Reframing the Organization: Why Implementing Total Quality Is Easier Said Than Done

Reger, Rhonda K.; Gustafson, Loren T.; Demarie, Samuel M.; Mullane, John V.

doi:10.5465/amr.1994.9412271815

Cited by 394 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In parallel, several authors share the view that successful implementation of QM requires a radical change (e.g. Dobyns and Crawford-Mason, 1991;Munroe-Faure and Munroe-Faure, 1992;Reger et al, 1994) resulting in a paradigm shift that may bring into question members' most basic assumptions about the nature of the organization (Blackburn and Rosen, 1993). According to this view, QM cannot simply be grafted onto existing management structures and systems, and may require the redesign of work, the redefinition of managerial roles, the redesign of organizational structures, the learning of new skills by employees at all levels, and the reorientation of organizational goals (Grant et al, 1994).…”

Section: Qm Implementation Process-how To Do Itmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality management re‐visited: a reflective review and agenda for future research

Sousa

Voss

2002

J of Ops Management

520

523

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality management (QM) has become an all‐pervasive management philosophy, finding its way into most sectors of today’s business society. After the initial hype and enthusiasm, it is time to take stock of the knowledge accumulated in what is now a mature field of study and look for directions to take the field further forward. This article reflects on the mass of literature in the field, synthesizing, organizing and structuring knowledge and offering suggestions for future research. It reviews QM research organized along five main themes: the definition of QM, the definition of product quality, the impact of QM on firm performance, QM in the context of management theory and the implementation of QM. The article draws on these themes to reflect on three questions which are fundamental to re‐visit and re‐appraise QM: (i) What is QM? (ii) Is the set of practices associated with QM valid as a whole? (iii) How to implement QM in a real business setting?

show abstract

Section: Qm Implementation Process-how To Do Itmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality management re‐visited: a reflective review and agenda for future research

Sousa

Voss

2002

J of Ops Management

520

523

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Having people make decisions that run contrary to their existing perceptions of their organization is difficult; large changes in identity are perceived as unattainable and small changes are perceived as irrelevant (Reger, Gustafon, Demarie & Mullane 1994). One way through this is by exploiting the principles of QP, as demonstrated in the explanation of the conjunction fallacy, that the conjunction of two events can increase the probability of making a decision in a given direction, because accepting a more probable event can facilitate the acceptance of a less probable one (assuming the two events are linked, in some way).…”

Section: Quantum Models and Organizational Decision Making 14mentioning

confidence: 97%

Insights from quantum cognitive models for organizational decision making.

White¹,

Pothos²,

Busemeyer³

2015

Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Please cite this article as: White, L. C., Pothos, E. M., and Busemeyer, J. R.,Insights from quantum cognitive models for organizational decision making, Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition (2014), http://dx. AbstractOrganizational decision making is often explored with theories from the heuristics and biases research program, which have demonstrated great value as descriptions of how people in organizations make decisions. Nevertheless, rational analysis and classical probability theory are still seen by many as the best accounts of how decisions should be made and classical probability theory is the preferred framework for cognitive modelling for many researchers. The focus of this work is quantum probability theory, an alternative probabilistic framework. Results in decision making, which appear paradoxical from a perspective of classical probability theory, may make perfect sense if one adopts quantum probability theory. We review some cognitive models of decision making based on quantum probability theory. Each of these models is based on a challenge to prescription from classical probability theory. The transition from labeling a particular behavior as irrational, by classical probability standards, to (potentially) rational (or, at any rate, not fallacious), raises interesting possibilities, including that of characterizing certain heuristics in formal, probabilistic terms.

show abstract

“…According to Reger, Gustafson, Demarie, and Mullane (1994), employees will not accept a change message if they believe it is unrealistic (high stress about the change) or unnecessary (high inertia to maintain the status quo). Section 4.2.1 discusses these dynamics at DevCo during the Silver PIP implementation.…”

Section: Limits Of Symbolic Compliance: Distant Benefits and Empty mentioning

confidence: 99%

It worked there, so it should work here: Sustaining change while improving product development processes

Collins

Browning

2019

J of Ops Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organizations operate under ongoing pressure to conduct product development (PD) in ways that reduce errors, improve product designs, and increase speed and efficiency. Often, managers are expected to respond to this pressure by implementing process improvement programs (PIPs) based on best practices elsewhere (e.g., in another part of their organization or in another industrial context). Successful PIP implementation depends on two criteria: (a) demonstrating (symbolic) success by meeting externally imposed deadlines and producing mandated artifacts and (b) sustaining the expected (substantive) changes in their employees' underlying beliefs and practices. Given the mixed success of PIPs in nonmanufacturing contexts, identifying factors that contribute to both symbolic and substantive implementation is important to both researchers and practitioners. We explore this challenge through an in‐depth field study at a PD company (DevCo) that implemented a PIP across its 11 PD projects. We examine DevCo's change message to implement the PIP, how DevCo's engineers experienced it, factors that impeded implementation, and factors that could improve substantive success. Along with this empirical evidence, we leverage organizational change concepts to facilitate effective PIP implementation in new contexts such as PD. We distill our findings into eight propositions that expand theory about effectively transferring PIPs across contexts.

show abstract

Reframing the Organization: Why Implementing Total Quality Is Easier Said Than Done

Cited by 394 publications

References 36 publications

Quality management re‐visited: a reflective review and agenda for future research

Quality management re‐visited: a reflective review and agenda for future research

Insights from quantum cognitive models for organizational decision making.

It worked there, so it should work here: Sustaining change while improving product development processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About