\ufeffLiterature review<\/p>\n
Extant literature on TQM has been dedicated to the critical success factors, modes of implementation failure and its effects on organizational performance. In this chapter, we present a review of extant literature on TQM, its definition, definition of quality, factors affecting its implementation, and a review of literature on TQM as a conceptual framework\/philosophy.<\/p>\n
Definition of Quality<\/p>\n
Several authors have attempted to define the concept of Total Quality Management (TQM). However, a lot of confusion surrounds the definition of the quality. The concept of quality holds different meanings to different individuals (Garvin, 1988). Until today, no consensus has been reached on the definition of quality as Wicks (2009) pointed out. This implies that no consensus has been reached on the actual meaning and definition of the concept of TQM.<\/p>\n
According to Crosby (1989) quality denotes conformance to various requirements. The essential parameters in this definition are that; one is aware of the requirements and be able to translate them into measurable service or product characteristics. It is therefore necessary for individuals and companies to quantify the characteristics of a given product or service in order for them to determine if their quality is high or low.<\/p>\n
According to Deming (1988, p.54), quality has two important definitions. Generally, he sees quality as a multidimensional concept that allows a company or individual to produce products and services that meets customer\u2019s expectations. He argued that the concept of quality must be determined by the level of customer satisfaction. He also noted that quality is a multidimensional concept that can never be defined in terms of a simple or single parameter. He proceeded to say that quality exists at various degrees because it can be equated to the various levels of customer satisfaction. <\/p>\n
The work of Feigenbaum (1983) noted that quality is the total aggregate product as well as service characteristics of engineering, marketing, manufacturing as well as maintenance via which the given product or service would meet customer\u2019s expectations. The views of Feigenbaum and Deming are synonymous. Feigenbaum too just as Deming believes that the concept of quality must take into account the level of customer satisfaction and is multidimensional. The only difference between their views is that Feigenbaum believes that customers\u2019 changing needs and expectations are highly dynamics. Top management must therefore play a role in maintaining quality by recognizing this evolution in the very definition of quality at the various phases of a product and industry life cycle (Feigenbaum ,1983, p.7).<\/p>\n
According to Ishikawa (1985), industries engage in quality control in order for them to achieve the manufacturing of products that have a high quality that can adequately satisfy the needs of their customers. His main points are that the concept of quality goes hand in hand with customer satisfactions and that quality is a concept that must be defined in a comprehensive manner. He also believes that customer needs and expectations are in a constant state of flux and this means that quality too is dynamic. The price of a given product is also an essential element of its quality.<\/p>\n
According to Juran (1988), quality is made up of certain product characteristics that meet the needs as well as expectations of customers. The customers must in this case be satisfied with the product or service offering. Quality denotes a state of freedom from all sorts of flaws and deficiencies.<\/p>\n
The work of Goodman, O\u2019Brein and Segal (2000, p.49) defined quality as the process of consistently manufacturing products that meet client\u2019s expectations. This is done while also mitigating errors prior to as well as after the delivery of such a product to the client. The whole idea is to product a product that completely satisfies the clients.<\/p>\n
The work of Dervitsiotis (2003) took a rather systematic approach to the concept of quality. In his definition, he noted that quality is the process of meeting and even exceeding the needs as well as of all the business stakeholders. The stakeholders in this cases are customers, employees, the community and even the suppliers.<\/p>\n
Definition of TQM<\/p>\n
Extant literature has been dedicated to the definition of TQM. These definitions are based on either its functions or applications (Mann & Kehoe, 1994). For example, the work of Dale and cooper (1994) defined the concept as the mutual cooperation of all members of an organization and as well as its corresponding business process for the sake of producing products and services, that meet the needs as well as expectations of clients\u201d. Kanji (1990) on the other hand based his definition on the process as well as practices of TQM. He noted that TQM an organization\u2019s way of life that is committed to realization and delivery of customer satisfaction via a continuous improvement process.<\/p>\n
Several studies have been dedicated to the criticizing TQM as a philosophy. The work of <\/p>\n
Park Dahlgaard (2002) noted that there are two main negative sources of criticism against TQM. The first criticism is related to concerns on the implementation of TQM as well as the failure of the process to deliver according to expectations.<\/p>\n
. A debate has been raging on whether organization experiencing failure have implemented TQM or other forms of philosophy. The other source of criticism is on the basis of the concept as a general theory of management. This form of criticism is based on the fact that there is a general lack of criticism on the definition as well as the fact that the main characteristics of the concept ambiguous and not in any way related to other existing theories of management.<\/p>\n
TQM as a movement has always responded to these criticisms by continuously adding more tools and ideas into the extant definitions of TQM. This therefore means that single and consensual definition is hard to arrive at. Most of the existing definitions are either vague or incomplete (Olsson & Bokor ,1995), The confusion in the definition of TQM is attributed or blamed on the divergent opinions as well as confusion surrounding the evolution of TQM as well as the meaning of the concept of quality.<\/p>\n
The critical success factors<\/p>\n
Extant literature has been devoted to the analysis and identification of the factors that are critical to the successful implementation of TQM. These studies appear to have an emphasis on three main areas. These areas according to Tari, (2005) and Claver et al. ( 2003) are ; involvement from quality leaders, prescribed assessment models as well as empirical research. The work of Dale (1999) noted that training, management leadership, process management, employee\u2019s participation as well as the planning as well as use of quality measures for the purpose of realizing continuous improvement are the main critical success factors for TQM.<\/p>\n
The work of Sila and Ebrahimpour (2005), Karuppusami and Gandhinathan (2006) as well as Sebastianelli and Tamimi (2003) pointed out that the initial or pioneering empirical research that focused on TQM\u2019s operationalization via the identification its critical success factors was that of Saraph et al. (1989). Since the publication of their work, several other authors have attempted to identify the factors that determine how successful or unsucessful TQM implementation are. The most significant literatures in this category are the works of Karuppusami and Gandhinathan (2006) and Sila and Ebrahimpour (2005) due to their systematic analysis as well as summary of previous research on this topic.<\/p>\n
The work of Karuppusami and Gandhinathan (2006) employed a total of 37 studies on TQM in order to identify a total of fifty six critical success factors (CSF) of TQM. Their choices for these studies were based on the fact that their validity and reliability in regard to the critical success factors were acceptable in statistical terms. By means of Pareto law or analysis, their work grouped these fifty six critical success factors in a descending order and then appropriately divided them into two main groups that were titled as either \u2018useful many\u2019 or \u2018very useful\u2019. The \u2018useful many\u2019 category accounted for close to 20 percent of all occurrences while the \u2018vital few\u2019 accounted for close to 80 percent of the CSF. According to their analysis, the most important critical success factor for TQM implementation is top management commitment. This study therefore appropriately confirmed what Sila and Ebrahimpour (2003) had found a little bit earlier.<\/p>\n
The work of Ramayah and Saad (2006) investigated the relationship existing between various TQM practices. Their study used the concept of multicollinearity in order the existing between the various TQM practices. The practices that investigated included management support and commitment, , employee empowerment, employee involvement , information and communication, customer focus, training and education, service quality as well as continuous improvement .They also investigated the relationship between these TQM practices and the prevailing market orientation. The outcome of their investigation revealed that continuous improvement, information and communication, employee empowerment and customer focus have a great impact on the quality of service delivery while customer focus as well as employee empowerment have a great effect on market orientation.<\/p>\n
The work of Jusoh, Yusoff and Mohtar (2008) indicated that top management leadership, customer focus, process management, data as well as information management, performance management, partnership as well as resource management are the practices are the TQM factors that can be used effectively within R&D facilities.<\/p>\n
The application of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) in the analysis of the relationship between the CSF has yielded mixed results. Such an analysis however, has generally indicated that information analysis, leadership, customer focus and human resource focus have a positive correlation with customer satisfaction in organizations. The work of Ali, Mahat, and Zairi,(2010) that was carried out in order to investigate the major critical success factor of TQM with a focus on human resources indicated a lot on the human resource elements of TQM practices. Customer focus, visionary leadership, staff selection as well as deployment, communication, training and education, innovation as well as creativity, recognition and employee motivation, staff competency, as well teamwork spirit are the important elements of human resource-based TQM practices. <\/p>\n
A critical review of literature on the critical success factors <\/p>\n
Leadership and the commitment of top management <\/p>\n
Extant literature has been dedicated to the roles of leadership and the commitment of top management as critical success factors of TQM. Several authors have noted top management commitment to be a prerequisite for achieving high levels of organizational commitment (Buch and Rivers, 2002). The work of Leiter and Maslach (2002) regards the commitment of senior management as a more important factor in TQM implementation. Top management\u2019s commitment is also noted to be an important factor by various empirical studies (Saraph et al., 1989; Ahire et al., 1996; Thiagarajan, 1996; Ramirez and Loney, 1993; Rao et al., 1999; Lau and Idris, 2001; Dayton, 2001; Sureshchandar et al., 2001).<\/p>\n
People management<\/p>\n
According to the work of Wuagneux (2002), the revised EFQM model of excellence have placed a greater emphasis on the role of people on the management and success of companies. A consideration must therefore, be made on the role that is played by culture as well as employee motivation on the creation of successful organizations. The work of Kanji (1998) effectively proposed the application of a people management principle that took into consideration \u2018team work\u2019 as well as the fact that people are the source of quality as one of the main TQM principles. <\/p>\n
The involvement of employees as well as their commitment to the organizational goals as prescribed by the TQM model is a precondition to a successful implementation of TQM practices (McAdam and Kelly, 2002; Buch and Rivers 2002 ). Employee empowerment has therefore been shown by a large number of authors to be a critical success factor of implementing TQM (Dale et al., 2001; Davidson et al., 2001; Rao et al., 1999; Martinez-Lorente et al.,1998; Zhang et al., 2000).<\/p>\n
Middle management involvement<\/p>\n
The involvement of middle management is considered by Thiagarajan and Zairi (1997) as a technique for optimizing employee involvement in an organization\u2019s quality process. This is because these middle managers are the ones responsible for initiating several key major adjustments to product quality. The middle managers ahs a critical role play because they are required to have an expert opinion and grasp of all the TQM principles while also being able to explain these principles to the rest of the workers. This way, the TQM philosophy is appropriately communicated to the entire organization\u2019s team as noted by Oakland (2000).<\/p>\n
Training and employee education<\/p>\n
Extant literature has been dedicated to the study of employee training and education as critical success factors of TQM. The work of Mathews et al (2001) indicates that the training that acts as a basis of quality management is a strong determinant of the effectiveness of the various quality measures that are undertaken. The work of Zhang et al. (2000) reiterated the importance of training and education to the success of all TQM initiatives. A series of empirical studies have indicated that both training and education are essential to the successful implementation of TQM (Thiagarajan and Zairi, 1998; Quazi and Padibjo, 1998; Rao et al., 1999; Zhang et al., 2000; Yusof and Aspinwall, 2000; Black and Porter, 1996; Tamimi, 1998; Pun, 2001; Calisir et al., 2001; Dayton, 2001)<\/p>\n
Employee reward and appreciation<\/p>\n
The concepts of reward and appreciation\/recognition are very important critical success factors for TQM implementation. The work of Oakland (2000), indicates that the concept of TQM is inherently user-driven. The work of Kemp et al. (1997) however, noted that recognition or acknowledgement is important since it helps in increasing employee involvement in the running of a company. Several authors have also explored the importance of employee reward and acknowledgement in the overall TQM process (Haksever, 1996; Li et al., 2001; Everett, 2002; Martinez-Lorente et al., 1998).<\/p>\n
Teamwork<\/p>\n
According to the works of Oakland (2000) and Goh (2000), one of the most popular Japanese approach to the attainment of quality production is use of kaizen team or quality circles. A review of extant literature reveals that the concept of teamwork is essential for TQM techniques to be successful (Cebeci and Beskese, 2002; Everett, 2002; McAdam and Kelly, 2002). According to the work of Mehra et al. (1998), one of the crucial elements of an organization\u2019s human resource function that has been noted to be a critical success factor to the successful implementation of TQM initiatives is teamwork.<\/p>\n
Quality organizational policy and strategy<\/p>\n
Experts in quality management have often insisted on the need for the development of strategic planning process that has its foundations on total quality concept (Sinclair and Zairi, 2001; Hitchcock and Willard, 2002; Sureshchandar et al., 2001) .<\/p>\n
Communicating for the sake of quality<\/p>\n
The work of Kanji and Asher (1993) noted that effective communication system is an essential component of the total quality process. This means that an effective communication system is paramount to the success of any kind of quality initiative (Sureshchandar et al., 2001). Organizational change must be communicated effectively for resistance to be mitigated (Salegna and Fazel, 2000; Claver et al., 2001).<\/p>\n
Efficient supplier management system<\/p>\n
Supplier quality management is an essential element of all TQM initiatives. This is because materials and other purchased elements are often a main source of problems related to quality (Zhang et al., 2000). Several authors have argued that firms must first establish an efficient supply chain partnership in order to motivate their suppliers to avail the materials that are needed to satisfy customer expectations (David, 2002; Clifton, 2001). These findings are further supported by other studies (Thiagarajan et al., 2001; Lau and Idris, 2001).<\/p>\n
An accredited system for quality management<\/p>\n
Extant literature has been devoted to the exploration of accredited and independent quality management systems. Example is ISO 9000 certification that can be argued to be the starting point for quality-based competitiveness. The TQM process is a sure way of gaining a competitive advantage as exemplified in a wide range of literature (Kolka, 2002; Williams, 1997; Van der Weile and Brown, 1998).<\/p>\n
According to the work of Oakland and Porter (1994) and Shipley (2002), most organizations regard ISO 9000 certification as the initial step in the implementation of TQM. A highly documented quality assurance system is also a critical element of every TQM strategy. This strategy\u2019s success is however, subject to how consistently it can manage a organization\u2019s processes (Zhang et al., 2000). The work of Beattie and Sohal (1999) indicated that most organizations implement ISO 9000 quality system concurrently with other quality standards (Beskese and Cebeci, 2001; McAdam and McKeown, 1999). <\/p>\n
Moren-Lozon and Peris (1998) created an integrated model for organizational design, strategic management and quality management. In this model, they grouped quality organizations into two main categories- quality assurance and TQM organization. The quality assurance organization is characterized by high level of conformity to quality standards while the TQM organization is characterized by elements of internal as well as external employee involvement, customer satisfaction and continuous improvement. This, according to Jabnoun (2000) indicates low-level formalization coupled with a centralized organizational structure.<\/p>\n
The work of Oakland and Porter (1994) indicated that one of the main responsibilities of top management at the initial phases of TQM program implementation is the setting up of an organization structure that is of high quality. Oakland (2000) reiterated that such a structure would lead to the creation of a framework that enables quality operations. Quality organization is therefore, considered as a crucial element in the attainment of a successful implementation of TQM initiatives.<\/p>\n
In order to achieve a high level of customer satisfaction, the work of (2000) reiterated the importance of efficient management of internal-supplier relationships as the very first phase of supporting an organization\u2019s process management. Via a translation process involving the translation of the consumer-supplier chain at an enterprise-wide level, organization can achieve a better focus that would in the end translate to value creation (McAdam and Kelly, 2002).<\/p>\n
The significance of customer focus can be seen in the fact that such a function is assigned the greatest weight in the European Quality Award and Malcolm Baldrige Award (NIST,1999; EFQM, 1999).<\/p>\n
Benchmarking<\/p>\n
Several authors have discussed the importance of benchmarking in the successful implementation of TQM initiatives (Sinclair and Zairi, 2001). Dow et al. (1999) never hesitated to mention that benchmarking is a challenging quality practice that helps organization by providing them with a systematic analysis of their achievements of all crucial quality objectives.<\/p>\n
Benchmarking has been argued and even demonstrated to be result in success in organizations requiring change management. For instance, benchmarking can result in the success of organizations requiring process re-engineering as noted by Thor and Jarrett (1999). It also noted by Cassell et al., (2001) to result in improved level of operational performance as well as overall change in organizational action and thinking. According to Jarrar and Zairi (2000) , benchmarking is a practice that is increasingly being appreciated as a powerful strategy for improving performance at an enterprise-wide level. <\/p>\n
The work of Dervitsiotis (2000) noted that several key organizations such as European Foundation for Quality and the American Productivity and Quality Centre are serious with the promotion as well as training of their members and employees in benchmarking as an important approach in the achievement of business excellent.<\/p>\n
Self-assessment<\/p>\n
According to Oakland (2000), the concept of self-assessment is important to organization since it helps them in highlighting their strengths and opportunities while also helping them to attain continuous improvement in their processes and operations (Conti, 1999)<\/p>\n
Factors hindering TQM implementation<\/p>\n
According to Ab Rahman et al (2011), organizations must be ready to determine the factors hindering the implementation of TQM for their TQM initiatives to be successful. This study is very important to this study since it explored the factors affecting the successful implementation of TQM in Islamic countries. It also explored the factors hindering TQM implementation in these countries. All Middle Eastern countries are Islamic nations. According to Khan (2001), the main concern regarding the implementation of TQM in Islamic nations like the ones located in Middle Eastern countries is the notion that the concept of TQM is totally alien and not relevant to the Islamic religious and cultural norms. <\/p>\n
Some of the main problems facing the implementation of TQM are general lack of lack of strong organizational leadership, lack of strategic quality planning, lack of effective human resources development and management, the total lack of capability of managing quality process, as well as total disregard of customer satisfaction as well as quality results as noted by Kravchuke and Leighton (1993). <\/p>\n
Extant literature has been devoted to the analysis and identification of the factors that are critical to the successful implementation of TQM. These studies appear to have an emphasis on three main areas. These areas according to Tari, (2005) and Claver et al. ( 2003) are ; involvement from quality leaders, prescribed assessment models as well as empirical research. The work of Dale (1999) noted that training, management leadership, process management, employee\u2019s participation as well as the planning as well as use of quality measures for the purpose of realizing continuous improvement are the main critical success factors for TQM.<\/p>\n
The work of Sila and Ebrahimpour (2005), Karuppusami and Gandhinathan (2006) as well as Sebastianelli and Tamimi (2003 pointed out that the initial or pioneering empirical research that focused on TQM\u2019s operationalization via the identification its critical sucessfactors was that of Saraph et al. (1989). Since the publication of their work, several other authors have attempted to identify the factors that determine how successful or unsucessful TQM implementation are. The most significant literatures in this category are the works of Karuppusami and Gandhinathan (2006) and Sila and Ebrahimpour (2003) due to their systematic analysis as well as summary of previous research on this topic.<\/p>\n
The work of Karuppusami and Gandhinathan (2006) employed a total of 37 studies on TQM in order to identify a total of fifty six critical success factors (CSF) of TQM. Their choices for these studies were based on the fact that their validity and reliability in regard to the critical success factors were acceptable in statistical terms. By means of Pareto law or analysis, their work grouped these fifty six critical success factors in a descending order and then appropriately divided them into two main groups that were titled as either \u2018useful many\u2019 or \u2018very useful\u2019. The \u2018useful many\u2019 category accounted for close to 20 percent of all occurrences while the \u2018vital few\u2019 accounted for close to 80 percent of the CSF. According to their analysis, the most important critical success factor for TQM implementation is top management commitment. This study therefore appropriately confirmed what Sila and Ebrahimpour (2003) had found a little bit earlier.<\/p>\n
The work of Ramayah and Saad (2006) investigated the relationship existing between various TQM practices. Their study used the concept of multicollinearity in order the existing between the various TQM practices. The practices that investigated included management support and commitment, , employee empowerment, employee involvement , information and communication, customer focus, training and education, service quality as well as continuous improvement .They also investigated the relationship between these TQM practices and the prevailing market orientation. The outcome of their investigation revealed that continuous improvement, information and communication, employee empowerment and customer focus have a great impact on the quality of service delivery while customer focus as well as employee empowerment have a great effect on market orientation.<\/p>\n
The work of Jusoh, Yusoff and Mohtar (2008) indicated that top management leadership, customer focus, process management, data as well as information management, performance management, partnership as well as resource management are the practices are the TQM factors that can be used effectively within R&D facilities.<\/p>\n
The application of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) in the analysis of the relationship between the CSF has yielded mixed results. Such an analysis however, has generally indicated that information analysis, leadership, customer focus and human resource focus have a positive correlation with customer satisfaction in organizations. The work of Ali, Mahat, and Zairi,(2010) that was carried out in order to investigate the major critical success factor of TQM with a focus on human resources indicated a lot on the human resource elements of TQM practices. Customer focus, visionary leadership, staff selection as well as deployment, communication, training and education, innovation as well as creativity, recognition and employee motivation, staff competency, as well teamwork spirit are the important elements of human resource-based TQM practices. <\/p>\n
According to Crosby (1979) quality denotes conformance to various requirements. The essential parameters in this definition are that; one is aware of the requirements and be able to translate them into measurable service or product characteristics. It is therefore necessary for individuals and companies to quantify the characteristics of a given product or service in order for them to determine if their quality is high or low.<\/p>\n
According to Deming (1988, p.54), quality has two important definitions. Generally, he sees quality as a multidimensional concept that allows a company or individual to produce products and services that meets customer\u2019s expectations. He argued that the concept of quality must be determined by the level of customer satisfaction. He also noted that quality is a multidimensional concept that can never be defined in terms of a simple or single parameter. He proceeded to say that quality exists at various degrees because it can be equated to the various levels of customer satisfaction. <\/p>\n
The work of Feigenbaum (1983) noted that quality is the total aggregate product as well as service characteristics of engineering, marketing, manufacturing as well as maintenance via which the given product or service would meet customer\u2019s expectations. The views of Feigenbaum and Deming are synonymous. Feigenbaum too just as Deming believes that the concept of quality must take into account the level of customer satisfaction and is multidimensional. The only difference between their views is that Feigenbaum believes that customers\u2019 changing needs and expectations are highly dynamics. Top management must therefore play a role in maintaining quality by recognizing this evolution in the very definition of quality at the various phases of a product and industry life cycle (Feigenbaum ,1983, p.7).<\/p>\n
According to Ishikawa (1985), industries engage in quality control in order for them to achieve the manufacturing of products that have a high quality that can adequately satisfy the needs of their customers. His main points are that the concept of quality goes hand in hand with customer satisfactions and that quality is a concept that must be defined in a comprehensive manner. He also believes that customer needs and expectations are in a constant state of flux and this means that quality too is dynamic. The price of a given product is also an essential element of its quality.<\/p>\n
According to Juran (1988), quality is made up of certain product characteristics that meet the needs as well as expectations of customers. The customers must in this case be satisfied with the product or service offering. Quality denotes a state of freedom from all sorts of flaws and deficiencies.<\/p>\n
The work of Goodman, O\u2019Brein and Segal (2000, p.49) defined quality as the process of consistently manufacturing products that meet client\u2019s expectations. This is done while also mitigating errors prior to as well as after the delivery of such a product to the client. The whole idea is to product a product that completely satisfies the clients.<\/p>\n
The work of Dervitsiotis (2003) took a rather systematic approach to the concept of quality. In his definition, he noted that quality is the process of meeting and even exceeding the needs as well as of all the business stakeholders. The stakeholders in this cases are customers, employees, the community and even the suppliers.<\/p>\n
The role of quality information system in manufacturing companies<\/p>\n
In the past couple of years, a lot of research has been conducted on the role of quality information system in the operations of companies. The work of Mjema et al (2005) explored the role of information technology on quality management. Tang and Duan (2006) on the other hand, investigated the role and application of integrated quality information system (IQIS) on the Chinese manufacturing industries. Their work concluded that an IQIS system in feasible with a high level of reliability and efficiency being achieved in the very end by Chinese manufacturers. The work of Muravlyova (2001) investigated the use of quality management information systems in the production of electrical machines. What is clearly evident is that studies on the application of QIS in Middle East are quite rare.<\/p>\n
References<\/p>\n
Ab Rahman et al (2012).Barriers and Benefits of Total Quality Management Implementation in Libyan Manufacturing Companies.Middle East Journal of Scientific Research 7 (4)<\/p>\n
Ahire, S.L. (1996), ` `An empirical investigation of quality management in small firms\u2019 \u2019, Production and Inventory Management Journal , 2nd quarter, pp. 44-50<\/p>\n
Ali, N. A., Mahat, F., & Zairi, M. (2010). Testing the criticality of HR-TQM factors in the <\/p>\n
Malaysian higher education context. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, <\/p>\n
21(11), 1177-1188. doi: 10.1080\/14783360701349534<\/p>\n
Black, S. and Porter, L. (1996), `Identification of critical factors of TQM\u2019 \u2019, Decision Sciences , Vol. 27, pp. 1-21.<\/p>\n
Beattie, K. and Sohal, A. (1999), ` `Implementing ISO 9000: a study of its benefits among Australian organisations\u2019\u2019, Total Quality Management , Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 95-10<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\ufeffLiterature review Extant literature on TQM has been dedicated to the critical success factors, modes of implementation failure and its<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-49678","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\n