Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 191629 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
the requirements for their degree have been proper model. This model implies that the
completed. In the context of the production degree seeking students are the “product-in-
analogy, university graduates compete for jobs just process”. They are the “raw material” when
as brands and products compete for customers in admitted and the “finished product” when
the market place. Thus, Figure 1 suggests that they graduate.
graduates may be interpreted as the finished (2) Internal customers for facilities – Students are
product, and that employers are the customers of the “internal customers”, in fact, paying
higher education institutions. Other components customers for many campus facilities and
of this production analogy are given in Table I. services such as dormitories, food services,
Among service organizations, higher education bookstores, libraries, sport facilities, registrar,
institutions are probably unique in yielding a and others. These non-academic facilities
production analogy. In fact, this analogy may be contribute indirectly to the quality of the
very useful in implementing TQM in higher institution’s product by helping to attract
education, since TQM has been most successful in better students, providing a more satisfactory
manufacturing organizations. campus climate, and also by supporting
academic programs.
However, unlike manufacturing companies, in
(3) Laborers in the learning process – This role was
universities and colleges students have other roles
first identified by Sirvanci (1996) as one of the
besides their product roles. In a comprehensive
dual roles of the student in the classroom. In
effort, Sirvanci (1996) identified four different
Harmon (1993), Glasser also suggested that
roles for students. According to Sirvanci (1996),
students, though not technically employees,
depending on the process under study, students
are more like lower-level employees. This role
take on one of the following four roles within the
evolves because, contrary to typical service
higher education institutions:
customers, students, as they receive service
(1) Product-in-process – At the institutional level,
(knowledge) from their instructors, are
i.e. the macro level, the production analogy expected simultaneously to work and exert
model illustrated in Figure 1 and Table I is the effort in order to learn the material by various
means such as completing projects, term
Table I Production analogy for higher education papers, and preparing for tests. The laborer
Higher education Production role seems to be unique to the students and
because of this role, the education process is
Secondary schools Suppliers
different from other service industries.
Admitted high school graduates Raw material
(4) Internal customers for the delivery of course
Student Product-in-process
Courses Process stages
material – This is the other component of the
Graduate Finished product
student’s dual role in the classroom. In fact,
Employers Customers most people have this role in mind when they
Number of graduates employed Sales think of students as customers.
Number of graduates unemployed Unsold product (inventory) From the multiple role descriptions above, it
Starting salary Price should be clear why customer identification in
384
Critical issues for TQM implementation in higher education The TQM Magazine
Mete B. Sirvanci Volume 16 · Number 6 · 2004 · 382-386
higher education is a complicated and confusing dual roles of the student, this source needs to be
issue. Since various groups who are involved with used with caution so as not to affect course content
this issue seem to treat only one dimension of the adversely. The overlap between delivery and
problem rather than the whole, they usually infer a content may cause students to perceive the volume
single label for students. In fact, when the Baldrige and difficulty of course material as poor
Education Criteria were first developed during the performance in delivery. In fact, critics of student
mid to late 1990s by adapting the performance evaluations argue that demanding higher
criteria for business organizations to education standards for students often results in lower
institutions, it further blurred the customer issue evaluations, with the inevitable result that
with the substitution of student satisfaction for the achievement levels are compromised. As a result,
customer satisfaction criterion. Although the word questionnaires for the measurement of satisfaction
“customer” was never used, this substitution need to be very specific, designed to measure only
implied that students are to be considered as the delivery aspects of the course.
customers. A different aspect of the customer issue, one
The most recent version of the Baldrige which is not related to customer identification, is
Education Criteria has clarified the confusion customer loyalty. In businesses, customer loyalty is
created by the initial version. The 2002 Baldrige very important because repeat buying by loyal
Downloaded by Middle Tennessee State University At 10:43 22 March 2015 (PT)
Education Criteria (Baldrige National Quality customers has a direct effect on profitability.
Program, 2002) assigns the largest percentage (20 However, higher education is a “once in a lifetime”
percent) of points to the “student learning results” activity. If students are considered as customers,
criterion (criterion 7.1 in Baldrige National this concept makes sense only when they make
Quality Program, 2002) instead of student donations as alumni. However, if employers are
satisfaction. This newer interpretation of the the customers, repeat purchase means recruiting at
student’s role agrees well with the product role the same universities and colleges every year.
(and the finished product for graduates) described
above in connection with the production analogy.
The production analogy implies that, as all other
Conclusion
organizations do, higher education institutions are
expected to improve the quality of their products Higher education institutions have been facing
(i.e. students). More than student satisfaction, challenges for some time and are expected to face
employers’ appraisal of the graduates which is, in more in the future. While many business
fact, a surrogate for society’s satisfaction, is a valid organizations have become leaner and more
performance measure in this case. efficient as a result of the adoption of TQM, higher
Representing the importance of higher education institutions have not been affected by
education institutions for general society, the this trend to as great an extent. Similar to the rise
production analogy depicts the fundamental role in health care costs, the cost of higher education
of the student. However, the other roles of the has been increasing steadily. These are some of the
student should not be ignored. For example, factors that are creating pressure on higher
students’ effort and work through their laborer role education institutions to change and become more
are essential as a principal input for the quality of efficient.
the institution’s product, namely its graduates. To There are, however, examples of successful
be successful in this role, in addition to exerting application of TQM principles and methods in
effort, students need to have the necessary skills, many universities worldwide. In fact, for the first
disposition, and motivation. These factors are time in 2002, a higher education institution,
similar to the human resource issues that University of Wisconsin-Stout, won the Baldrige
businesses face and deal with when they attempt to education award. Some of the implementations of
improve the productivity of their employees. TQM principles in higher education have been
Higher education may borrow ideas and methods confined to the administrative branches and non-
from businesses to improve the output of their academic processes of universities. On the
students. academic side, some departments, for example,
The dual of the laborer role is the internal have used QFD (quality function deployment) for
customer for the delivery of course material. To curriculum development and improvement.
improve this component of classroom teaching, Advisory councils have been established for
the best available source for feedback information departments and colleges with the goal of receiving
is the students taking the class. Students’ input information regarding the market demand
evaluation of course delivery and students’ for their graduates. Such an effort is definitely an
satisfaction are appropriate measures of example of customer and market focus. However,
performance in this case. However, because of the most of these applications have been somewhat
385
Critical issues for TQM implementation in higher education The TQM Magazine
Mete B. Sirvanci Volume 16 · Number 6 · 2004 · 382-386
narrow in scope and have not advanced beyond a administrators and boards of trustees need to
quality project application. The issues discussed overcome the issues discussed in this article.
here under the headings “Leadership” and
“Cultural and organizational transformation” are
some of the reasons hindering institution-wide
implementation. Similar issues were encountered
References
in University of Wisconsin-Stout’s TQM Baldrige National Quality Program (2002), Education Criteria for
implementation, and are discussed in Daniels Performance Excellence, Baldrige National Quality
(2002). Pennsylvania State University’s efforts Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology,
towards quality improvement are presented in Gaithersburg, MD.
Everett (2002). Bennett, D.C. (2001), “Assessing quality in higher education”,
Liberal Education, Vol. 87 No. 2, pp. 40-6.
In implementing TQM in higher education, one
Daniels, S.E. (2002), “First to the top”, Quality Progress, Vol. 35
needs to realize that higher education is different No. 5, pp. 41-53.
from other service industries, and depending on Everett, C.L. (2002), “Penn State’s commitment to quality
how customers are identified, the performance improvement”, Quality Progress, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 44-8.
measure for the organization and processes under Grant, D.M. (2002), “Measuring the dimensions of quality in
study are profoundly affected. As discussed above, higher education”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 13
Downloaded by Middle Tennessee State University At 10:43 22 March 2015 (PT)
386
This article has been cited by:
1. A. Pal Pandi, P.V. Rajendra Sethupathi, D. Jeyathilagar. 2014. The IEQMS model for augmenting quality in engineering
institutions – an interpretive structural modelling approach. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 1-17. [CrossRef]
2. Ehsan Sadeh, Mansour Garkaz. 2014. Explaining the mediating role of service quality between quality management enablers and
students' satisfaction in higher education institutes: the perception of managers. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence
1-22. [CrossRef]
3. Josip Mikulić, Ines Dužević, Tomislav Baković. 2014. Exploring drivers of student satisfaction and dissatisfaction: an assessment
of impact-asymmetry and impact-range. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 1-13. [CrossRef]
4. Namish Mehta, Prakash Verma, Nitin Seth. 2014. Total quality management implementation in engineering education in India:
an interpretive structural modelling approach. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 25, 124-140. [CrossRef]
5. Muhammad Asif, Abdul Raouf, Cory Searcy. 2013. Developing measures for performance excellence: is the Baldrige criteria
sufficient for performance excellence in higher education?. Quality & Quantity 47, 3095-3111. [CrossRef]
6. Rajiv Sindwani, Vikram Singh, Sandeep Grover. 2013. Identification of Attributes of TQM in an Educational Institute.
International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology 2:10.4018/jssmet.20110401, 48-64. [CrossRef]
7. Muhammad Asif, Muhammad Usman Awan, Muhammad Khalid Khan, Niaz Ahmad. 2013. A model for total quality
Downloaded by Middle Tennessee State University At 10:43 22 March 2015 (PT)