April 2000
Volume 7 • Number 2

Contents

Quality Managers and the Successful Management of Quality: An Insight

The importance of the quality manager in an organization has recently shown a significant increase. There are, however, very few comprehensive studies directed toward the functioning of these managers. Specifically, none was found dealing with the factors that enhanced or inhibited a quality manager’s ability to succeed. Therefore, the goal of this study is to identify those factors that would inhibit or enhance the ability of a quality manager to succeed in managing the quality function. Data collected from 193 firms in the United States are used to shed light on the issues of interest.

Appropriate tests were conducted to ensure the reliability and validity of the scales. The mean and standard deviation were utilized to determine the perceptions of the quality managers concerning the effect of the following factors on their success: career path, education, product diversity, organizational structure, tools and techniques utilized, program orientation, and ASQ affiliation. The findings of this study are expected to provide researchers and practitioners with additional insight on the management of quality in general and provide practicing managers with a better understanding of the factors that may enhance or inhibit their career.

Key words: factor analysis, quality management

by INJAZZ J. CHEN, CLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY, RONALD L. COCCARI, CLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY, KEN A. PAETSCH, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, ANTONY PAULRAJ, CLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY

INTRODUCTION

Meeting production schedules remained the paramount managerial goal from 1950 through 1980. The auto industry exemplified this concept as it relied on fixing production errors. Quality concerns were deemed in opposition to production goals. The importance of contributions, such as Juran’s Quality Control Handbook in 1951, Feigenbaum’s Total Quality Control in 1956, and Crosby’s zero defects concepts in the 1960s, was not well recognized during this period because quality and production were viewed as conflicting goals. The erosion of global market share that many U.S. manufacturers experienced, however, set the stage for the resurgence of quality. Production being paramount and an orientation of “caveat emptor” to continuous improvement and customer satisfaction indicate where U.S. manufacturers have been and where they are currently.

Prior to this resurgence in the importance of quality, the role of a quality manager in most cases was one of police officer. The importance of a quality manager in an organization has significantly increased since then. In spite of the proliferation of general research in the management of quality, there are very few comprehensive studies directed toward the functioning of a quality manager. With the exception of the Trought (1989) and Garvin (1988) studies, an extensive literature review did not identify research focusing on the quality manager. Specifically, none was found that dealt with factors that enhanced or inhibited a quality manager’s ability to succeed. Juran (1974) addresses a portion of this issue with a description of why quality managers fail. He states that they fail, among other reasons, because they have a preoccupation with conformance, an emphasis on technology versus business, and a preoccupation with departmental goals. Furthermore, they are unfamiliar with the culture into which they have moved. What is not provided is a further delineation of the “other” factors that cause failure and the converse issues of what leads to success. Simply stated, further research is needed to better understand the management of the quality function. Garvin (1988) states it in the following manner (p. 221).

If quality is to be managed, it must first be understood. It frequently points in the wrong direction or is otherwise incomplete. If managers are to succeed, they must first move aggressively to improve their understanding of quality practices and performance. They need to acquire more detailed information about... their own quality performance. Conscious experimentation may well be required to distinguish effective from ineffective practice.