 61(2), 118–131.

Saremi, M., Mousavi, S.F., & Sanayei, A. (2009). TQM consultant selection in SMEs with TOPSISunder fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 2742–2749.

Scott, S.G. (1997). Social identification effects in product and process development teams. Journalof Engineering and Technology Management, 14(2), 97–127.

Sessa, V.I., London, M., Pingor, C., Gullu, B., & Patel, J. (2011). Adaptive, generative, and trans-formative learning in project teams. Team Performance Management, 17(3/4), 146–167.

Sila, I. (2007). Examining the effects of contextual factors on TQM and performance through thelens of organizational theories: An empirical study. Journal of Operations Management,25(1), 83–109.

Simard, C., & Rice, R.E. (2006). Managerial information behaviour: Relationships among totalquality management orientation, information use environments, and managerial roles. TotalQuality Management & Business Excellence, 17(1), 79–95.

Smith, D.A., & Offodile, O.F. (2008). Strategic importance of team integration issues in productdevelopment processes to improve manufacturability. Team Performance Management,14(5/6), 269–292.

Soltani, E. (2007). Top management: A threat or an opportunity to TQM? Total Quality Managementand Business Excellence, 16(4), 463–476.

Soltani, E., Lai, P., & Gharneh, N.S. (2005). Breaking through barriers to TQM effectiveness: Lackof commitment of upper-level management. Total Quality Management & BusinessExcellence, 16(8–9), 1009–1021.

Soltani, E., Lai, P., Javadeen, S.R.S., & Gholipour, T.H. (2008). A review of the theory and practiceof managing TQM: An integrative framework. Total Quality Management & BusinessExcellence, 19(5), 461–479.

Song, Z., & Chathoth, P.K. (2011). Intern newcomers’ global self-esteem, overall job satisfaction,and choice intention: Person–organization fit as a mediator. International Journal ofHospitality Management, 30(1), 119–128.

1408 K. Nasim et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Sudhakar, G.P., Farooq, A., & Patnaik, S. (2011). Soft factors affecting the performance of softwaredevelopment teams. Team Performance Management, 17(3/4), 187–205.

Tan, P.K.L. (1997). An evaluation of TQM and techniques for successful implementation. Trainingfor Quality, 5(4), 150–159.

Tari, J.J. (2005). Components of successful total quality management. The TQM Magazine, 17(2),182–194.

Taylor, W. (1997). Leadership challenges for smaller organisations: Self-perceptions of TQMimplementation. International Journal of Management Sciences, 25(5), 567–579.

Thiagaragan, T., & Zairi, M. (2001). A proposed model of TQM implementation based on an empiri-cal study of Malaysian industry. International Journal of Quality and ReliabilityManagement, 18(3), 289–306.

Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal ofManagement, 14(3), 207–222.

Valentine, S., Godkin, L., & Lucero, M. (2002). Ethical context, organizational commitment, andperson-organization fit. Journal of Business Ethics, 41(4), 349–360.

Valentine, S., Greller, M.M., & Richtermeyer, S.B. (2006). Employee job response as a function ofethical context and perceived organization support. Journal of Business Research, 59(5),582–588.

Venkateswarlu, P., & Nilakant, V. (2005). Adoption and persistence of TQM programmes – casestudies of five New Zealand organizations. Total Quality Management & BusinessExcellence, 16(7), 807–825.

Vermeulen, W. (1997). Cultural change: Crucial for the implementation of TQM. Training forQuality, 5(1), 40–45.

Vicek, M.C., Koksal, G., & Ozdemirel, N.E. (2005). A team performance measurement model forcontinuous improvement. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 16(3),331–349.

Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Meiri, S. (2008). New public management values and person organization fit: Asocio-psychological approach and empirical examination among public sector personnel.Public Administration, 86(1), 111–131.

Vilela, B.B., Gonzalez, J.A.V., & Ferrın, P.F. (2008). Person–organization fit, OCB and perform-ance appraisal: Evidence from matched supervisor–salesperson data set in a Spanishcontext. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(8), 1005–1019.

Vogel, R.M., & Feldman, D.C. (2009). Integrating the levels of person–environment fit: The roles ofvocational fit and group fit. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75(1), 68–81.

Werbel, J.D., & DeMarie, S.M. (2005). Aligning strategic human resource management and person–environment fit. Human Resource Management Review, 15(4), 247–262.

Werbel, J.D., & Johnson, D.J. (2001). The use of person–group fit for employment selection: Amissing link in person–environment fit. Human Resource Management, 40(3), 227–240.

Wheeler, A.R., Gallagher, V.C., Brouer, R.L., & Sablynski, C.J. (2007). When person–organization(mis)fit and (dis)satisfaction lead to turn over the moderating role of perceived job mobility.Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(2), 203–219.

Yam, R.C.M., Tam, A.Y.K., Tang, E.P.Y., & Mok, C.K. (2005). TQM: A change managementmodel for market orientation. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 16(4),439–461.

Yong, K.T., & Pheng, L.S. (2008). Organizational culture and TQM implementation in constructionfirms in Singapore. Construction Management and Economics, 26(3), 237–248.

Yusuf, Y., Gunasekaran, A., & Dan, G. (2007). Implementation of TQM in China and organisationperformance: An empirical investigation. Total Quality Management and BusinessExcellence, 18(5), 509–530.

Total Quality Management 1409

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f L

iver

pool

] at

22:

57 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014