{"title":"A violation of assumptions about TQM: A response to Jauch and Orwig","authors":"Ralph F. Mullin, George W. Wilson","doi":"10.1016/S1084-8568(99)80118-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article responds to the Jauch and Orwig article in the Journal of Quality Management, volume 2, issue 2. We challenge Jauch and Orwig's premise that TQM should be rejected because it doesn't fit the current system of higher education. This premise implies that the current system is so effective that it need not be improved, and fails to explore the logical alterative of changing the current system to one that fits quality, philosophy and principles. Their arguments on (1) continuous improvement, (2) customer focus, and (3) management systems are critically examined. We recommend that academy scholarship focus on examining the underlying assumptions of our current “quantity” system, and systematic analysis of this system against a “quality” system model.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Quality Management","volume":"3 2","pages":"Pages 293-308"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1084-8568(99)80118-7","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Quality Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1084856899801187","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Abstract
This article responds to the Jauch and Orwig article in the Journal of Quality Management, volume 2, issue 2. We challenge Jauch and Orwig's premise that TQM should be rejected because it doesn't fit the current system of higher education. This premise implies that the current system is so effective that it need not be improved, and fails to explore the logical alterative of changing the current system to one that fits quality, philosophy and principles. Their arguments on (1) continuous improvement, (2) customer focus, and (3) management systems are critically examined. We recommend that academy scholarship focus on examining the underlying assumptions of our current “quantity” system, and systematic analysis of this system against a “quality” system model.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
