对TQM计划成功和失败的认识

Kevin J. Dooley, Richard F. Flor
{"title":"对TQM计划成功和失败的认识","authors":"Kevin J. Dooley,&nbsp;Richard F. Flor","doi":"10.1016/S1084-8568(99)80111-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Total quality management (TQM) initiatives are perceived to have had varying degrees of success over the past several years. We propose a model that helps explain why TQM initiatives are perceived to have succeeded or failed. The model revolves around the gap between perceived and expected results—the more perceived results match or exceed expected results, the more positive perceptions become. Perceived results are related to the effectiveness of TQM implementation, modified by observer bias due to limited rationality. Expected results are related to how TQM is “framed,” and to the perceived success that other, firms have had in implementing TQM. We, further posit that in the early 1990s, as TQM was beginning to gain widespread attention, many individuals began to develop negative perceptions regarding TQM. Individuals reacted to these negative perceptions by improving their implementation of TQM, reframing the meaning of TQM, and readjusting their evaluation of the success of other firms engaging in TQM. The case of Florida Power &amp; Light is used to illustrate this reframing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Quality Management","volume":"3 2","pages":"Pages 157-174"},"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)80111-4","citationCount":"33","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perceptions of success and failure in TQM initiatives\",\"authors\":\"Kevin J. Dooley,&nbsp;Richard F. Flor\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S1084-8568(99)80111-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Total quality management (TQM) initiatives are perceived to have had varying degrees of success over the past several years. We propose a model that helps explain why TQM initiatives are perceived to have succeeded or failed. The model revolves around the gap between perceived and expected results—the more perceived results match or exceed expected results, the more positive perceptions become. Perceived results are related to the effectiveness of TQM implementation, modified by observer bias due to limited rationality. Expected results are related to how TQM is “framed,” and to the perceived success that other, firms have had in implementing TQM. We, further posit that in the early 1990s, as TQM was beginning to gain widespread attention, many individuals began to develop negative perceptions regarding TQM. Individuals reacted to these negative perceptions by improving their implementation of TQM, reframing the meaning of TQM, and readjusting their evaluation of the success of other firms engaging in TQM. The case of Florida Power &amp; Light is used to illustrate this reframing.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100829,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Quality Management\",\"volume\":\"3 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 157-174\"},\"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)80111-4\",\"citationCount\":\"33\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Quality Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1084856899801114\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Quality Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1084856899801114","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 33

摘要

在过去的几年中,全面质量管理(TQM)计划被认为取得了不同程度的成功。我们提出了一个模型来帮助解释为什么TQM计划被认为是成功或失败的。这个模型围绕着感知结果和预期结果之间的差距——感知结果越符合或超过预期结果,感知就越积极。感知结果与TQM实施的有效性有关,由于有限的合理性而受到观察者偏差的修正。预期的结果与TQM的“框架”以及其他公司在实施TQM方面所取得的成功有关。我们进一步假设,在20世纪90年代初,随着全面质量管理开始获得广泛关注,许多人开始对全面质量管理产生负面看法。个人通过改善他们对TQM的实施,重新定义TQM的含义,以及重新调整他们对其他公司实施TQM的成功的评价来应对这些负面看法。佛罗里达电力公司一案;光被用来说明这种重构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Perceptions of success and failure in TQM initiatives

Total quality management (TQM) initiatives are perceived to have had varying degrees of success over the past several years. We propose a model that helps explain why TQM initiatives are perceived to have succeeded or failed. The model revolves around the gap between perceived and expected results—the more perceived results match or exceed expected results, the more positive perceptions become. Perceived results are related to the effectiveness of TQM implementation, modified by observer bias due to limited rationality. Expected results are related to how TQM is “framed,” and to the perceived success that other, firms have had in implementing TQM. We, further posit that in the early 1990s, as TQM was beginning to gain widespread attention, many individuals began to develop negative perceptions regarding TQM. Individuals reacted to these negative perceptions by improving their implementation of TQM, reframing the meaning of TQM, and readjusting their evaluation of the success of other firms engaging in TQM. The case of Florida Power & Light is used to illustrate this reframing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信