A higher education TQM excellence model: HETQMEX

Introduction

Like any other businesses, higher educationneeds quality. TQM is a way of managing toimprove the effectiveness, efficiency, cohe-siveness, flexibility, and competitiveness of abusiness as a whole. As defined by ISO 9004(BSI, 1993), TQM is a management philoso-phy and company practices which aim toharness the human and material resources ofan organization in the most effective way toachieve the objectives of the organization.

Some researchers are sceptical of the ideaof applying TQM to higher education institu-tions (HEIs). For instance, Chaston (1994)has identified obstacles which include insuffi-cient trust between departments and lowconfidence in the ability to manage theprocess: “Under these circumstances, it doesnot appear that, for the foreseeable future,British universities are in a position to adoptTQM philosophy”. Paradoxically, however,HEIs which research and teach TQM lackcredibility if they decline to embrace TQMphilosophy and practices themselves. Thisarticle determines the most effective andsystematic way to introduce TQM to HEIsand build on existing partial TQM practices.

Because TQM is universal and proven bymany successful firms, it should be used toformulate the mission statement for the ser-vices provided by HEIs; a generic missionstatement could be: “To provide qualityeducation, research and related services tocontinuously satisfy stakeholders’ needs andachieve excellence through TQM”.

Since incorporation in 1989, De MontfortUniversity (DMU) has undergone an ambi-tious transformation, nearly trebling in size to25,000 full-time equivalent students andquadrupling its campuses. It has become oneof the largest universities in the UK and thefastest growing in western Europe: “Onemain objective of DMU is to unlock the cre-ativity of academic staff to find ways ofincreasing productivity while enhancingquality on declining resources. Fundamen-tally, schools (faculties) must live within theirmeans, with cross-subsidization only allowedfor explicit strategic purposes” (Caulkin,1994). This article will use teaching andlearning quality practices at De MontfortUniversity as an example to illustrate themethods and common problems encounteredwhen implementing a quality managementsystem.

35

Quality Assurance in EducationVolume 4 · Number 2 · 1996 · pp. 35–42© MCB University Press · ISSN 0968-4883

A higher education TQMexcellence model:HETQMEX

Samuel K. Ho and Katrina Wearn

The authorsSamuel K. Ho is Principal Lecturer and Subject Leader inTQM in the Department of Corporate Strategy.Katrina Wearn is School Manager of the School of Designand Manufacture, both at De Montfort University, Leicester, UK.

AbstractSuggests that, in higher education management in the1990s, a strategy utilized by increasing numbers oforganizations for effective change and sustained competi-tive advantage is TQM. Aims to determine the advantagesof TQM and how TQM can be applied effectively andefficiently in higher education institutions. Develops ahigher education TQM excellence (HETQMEX) modelbased on fundamental concepts of service quality: five-S,marketing and education quality control, quality controlcircles, ISO 9000 and total preventive maintenance.Acknowledges the diversity of customers which TQM mustsatisfy and highlights some of the problems encounteredin implementing the model, based on well-foundedresearch and experience of the authors.

The definitions of quality and TQM

There are a number of well-known qualitydefinitions: “the totality of features and char-acteristics of a product or service that bearson its ability to meet a stated or implied need”;“conformance to requirement” (Crosby,1979); and “fitness for use”. Japanese compa-nies find the old suggestion of quality, “thedegree of conformance to a standard”, toonarrow and, consequently, have started to usea new definition of quality of “customer satis-faction” (Wayne, 1983). HEIs need to satisfyseveral customers, the student being themain, but certainly not the only customer.

There are many definitions for TQM aswell. Tobin (1990) defines TQM as “thetotally integrated effort for gaining competi-tive advantage by continuously improvingevery facet of organizational culture”. Feigen-baum (1991) defines TQM as the “totalquality control’s organization-wide impact”.Wilkinson and Witcher’s (1991) definition isarguably the most comprehensive:• Total: every person in the firm is involved

(including customers and suppliers);• Quality: customer requirements are met

exactly;• Management: senior executives are fully

committed.

The TQM process

It has been established in the introductionthat TQM is a means for achieving and main-taining excellence in higher education. Thissection explores the key components of TQMand investigates best practices in achievingsuccess in each of the key components. Fromvarious literature, the components for excel-lence in organizations can be summarized bythe five Ss (Osada, 1991). This is shown inTable I.

The five Ss have been around a long time.There is nothing new about them but, ingeneral, people have not been aware of their

significance until now. So, when we lookaround, there is a lot of room for improve-ment. The five Ss can help in everything wedo by ensuring a total quality working envi-ronment. These are basic activities that every-one should be doing in order to have a totalquality environment at their workplace.

Quality control in education andmarketingThe marketing process consists of decisionson the marketing mix, i.e. the right product atthe right place, right promotion and rightprice. As the marketing function is moreconcerned with effectiveness (doing the rightthing) rather than efficiency (doing thingsright) of a business, the success of the market-ing function should be the primary objective.There is a need to look closely at what market-ing can offer TQM. A contemporary conceptis to apply TQM to every aspect of marketing,which can be termed as total quality market-ing (Witcher, 1990). For example, in thestudent recruitment process, are informationand decisions given to students promptly? Isthe prospectus user-friendly and consistentwith the service delivered?

‘…the prime responsibility formaintaining and enhancing thequality of teaching and learningrests with each institution…’

In the UK, the section in the higher educationwhite paper concerning quality assurancebegins with the statement that “the primeresponsibility for maintaining and enhancingthe quality of teaching and learning rests witheach institution”. It then goes on to state that“there is a common view throughout highereducation on the need for externally providedreassurance that the quality control mecha-nisms within institutions are adequate”(Department of Education and Science,1991). In 1992, the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals established theHigher Education Quality Council (HEQC)to externally audit the quality of teaching andresearch of HEI and publish its findings. Thefocus is on both quality control and qualityassurance, both of which have become statu-tory continuous processes in HEI in achievingquality at all times.

36

A higher education TQM excellence model: HETQMEX


Quality Assurance in Education

Volume 4 · Number 2 · 1996 · 35–42

Table I The Five Ss

Japanese English Meaning

Seiri Structurize OrganizeSeiton Systemize NeatnessSeiso Sanitize CleaningSeiketsu Standardize StandardizationShitsuke Self-discipline Discipline

Quality control circles (QCC) A QCC (Ishikawa, 1984) is a small groupwhich voluntarily performs quality controlactivities within a single workplace. Moreover,this small group is an ongoing organizationwithin company-wide, quality control activi-ties, for mutual self-development and processcontrol. The group is also charged to improveits workplace, utilizing quality control tech-niques, with full participation of all members.The basic concepts behind QCC activitieswithin the company-wide quality controleffort are to contribute to continuousimprovement and development of the enter-prise; to respect humanity, and to enhancepersonal and job satisfaction; and to givefullest rein to human capabilities and drawout each individual’s infinite potential. Forexample, QCC can be set up to design andimprove courses and methods of assessment,to determine how research can be incor-porated in the curriculum, and to share bestteaching practices.

ISO 9000 series quality managementsystemsIn 1992, the British Standards Institute pub-lished guidance notes to assist educationaland training organizations in interpreting ISO9000-1 during implementation and auditingof quality documentation (BSI, 1992). Thisprovides useful guidelines for HEI workingtowards ISO 9000-1. In the UK there areseveral education institutes already registeredunder the above scheme (e.g. WolverhamptonUniversity, Pershore College of Horticultureand Sandwell College). In 1990, the Councilof Vice-Chancellors and Principals estab-lished the Academic Audit Unit to provide“assurance, external to each individual uni-versity, that its own systems are satisfactoryfor maintaining the academic standards in theteaching function for which, under its charter,it is uniquely responsible”.

Total preventive maintenanceTotal preventive maintenance (TPM) (Senju,1992) is a system of maintenance covering theentire life of equipment in every division,including planning, operations and mainte-nance, involving everyone from top executivesto shopfloor workers, promoting productivemaintenance through morale-building man-agement and small-group activities in aneffort to maximize equipment efficiency. InHEI, essential equipment such as computing

facilities, laboratory equipment and demon-stration units require regular maintenance inorder to provide services as and when needed.The condition of this equipment has a directimpact on the quality and productivity ofteaching and instruction sessions.

The TQM basic principlesAttention to the following TQM principles isthe main guarantee for successful implemen-tation of TQM. They are leadership, commit-ment, total customer satisfaction, continuousimprovement, total involvement, training andeducation, ownership of problems, rewardand recognition, error prevention, and team-work. On the other hand, there are well recog-nized pitfalls of TQM (Laza and Wheaton,1990). In addition, some employees mayacknowledge TQM philosophy but fail tocontribute individually because they do notknow what is required or are not motivated toparticipate. Unfortunately, this is particularlyacute in HEI where academic staff are ex-pected to analyse, challenge, criticize andsubstantiate evidence. So, in order to imple-ment TQM effectively, it is important toensure that everyone is fully involved in andcommitted to the process.

The ISO 9004-4:1993 TQM standardThe publication of the new ISO 9004-4:1993TQM has provoked the question – where doesthe standard sit relative to ISO 9000? – to thewritings of Deming, Feigenbaum, Oaklandand others. It has long been recognized thatwithout total dedication from the top to theprinciples of TQM, the chances of effectivepromulgation of the concepts throughout theorganization are unlikely, and the necessarychange to management and work attitudeswould be difficult to achieve.

‘…customer satisfaction, health andsafety, the environment and businessobjectives are mutually dependent…’

The main principles recognize that customersatisfaction, health and safety, the environ-ment and business objectives are mutuallydependent and that all businesses can bebroken down into a series of process steps.ISO 9004-4 “Guide to quality improvementmethods” deals with the implementation of acontinuous quality improvement process, asapplied to every aspect of the organization

37




Volume 4 · Number 2 · 1996 · 35–42

and concludes with an informative list of themost common tools and techniques used.

The De Monfort University qualitysystem

The mission of the DMU is “to provide teach-ing, research and complementary servicesdelivered through a distributed universitywhich is internationally competitive, locallysensitive and everywhere excellent”. With thedissolution of the binary divide in highereducation, DMU realizes the significance forthe university to project the notion of “excel-lence” perceived of many of the “old universi-ties”, and to move away from the commonperception of “second rate” often attributedto the polytechnic “new university” sector.

In order effectively and efficiently to retainits competitive edge as the largest UKprovider of design higher education, theSchool (faculty) of Design and Manufactureat DMU completely reviewed and revisedtraditional teaching methods and courseswhich served well for 25 years but which wereno longer appropriate for the end of the twen-tieth century. Philip Sullivan, Executive Headof the School of Design and Manufacture,observed that, “Industry recognizes thatdesign can add more to gross margins thanany other production process, so this wayDMU can contribute to the economy as awhole” (Caulkin, 1994) “Teaching staffbecome 30 per cent more efficient with doublethe number of students”, and effectiveness ofthe revised course content was widely recog-nized by industry, students and other designfaculties (Sullivan, quoted in Caulkin, 1994).

‘…The question of priorities of financeversus quality is at the heart of heatedmanagement debate across the publicsector…’

Professor John Coyne, Executive Head ofLeicester Business School at DMU, echoesmany of these feelings. For him, the qualityissue to address was the higher participationrates in higher education, extending accessfrom a 12 per cent middle-class élite to 33 percent, which had profound implications forteaching and standards, despite hugeincreases in staff productivity. Notwithstand-ing this dilemma, Leicester Business School

achieved an excellence in rating for teachingin 1994 from the HEFCE.

The question of priorities of finance versusquality is at the heart of heated managementdebate across the public sector. Says Coyne:“Government must provide the bread andbutter for our basic mission, then it is up toexternal activities, such as consultancy, toprovide the jam. The worry is that the declin-ing income will take the butter off; then stu-dents may be left with just the crust”. On theother hand, if the Government has a soundfiscal policy towards higher education, thenquality is the major issue for HEI to resolve.

Service quality principles in HEIsOne very significant impact of educationalprinciples is change of focus from teaching toaction learning. Maria Montessori (Pascaleand Athos, 1981) has pointed out that thetraditional curriculum design is aiming atreducing the burden of teaching but restrict-ing the content. This problem, however, canbe solved effectively by adopting an actionlearning approach (Revans, 1983). Some ofMontessori’s research findings are importantfor achieving TQM in higher education.Examples are: modelling is better than words,demonstration is better than explanation,minimize instructions, and positive reinforce-ment is more effective than punishment.These themes can be built into curriculumdesign and teaching methodology. All acade-mic, research, administrative and supportstaff should be encouraged to adopt thisapproach as and when feasible.

Teaching service specificationsHEIs are accountable for the academicquality of teaching programmes. Specificationof teaching services is an essential base fromwhich to assess academic quality objectively.This may be achieved through the introduc-tion of teaching and learning plans, as used bythe School of Design and Manufacture atDMU, to provide a detailed service specifica-tion for every module offered. The objectiveof teaching and learning plans is to design andmanage teaching operations to maximizeeffectiveness and efficiency while maintainingquality and flexibility.

Service specification forms an integral partof the SERVQUAL conceptual model ofservice quality to measure tangible and intan-gible service elements advocated by Parasuraman et al. (1990). This model

38




Volume 4 · Number 2 · 1996 · 35–42

investigates discrepancies or “gaps” tohighlight target areas where quality may beimproved (see Figure 1). From the exampleused in the Figure, it can be seen thatalthough the customer’s expected service was A-B-C-D-E at the end of the five-gapchain, perceived service could be turned intoA-F-G-H-I instead! Examples for highereducation for the five gaps are given asfollows:• Gap 1: Customers’ expectations and man-

agement’s perceptions of customers’expectations – an example of this gap is oncourses requiring hands-on experience,such as computing and design, wherestudents may, erroneously, expect a greater

emphasis on practical and technical studyat the expense of academic rigour.

• Gap 2: management’s perceptions of cus-tomers’ expectations and service qualityspecifications – students’ ignorance andemployers’ particular focus may bias orlimit their expectations. As experiencedprofessionals, academic staff should have amajor role in designing and determiningthe format of the modules and courseswhich they deliver. In many instances, sucha gap may be desirable.

• Gap 3: Service quality specifications andservice delivery – in a modular system, it isnot uncommon for a module designed byone academic to be taught by other

39




Volume 4 · Number 2 · 1996 · 35–42

Figure 1 Service quality

Word-of-mouthcommunications Personnel needs Past experience

Expected serviceABCDE

Perceived serviceAFGHI

ServicedeliveryABFGH

Service qualityspecifications

ABCFG

Managementperceptions of

customer expectationsABCDF

Externalcommunications

to customersAFGHI

Gap 1

Gap 5

Gap 3

Gap 2

Gap 4

Customer

Serviceprovider

academic staff members who may applypersonal interpretation or focus of exper-tise to delivery of the specification. On theother hand, continuous improvement, as anew module is refined with experience,should be encouraged, with the specifica-tion regularly reviewed.

• Gap 4: Service delivery and external com-munications to customers – standardizedcomprehensive, two-way informal andformal feedback systems are necessary torecognize and minimize any such gapoccurring.

• Gap 5: Customers’ expectations and per-ceived service – for instance, students whoutilize laboratory, studio and workshopfacilities in periods of peak demand mayperceive that facilities are inadequatelyresourced whereas, in reality, facilitiesmight be operating at, say, 50 per centcapacity over the working week.

Additionally, HEIs have a multiplicity ofcustomer expectations and perceptions toconsider. Teaching and learning plans couldform the basis of quality specification usingParasuraman et al.’s (1990) conceptual model.Teaching and learning plans for each individ-ual module would specify the aims andobjects, purpose, credit value and modulelevel, weekly syllabus, delivery format, assess-ment format and reading list. The benefits ofservice specification are wide-reaching, and ofsignificant use to all stakeholders:(1) Students: As the main customer of the

service, students receive the followingbenefits:• Specification provides a detailed

breakdown of the aims and objectives,syllabus, reading list and assessmentformat of the module.

• Assessment of student performance innon-quantifiable modules has objec-tive criteria against which to measurestudent performance.

• Students know what to expect of theservice and can objectively perceivewhether the service has been deliveredin accordance with the specification.

• If students desire, parents may be morefully informed.

• If students desire, employers may bemore fully informed.

(2) Employers of graduates: The Charter forHigher Education (Department of Educa-tion, 1993) advocates that universities

should keep employers “fully informedabout their approach to teaching andlearning, particularly the way students aretaught transferable skills like problemsolving and effective communication”.

(3) Government bodies: Government bodiesare a major purchaser of the services ofHEIs, to which HEIs are accountable.Specification could increase the objectivi-ty of HEQC academic quality assessmentaudits.

(4) Franchise colleges: Specification provides ablueprint for staff for provision of anidentical service, and advantages forfranchise college stakeholders in accor-dance with university stakeholders.

(5) Exchange colleges: Specification can con-firm whether particular modules areequivalent substitute study for exchangestudents.

(6) Academic staff: Specification can be usedas a basis for determining teaching workload, as required by the unions andthe university. Course leaders and headsof department can have a clearer insightand constructive input into courses forwhich they are responsible.

(7) Management and administration: Specifica-tion allows more accurate costing andhence can determine whether modulesare feasible. An unfeasible module may beredrafted, knowingly subsidized, attract asupplement from the student or be sub-jected to “what if” computer-costingmodelling.

(8) Professional bodies and other educationalinstitutions: Specification will assist indetermining whether exemptions forfurther courses are appropriate.

A higher education TQM model ofexcellence (HETQMEX)

Summarizing the analysis above, a highereducation TQM model of excellence is devel-oped by the authors as shown in Figure 2. Bynow, the HETQMEX model is almost self-explanatory and can form the basis for ser-vices provided by TQM HEIs of the 1990sand beyond.

HETQMEX provides a step-by-stepimprovement opportunity for HEIs which arecommitted to improving customer satisfactionthrough TQM. Dependent on the stage ofquality development, particular HEIs canenter into any one of the seven stages. This is

40




Volume 4 · Number 2 · 1996 · 35–42

a gradual, ongoing, long-term rather than animmediate process, but worth the effort,resulting in sustained competitiveness. Satis-fying customers is a continuous processbecause their requirements change over time.Thus, the desirable way to achieve total cus-tomer satisfaction is through continuousimprovement via HETQMEX.

Recommendation for implementingHETQMEX

Based on this discussion, HEIs can embraceHETQMEX through a programme of train-ing and implementation. The HETQMEXtraining and implementation programme canbe termed total quality programme (TQP) foran organization and is a unique approach forHEIs, to achieve excellence through TQM.Where certain HEIs have covered some stagesof the model, they can tailor the programmeto suit their own needs.

In order to implement the above objectivesuccessfully, the process is as follows:• obtain top management commitment:

most important of all establish implemen-tation teams, including a quality steeringcommittee and quality improvementteams;

• assess the current quality system situationto identify all the existing good practices;

• create a documented implementation plan– good project management is essential;

• provide training so that staff are fully awareof the changes;

• create and update quality managementdocumentation (BS 5750 or equivalent);

• monitor progress as part of the Demingcycle (plan-do-check-act).

Conclusion

This article demonstrates the advantages ofTQM and how TQM can be effectively andefficiently applied in HEIs, as illustrated bythe higher education TQM excellence model(HETQMEX), based on fundamental con-cepts of service quality. Most HEIs concen-trate exclusively on students (and perhapsemployers) as customers but neglect thediversity of customers which TQM mustsatisfy. It also suggests commitment fromeveryone, competence and continuousimprovement in implementing TQM.

HETQMEX is built on rigorous researchand experience, emphasizing an understand-ing of customer needs, encompassing provenquality management techniques structured inan effective sequence. HETQMEX is basedon contemporary definitions and perceptionsof quality in general and service quality inparticular. An implementation plan has beensuggested for HEIs to work towards HET-QMEX; further research will be conducted tovalidate the model to establish it as a uniqueidentity for TQM in higher education.

References and further reading

BSI (1987), “ BS 5750/ISO 9000: 1987 a positive contribu-tion to better business, an executive guide”, BritishStandards Institution.

BSI (1992), “Guidance notes for the application of BS 5750to education and training”, British StandardsInstitution.

BSI (1993), ISO 9004-4: Quality Management and qualitysystem elements – guidelines for quality improve-ment, British Standard Institution.

41




Volume 4 · Number 2 · 1996 · 35–42

Figure 2 The HETQMEX model

Objective SERVQUAL

Operationsmanagement

Qualitymanagement

5-S

MEQC

QCC

ISO

TPM

TQM

5-SMEQCQCCISOTPMTQM

Seiri, seiton, seiso, seiketsu, shitsukeMarketing and education quality controlQuality control circlesISO 9000 seriesTotal preventive maintenanceTotal quality management

Key

Caulkin, S. (1994), “University challenged”, The Observer,Business section, 14 August, p. 6.

Chaston, I. (1994), “Are British universities in a position toconsider implementing TQM?”, Higher EducationQuarterly, Vol. 48 No. 2, April.

Crosby, P.B. (1979), Quality Is Free, McGraw-Hill, NewYork, NY.

Department of Education (1993), Charter for HigherEducation, DoE Leaflet, HMSO, London.

Department of Education and Science (1991), HigherEducation: A New Framework, DES, Cmnd 1541,HMSO, London.

Department of Trade and Industry (1989), “Managing intothe 90s: manufacturing”, DTI, HMSO, London.

Feigenbaum, A.V. (1991), Total Quality Control, (3rd ed.),McGraw Hill, New York, NY, pp. 5-6, 11-14.

Ho, S.K. (1994), “ISO 9000: the route to total qualitymanagement”, Quality World, March, pp. 157-63.

International Standards Organization (1986), ISO 8402:Quality Vocabulary, ISO, Switzerland.

Ishikawa, K. (1984), Quality Control Circles at Work -Cases from Japan's Manufacturing and ServiceSectors, Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo.

ISO (1993).

Juran, J.M. and Gryna, F.M. (1988), Quality Planning andAnalysis, Tata MacGraw-Hill, New Delhi, pp.126-8.

Kotler, P. (1987), Marketing for Non Profit Organizations,(2nd ed.), Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Kotler, P. and Fox, K. (1985), Strategic Marketing forEducational Institutions, Prentice Hall, EnglewoodCliffs, NJ.

Laza, R.W. and Wheaton P.L. (1990), “Recognizing thepitfalls of TQM”, Public Utilities Fortnightly,12 April.

MacDonald, J. and Piggott, J. (1990), Global Quality: TheNew Management Culture, Mercury, London.

Oakland, J.S. (1989), Total Quality Management,Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.

Osada, T. (1991), The 5-S: Five Keys to a Total QualityEnvironment, APO, Tokyo.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L. (1990), Deliver-ing Quality Service, Free Press, New York, NY.

Pascale, R.T. and Athos, A.G. (1981), The Art of JapaneseManagement, Simon & Schuster, New York, NY andHemel Hempstead.

Revans, R. (1983), ABC of Action Learning, Chartwell-BrattLtd, London and Bromley.

Senju, S. (1992), TQC and TPM, APO, Tokyo.

Tobin, L.M. (1990), “The new quality landscape: totalquality management”, Journal of System Management, Vol. 41, pp. 10-14.

Wayne, S.R. (1983), “Quality control circle and companywide quality control”, Quality Progress, October,pp. 14-17.

Wilkinson, A. and Witcher, B.J. (1991), “Fitness for use?Barriers to full TQM in the UK”, ManagementDecision, Vol. 29 No. 8, pp. 46-51.

Witcher, B.J. (1990), “Total marketing: total quality and themarketing concept”, The Quarterly Review ofMarketing, Winter, pp. 1-6.

42




Volume 4 · Number 2 · 1996 · 35–42

Documents

A higher education TQM excellence model: HETQMEX