1. Petter Øgland Trial Lecture Oslo, November 27th 2013
A critical review of research on TQM implementation (process and achievements) in light of theories of organizational change
Petter Øgland
Trial Lecture
Oslo, November 27th 2013

2. Plan for lecture Introduction (15 minutes)
What is general systems theory (GST)?
What is total quality management (TQM)?
What is organisational development (OD)?
The traditional TQM paradigm (20 minutes)
OD, systems and modernity
Main review of research on TQM implementation
The new TQM paradigm (10 minutes)
OD, complexity and post-modernity

3. General systems theory (von Bertalanffy, 1968; Rosen, 1991)
Water circuit
Electric circuit
Analogy (“similar”)
Model (“same”)

4. Scientific management and agricultural research
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Hertfordshire, 1920s
Midvale Steel, Pennsylvania, 1890s
Analogy (“similar”)
R.A. Fisher
Statistical methods
F.W. Taylor
Industrial engineering
Model (“same”)
Statistical method from the viewpoint of quality control (W.A. Shewhart, 1939)

5. TQM is company-wide use of statistical process control (SPC)
Plan-do-check-act (PDCA): Shewhart (1933), Ishikawa (1985), Deming (1986)

6. Total Quality Management (TQM) as Organisational Development (OD)
Problematic social behaviour
Improved social behaviour
Change
Freeze
Unfreeze

7. TQM solves the OD problem through industrial engineering (Wren, 2005)
Problem structuring methods (PSM)
Old situation
Model
(problem formulation)
Model conclusions
(system specification)
New situation
Analyse
Design
Implement
Organisational change
Systems Engineering (SE)
Evaluation

8. The traditional TQM paradigm (Flood & Jackson, 1991; Flood, 1993)
Problem structuring methods (PSM)
Old situation
Model
(problem formulation)
HERMENEUTIC KNOWLEDGE
Model conclusions
(system specification)
TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE
New situation
EMANCIPATORY KNOWLEDGE
Analyse
Design
Implement
Organisational change
Systems Engineering (SE)
Evaluation
Habermas (1971)

9. TQM theory = IE + OD + CT Industrial Engineering (IE) Methods of doing
(Taylor, 1911)
Organisational Development (OD)
Methods of understanding
(Lewin, 1947)
Critical theory (CT)
Methods of emancipation
(Marcuse, 1964)

10. OD classification: System of Systems Methodology (Jackson & Keys, 1984)
Participants dimension of context (increasing diversity of values)
Unitary
(Solve problem)
Plural
(Formulate problem)
Coercive
(Evaluate solution)
Systems dimension of context (increasing complexity)
Simple
Operation research (OR)
Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)
Critical System Heuristics (CSH)
Complex
Viable systems methodology (VSM)
System Dynamics (SD) ?
Selection of OD methods with relevance for TQM based on Flood & Jackson (1991)

11. OD classification: System of Systems Methodology (Jackson & Keys, 1984)
Participants dimension of context (increasing diversity of values)
Unitary
(Solve problem)
Plural
(Formulate problem)
Coercive
(Evaluate solution)
Systems dimension of context (increasing complexity)
Simple
Operation research (OR)
Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)
Critical System Heuristics (CSH)
Complex
Viable systems methodology (VSM)
System Dynamics (SD) ?
Selection of OD methods with relevance for TQM based on Flood & Jackson (1991)

12. Simple, unitary: TQM & OR
Process
Scientific management (Taylor, 1911)
Achievements
Statistical process control (SPC), Pareto analysis, statistical quality control (SQC), mathematical models and methods often described as OR tools
Challenges
Fails when it does not see the big picture (Churchman, 1968)
Participants dimension of context (increasing diversity of values)
Unitary
(Solve problem)
Plural
(Formulate problem)
Coercive
(Evaluate solution)
Systems dimension of context (increasing complexity)
Simple
Operation research (OR)
Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)
Critical System Heuristics (CSH)
Complex
Viable systems methodology (VSM)
System Dynamics (SD) ?
(Churchman, Ackoff & Arnoff, 1957)

13. Complex, unitary: TQM & VSM
Process
Systems analysis (Hara, 1967), BPR (Hammer & Champy, 1993), KM (Davenport & Prusak, 1998), Six Sigma (Harry & Schroeder, 2000)
Achievements
TQC (Feigenbaum, 1961; Juran, 1964; Ishikawa, 1985), Motorola, Xerox, Ford (Camp, 1989), General Electric (Welch, 2001), Chilean government (Beer, 1974)
Challenges
Failure if the system to be controlled is poorly understood (Checkland, 1981)
Participants dimension of context (increasing diversity of values)
Unitary
(Solve problem)
Plural
(Formulate problem)
Coercive
(Evaluate solution)
Systems dimension of context (increasing complexity)
Simple
Operation research (OR)
Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)
Critical System Heuristics (CSH)
Complex
Viable systems methodology (VSM)
System Dynamics (SD) ?
(Beer, 1959)

14. Simple, plural: TQM & SSM
Process
Quality circles, workshops, training sessions, HR dept.
Achievements
Fishbone diagrams (Ishikawa, 1987), group dynamics (Lewin, 1950), Tavistock (Trist et al, 1997), STS (Mumford, 1995), SSM (Checkland & Poulter, 2006)
Challenges
Shared understanding of problem and commitment to action does not mean that the problem is objectively understood (Beasley, 2004)
Participants dimension of context (increasing diversity of values)
Unitary
(Solve problem)
Plural
(Formulate problem)
Coercive
(Evaluate solution)
Systems dimension of context (increasing complexity)
Simple
Operation research (OR)
Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)
Critical System Heuristics (CSH)
Complex
Viable systems methodology (VSM)
System Dynamics (SD) ?
(Checkland & Poulter, 2006)

15. Complex, plural: TQM & SD
Process
Computer simulation, e.g. DYNAMO (Pugh, 1963)
Achievements
Predictive theory needed for organisational learning (Deming, 1986; Senge 1990), industrial dynamics, urban dynamics, world dynamics (Forrester, 1961; 1969; 1971; Meadows et al, 1972)
Challenges
Behaviour of complex systems are difficult to predict, outcome may be the opposite of what was planned for (Gleick, 1987)
Participants dimension of context (increasing diversity of values)
Unitary
(Solve problem)
Plural
(Formulate problem)
Coercive
(Evaluate solution)
Systems dimension of context (increasing complexity)
Simple
Operation research (OR)
Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)
Critical System Heuristics (CSH)
Complex
Viable systems methodology (VSM)
System Dynamics (SD) ?
(Senge, 1990)

16. Simple, coercive: TQM & CSH
Process
Assessments, Scandinavian school of IS (Nygaard, 1996)
Achievements
Quality maturity models (Crosby, 1979)
EFQM model (1992)
Participants dimension of context (increasing diversity of values)
Unitary
(Solve problem)
Plural
(Formulate problem)
Coercive
(Evaluate solution)
Systems dimension of context (increasing complexity)
Simple
Operation research (OR)
Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)
Critical System Heuristics (CSH)
Complex
Viable systems methodology (VSM)
System Dynamics (SD) ?
(Ulrich, 1983)

17. Summary of research: Critical Success Factors (CSF) for TQM implementation
Management commitment (Beer, 2003; Beckford, 2002; Taylor & Wright, 2003), but difficult to maintain (Schein, 1987)
Empowerment (French & Bell, 1995; Gatchalian, 1997)
TQM agents must have statistical education and experience (Deming, 1986), but TQM as a fad resulted in a market populated by consultants without such background (Cole, 1998)
Strategy (customer focus) (Deming, 1986; Taylor & Wright, 2003), but often has to compete for attention with fads, whims and daily fire-fighting (Mintzberg, 1973)
Supply-chain management (Deming, 1986; Tapiero, 1996)
Internal quality information usage (Taylor & Wright, 2003; Collins, 2003; Hoyle, 2006; Senge, 1990)
TQM results must be viewed as a balanced scorecard (Kaplan & Norton, 1996)
Satisfied employees produce better work (Csikszentmihaly, 1990)
Customer focus (Peters & Waterman, 1982), but innovation comes from process not customers (Deming, 1986)
Public image, business ethics, and impact on society is part of quality (Oakland, 1989)
Quality improvement should impact the bottom line (Juran, 1988; Black & Revere, 2006)

18. CSF for TQM implementation forms the basis for the EFQM model

19. Is there another way of looking at TQM implementation?
In spite of this knowledge, most TQM implementations fail (Burnes, 2010)
WHY?
Is there another way of looking at TQM implementation?

20. The new TQM paradigm (Dooley, Johnson & Bush, 1995)
The organisation is like a mainframe computer
OLD METAPHOR
The organisation is like a computer network
NEW METAPHOR

21. OD classification: System of Systems Methodology (Jackson, 2003)
Participants dimension of context (increasing diversity of values)
Unitary
(Solve problem)
Plural
(Formulate problem)
Coercive
(Evaluate solution)
Systems dimension of context (increasing complexity)
Simple
Operation research (OR)
Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)
Critical System Heuristics (CSH)
Complex
Viable systems methodology (VSM)
Complex adaptive systems (CAS)
System Dynamics (SD)
Actor-Network Theory (ANT)

22. Complex, coercive: TQM & ANT
Process
Ethnography
Achievements
Root Cause Analysis (Ammerman, 1998), Evaluation of the ARAMIS failure (Latour, 1993), “Tragedy of the commons” (Hardin, 1968)
Challenges
Complex explanations motivate passivity rather than action (Winner, 1993)
Participants dimension of context (increasing diversity of values)
Unitary
(Solve problem)
Plural
(Formulate problem)
Coercive
(Evaluate solution)
Systems dimension of context (increasing complexity)
Simple
Operation research (OR)
Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)
Critical System Heuristics (CSH)
Complex
Viable systems methodology (VSM)
Complex adaptive systems (CAS)
System Dynamics (SD)
Actor-Network Theory (ANT)
(Legge, 2002)

23. Complex, unitary: TQM & CAS
Process
Kaizen (Imai, 1987), JIT (Shingo, 1989), Lean Production (Womack et al, 1990)
Achievements
Kanban (Ohno, 1978), 5S (Hiroyuki, 1995), Toyota Motor Company (Liker, 2004)
Participants dimension of context (increasing diversity of values)
Unitary
(Solve problem)
Plural
(Formulate problem)
Coercive
(Evaluate solution)
Systems dimension of context (increasing complexity)
Simple
Operation research (OR)
Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)
Critical System Heuristics (CSH)
Complex
Viable systems methodology (VSM)
Complex adaptive systems (CAS)
System Dynamics (SD)
Actor-Network Theory (ANT)
(Axelrod & Cohen, 2000)

24. Does the new TQM paradigm work?
Socially important
The new paradigm creates problems that were not seen within the older paradigm (Kuhn, 1970)
With the new paradigm the world feels like a “juggernaut out of control” (Giddens, 1984)
Scientifically challenging
Unfalsifiable theory (ideological)
Anecdotal empirical evidence
Research based on comparison of treatments is not possible
Relevance for research
Important and interesting area for doing research
(Ciborra et al, 2000)

25. Summary of lecture Introduction The traditional TQM paradigm
Industrial engineering (IE) and organisational development (OD) are both based on general systems theory (GST)
Total quality management (TQM) is use of IE for doing OD
The traditional TQM paradigm
TQM is GST from the viewpoint of electrical engineering
Mature science, but 80% TQM implementation failure
The new TQM paradigm
TQM is GST from the viewpoint of ecology
Sociologically convincing, but scientifically immature