Int. J.

Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

Quality tools and techniques: Are they necessary for

quality management?
Juan Jose! Tar!*, Vicente Sabater
Department of Business Management, University of Alicante, AP. Correos 99, Alicante 03080, Spain
Received 10 February 2003; accepted 21 October 2003

Abstract
Total quality management (TQM) has been developed around a number of critical factors. However, TQM is much
more than a number of critical factors; it also includes other components, such as tools and techniques for quality
improvement. In this paper, we carry out an empirical study in order to verify the importance of these tools and
techniques for TQM improvement and their effect upon TQM results. For this purpose, we use the answers provided by
the person in charge of quality in 106 ISO-certied rms in Spain.
r 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights
reserved.
Keywords: ISO 9000; Quality management; Quality tools

1. Introduction
The importance of total quality management
(TQM) has considerably increased over the last
years, on both a practical and theoretical level.
TQM has been developed around a number of
critical factors which vary from one author to
another, although the core factors are leadership,
quality planning, human resources management
(training, work teams, employee involvement,
etc.), process management, cooperation with
customers and suppliers, and continuous improvement. According to the literature, the elements of
TQM may be grouped into two dimensions: the
management system (leadership, planning, human
resources, etc.) and the technical system (TQM
tools and techniques) (Evans and Lindsay, 1999);
*Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +34-965903606.
E-mail address: jj.tari@ua.es (J.J. Tar!).
0925-5273/$ - see front matter r 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights
reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2003.10.018

or into the soft and hard parts (Wilkinson et al.,

1998).
Thus, TQM is much more than a number of
critical factors; it also includes other components,
such as tools and techniques for quality improvement (Hellsten and Klefsjo. , 2000). In fact,
techniques and tools are vital to support and
develop the quality improvement process (Bunney
and Dale, 1997; Stephens, 1997).
The critical factors of TQM are the elements
that may lead to satisfactory performance, as has
been proved by other studies (Saraph et al., 1989;
Badri et al., 1995; Powell, 1995; Ahire et al.,
1996; Adam et al., 1997; Hendricks and Singhal,
1997; Grandzol and Gershon, 1998; Quazi et al.,
1998; Das et al., 2000). However, on the one
hand, although the data show the existence of
connec- tions between the factors of TQM and
a rms performance, it cannot be strictly
proven
that
TQM
leads
to
increased

268

J.J. Tar!, V. Sabater / Int. J. Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

that such relationship exists (Powell, 1995) and

also that, as many respondents answered, quality
may inuence part of the rms performance. On
the other hand, in some cases, the impact of TQM
practices on a rms performance is weaker and
not always signicant (Sousa and Voss, 2002).
Thus, TQM does not always improve performance. In spite of its advantages (Sohal et al.,
1991; Kanji, 1998), we can also nd problems in
its implementation (Kanji, 1998). Firstly, in order
to have a positive performance in a rm, it is
necessary to develop its intangible resources
(Powell, 1995). Secondly, rms that implement
an effective TQM programme improve their
operating performance (Hendricks and Singhal,
1997). Thirdly, experience has shown that some
rms fail when they implement TQM (Boje and
Winsor, 1993; Spector and Beer, 1994) because the
implementation of TQM cannot be successful
without the use of suitable quality management
methods (Sitkin et al., 1994; Wilkinson et al.,
1998; Zhang, 2000) such as tools and techniques
for quality. According to this view, the
management system of TQM may only have a
positive effect on performance if a technical
system has also been established (Sousa and
Voss, 2002). In addition, these techniques,
amongst others, are
important for business
survival and continuation (Zackrisson et al.,
1995).
What has been missing from the literature is an
assessment of how quality tools have affected
TQM. In our opinion, the situation makes it
necessary to carry out an empirical study in order
to verify the importance of these tools and
techniques for TQM improvement and their effect
upon TQM results.
Our study analyzes the relationship between the
use of these techniques and tools for TQM
improvement and TQM itself, and will attempt
to check if those rms with a higher TQM level
(higher implementation of critical factors) and best
TQM results, do show a higher interest in the use
of these tools and techniques. For this purpose, we
use the answers provided by the person in charge
of quality in 106 ISO-certied rms in Spain. Our
results are part of a wider research process, aimed
at analyzing quality practices in certied rms by
using TQM elements, which identies the factors

and results of these rms, classies them and

establishes different TQM levels.
This paper will be structured as follows: in the
next section, a review is made of the literature, on
the one hand, concerning TQM results and critical
factors, and on the other, regarding the tools and
techniques for quality improvement. The
following section reects the methodology used
for this paper; this is followed by a presentation
and discussion of the results. A number of
conclusions will be suggested in the nal section.
2. Literature review
2.1. Critical factors of quality management
Quality management theory has been inuenced
by the contributions made by quality leaders
(Crosby, 1979; Deming, 1982; Ishikawa, 1985;
Juran, 1988; Feigenbaum, 1991). The research by
all these authors shows both strengths and
weaknesses, for none of them offers all the
solutions to the problems encountered by rms
(Dale, 1999), although some common issues can
be
observed, such as management leadership, training, employees participation, process management, planning and quality measures for
continuous improvement.
These ideas have exerted an inuence upon later
studies, in such a way that the literature on TQM
has progressively developed from these initial
contributions, identifying different elements for
effective quality management: customer-based
approach, leadership, quality planning, fact-based
management, continuous improvement, human
resource management (involvement of all
members in the rm, training, work teams,
communication systems), learning, process
management, coopera- tion with suppliers and
organizational awareness and concern for the
social and environmental context.
Alongside these studies, we may mention the
development of formal evaluation models, such as
the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award
model in the USA, the European Foundation for
Quality Management (EFQM) model in Europe
and the Deming Application Prize model in Japan.

J.J. Tar!, V. Sabater / Int. J. Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

269

Table 1
Empirical research of quality management
Authors

Purpose

Critical factors identied

Saraph et al. (1989)

Develop an instrument for measuring critical

factors of quality management
Develop an instrument based on empirical and
practitioner literature
Additional assessment of instrument proposed
by Saraph, Benson and Schroeder
Identify a set of critical factors of TQM
Identify constructs of TQM and develop
scales for measuring these constructs
Develop and test an instrument for use in
TQM research
Corroborate the results of the study developed
by Saraph, Benson and Schroeder
Develop a valid instrument for key dimensions
of quality management in the international
context

8 factors with 66 items

Flynn et al. (1994)

Badri et al. (1995)
Black and Porter (1995)
Ahire et al. (1996)
Grandzol and Gershon (1998)
Quazi et al. (1998)
Rao et al. (1999)

Although there are some differences between these

models, they have a number of common elements
(Ritchie and Dale, 2000). We should also quote
here a number of empirical studies leading to a
scale for TQM measurement (Table 1). These
constructs are all present in the framework used
for the national quality awards we have listed.
2.2. Tools and techniques for quality improvement
As pointed out above, according to the literature on TQM there are two components in a TQM
system: the management system and the technical
system, or the soft and hard part. The hard part
includes production and work process control
techniques, which ensure the correct functioning
of such processes (amongst others, process design,
the just in time philosophy, the ISO 9000 norm
and the seven basic quality control tools) (Evans
and Lindsay, 1999; Wilkinson et al., 1998). The
two dimensions reect all the issues which a
manager must bear in mind for a successful
TQM implementation.
and techniques for quality improvement. A
single tool is a device with a clear function, and is
usually applied on its own, whereas a technique
has a wider application and is understood as a
set of tools (McQuater et al., 1995). Thus,
Ishikawa

7 major dimensions with 48 items

8 factors with 66 items
10 factors with 32 items
12 factors with 50 items
7 exogenous factors with 39 items and
6 endogenous factors with 23 items
16 factors with 78 items
13 factors with 62 items

(1985) and McConnell (1989) have identied a list

of seven TQM tools: ow charts, cause and effect
diagrams, Pareto charts, histograms, run charts
and graphs, X bar and R control charts and scatter
diagrams. Also, Imai (1986), Dean and Evans
(1994), Goetsch and Davis (1997), Dale (1999),
and Evans and Lindsay (1999) have offered a list
of tools and techniques for quality improvement.
For their part, Dale and McQuater (1998) have
identied the tools and techniques most widely
used by rms, as shown in Table 2.
This review shows, on the one hand, that there
have been numerous studies analyzing the critical
factors for successful quality management implementation and its inuence upon performance
(Saraph et al., 1989; Powell, 1995; Hendricks and
Singhal, 1997), and on the other, which techniques
and tools might be best suited for quality
improvement. In this latter case, there is a major
gap in research in this area, because there are few
studies which have veried if the use of these
techniques and tools improves the TQM level and
if it has an inuence upon performance.
Thus, considering that: (a) an effective TQM
programme has positive effects upon operating
performance (Hendricks and Singhal, 1997), (b)
the use of these techniques and tools is vital to
support and develop the quality improvement
process (Hellsten and Klefsjo. , 2000; Bunney
and

270

J.J. Tar!, V. Sabater / Int. J. Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

Dale, 1997; Stephens, 1997) and (c) companies in

which these tools have been developed to a greater
extent are likewise the ones which have a greater
implementation of work practices, such as employee management, continuous improvement (work
teams, suggestion schemes, etc.) (Bayo-Moriones
and Merino-D!az, 2001), the following question
is
empirically researched in this study: do techniques
and tools have a positive effect upon a rms TQM
level and TQM results?
Answering the above question would help
managers to realize the importance of techniques
and tools in order to improve quality. The
hypotheses we have formulated are the following:
H1. TQM critical factors are positively related
to the tools and techniques for quality improvement.
H2. TQM results are positively related to the tools
and techniques for quality improvement.
These two hypotheses are tested by means of a
correlation analysis, the relationship being veried
in the two senses: a higher TQM level and higher
TQM results imply a greater use of these
techniques, and vice versa. In order to further
clarify the connections, the following hypotheses
are formulated, derived from the two previous
ones:
H3. Firms with a higher TQM level have implemented to a greater extent the tools and
techniques for quality improvement.
H4. Firms with better TQM results have implemented to a greater extent the tools and techniques
for quality improvement.

3. Methodology
3.1. Sample
In order to achieve our objective, and within the
wider analysis mentioned in the introduction, we
selected as the population for our study those rms

carrying out their activity in the Alicante area

(eastern Spain) which received the ISO 9000
certicate. Certied rms were chosen because
we were interested in rms with some kind of
quality system, for the following reasons: (a) these
rms had one person engaged, either full time or
part-time, in quality tasks and (b) these organizations would be rms which started their path
toward quality management by obtaining an ISO
9000 based system, and this is an objective
criterion guaranteeing that these rms do possess
a quality system. Also, the ISO 9000 quality
management system, like the excellence models,
is improving the understanding of concepts and
practices associated with TQM (Van der Wiele
et al., 2000) and implies compliance with certain
requirements of total quality, which may help to
understand the questions asked, and therefore, to
obtain adequate answers.
Thus, a list of certied rms in the Alicante
area was requested from the organizations in
charge of certication in Spain. Although the total
population (number of certicates) was 175, our
study only includes 154 cases for the following
reasons:
*

We eliminated two multinational consultancy

rms, which were not included in the study.
There were four rms with more than one
certicate for each of them (nine altogether),
and thus the number of answers received was
four.
It was detected in some cases that there were
various certied rms belonging to the same
group, and thus the person responsible for
quality issues was the same. This reduced a
total of 22 certicates to eight interviews (i.e.
eight answers).

In addition to this, it proved impossible to

obtain data from 12 rms, and hence the nal
population considered was 142. The number of
answers recorded was 108, which represents a
response percentage of 76.06%. However, two
answers were not regarded as valid due to
incomplete data; therefore, the number of cases
processed statistically with the SPSS software was
106 rms. The characteristics of these 106 rms
are shown in Table 3.

J.J. Tar!, V. Sabater / Int. J. Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

271

Table 2
Commonly used tools and techniques
The seven basic quality control tools

The seven management tools

Other tools

Techniques

Cause and effect diagram

Check sheet
Control chart
Graphs
Histogram
Pareto diagram
Scatter diagram

Afnity diagram
Arrow diagram
Matrix diagram
Matrix data analysis
method
Process decision
programme chart
Relations diagram
Systematic diagram

Brainstorming
Control plan
Flow chart

Benchmarking
Departmental purpose
analysis
Design of experiments
Failure mode and effects
analysis
Fault tree analysis
Poka yoke
Problem solving methodology
Quality costing
Quality function deployment
Quality improvement teams
Statistical process control

Force eld analysis

Questionnaire
Sampling

Table 3
Number of certied rms according to number of employees and number of rms per sector
Number of employees
Small

No. of rms
Total
Total (%)

Sector (SICStandard
Industrial Classication)
Medium

Large

o20

2049

5099

100250

>250

>500

17

17

27

24

13

34
32%

51
48%

One sample-related error is that caused by the

lack of response by some rms. Therefore, in
order
to verify if the lack of response was signicant, we
carried out a comparison between the rms that
did answer and those which did not. It was seen
that there were no signicant differences between
them regarding the variable size (p 0:697)
and sector (p 0:609). Also, the sampling error
was 74.9%.
3.2. Data collection
A questionnaire was designed meeting the
objectives that had been set. The process of
developing the questionnaire nished with a pilot
survey, which was used to modify and eliminate a
number of variables, until the nal questionnaire
was designed. Experts on the subject were consulted, to ensure that the questions were properly
phrased, and the suitability of the questionnaire
was tested on a sample of rms (Madu, 1998). In

21
20%

Total

Industry

Services

106
106
100%

63
59%

43
41%

this way, this test consisted in a rst revision of the

questionnaire (pre-test) with four people (an
academic, a small/medium rm manager and two
quality consultants), to ensure a suitable coverage
of the domain of each construct, and a second test
with the rst ten rms studied, selected at random,
which allowed us to modify and delete some
variables.
The data were collected by means of a structured personal interview, based on a closed
questionnaire, plus a set of open questions which
allowed us to clarify certain points. We decided to
combine the interview with the questionnaire and,
due to the need for personal interaction, the
participating rms were limited to the Alicante
area. Although this could place a limitation on any
generalizations, it must be considered that ISO
9000 offers a standard applicable to any rm,
region or country. However, ISO 9000 is a cultureindependent system: the standard is written in
general terms and may be applicable to any

272

J.J. Tar!, V. Sabater / Int. J. Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

organization, but each rm must adapt the

standard to its own characteristics. Nevertheless,
most obstacles, benets and other issues related to
ISO 9000 do not differ to any great degree from
one country to another (Ebrahimpour et al., 1997;
Withers and Ebrahimpour, 2001).
In this way, the process started with a pilot test,
which allowed us, as has been discussed before, to
modify the initial questionnaire; then we conducted the interviews with 108 rms that agreed to
participate. However, only 106 interviews were
considered because the other two, as has been
mentioned before, yielded incomplete data. The
questionnaire was answered by the persons in
charge of the quality area, for these reasons: (a)
these persons play an active role in the quality
strategy; (b) they possess the knowledge required
to answer the questionnaire, and given their
training and knowledge on the subject, considering
that these rms had quality systems, this would
allow a better understanding of the questions; and
(c) in similar studies, the key person to interview
is the quality manager.
3.3. Measures
By means of a number of measures we
attempted to nd out about the usual practices
of rms implementing quality systems. Our intention was to measure TQM (through the critical
factors), the results of quality management and the
use of tools and techniques of TQM.
Critical factors: By means of these measures we
intended to analyze the usual practice of those
rms implementing quality systems (ISO 9000)
through the factors of quality management. In
order to identify them, we started from the EFQM
model and a review of the literature. We selected
eight critical factors considering the enablers
dened by the EFQM model and a review of the
literature, dening the items from those xed in
that model and in the empirical work by Saraph
et al. (1989), Badri et al. (1995), Black and Porter
(1995), Powell (1995), Ahire et al. (1996), Grandzol and Gershon (1998) and Quazi et al. (1998).
Thirty-seven items were used in our nal questionnaire, grouped within these eight critical
factors. Each of these items was measured within

a 7-point scale (Table 4). Among these categories,

the learning factor is the same as the one used in
the work by Grandzol and Gershon (1998),
formed by its ve items.
Results of TQM: These questions are aimed at
discovering which effects quality has had upon
results. We measure the results of TQM considering the results of the EFQM model and the work
by Powell (1995) and Grandzol and Gershon
(1998). Our nal questionnaire contains 15 items,
measured within a 7-point scale, grouped into four
results (Table 5). We consider the customer
satisfaction factor used by Grandzol and Gershon
(1998) and the construct of the TQM programme
performance used by Powell (1995); however, in
both factors we have included in the nal
questionnaire one item less than in these studies,
such item being dropped in the pilot test.
Concerning the performance construct of TQM,
the effects of quality on such result may be
evaluated by examining unexpected changes in
nancial results, for example, in the ve years
following the onset of quality management, as
described in the nancial results published by
rms (Easton and Jarrell, 1998); or in a
subjective way, by measuring respondents
perceptions, these subjective measurements being
widely accepted in organizational research
(Powell, 1995), due to the difculty in identifying
and obtaining an objective measurement for
rms of different sizes and sectors (Saraph et al.,
1989). In our case, we chose the second option
instead of the sales turnover.
Techniques and tools: A question was asked in
order to study the most frequent techniques and
tools, by means of nominal qualitative variables.
We identied 12 tools and techniques, based on
the research by Ishikawa (1985), Imai (1986),
McConnell (1989), Dean and Evans (1994),
Goetsch and Davis (1997), Dale and McQuater
(1998), Dale (1999), and Evans and Lindsay
(1999). Thus, those responsible for quality were
asked whether they were not familiar with, were
familiar with, used or regarded as a basic tool any
of the following techniques and tools: graphs,
statistical process control (SPC), benchmarking,
quality costs, internal audits, failure mode and
effects analysis (FMEA), cause and effect
diagrams, Pareto diagrams, histograms, scatter

Table 4
Elements of the EFQM model and critical factors identied
Enablers (EFQM model)

Critical factors (Cronbachs

alpha)

No.
of
items

Source

Leadership

Leadership
(a 0:76)

Strategic quality management (Black and Porter)

Executive commitment (Powell)
Leadership (Grandzol and Gershon)
EFQM model

Policy and strategy

Quality planning
(a 0:77)

Role of divisional top management and quality police (Saraph, Benson and Schroeder)
Operational quality management (Black and Porter)
Corporate quality culture (Black and Porter)
Top management commitment (Ahire, Golhar and Waller)
EFQM model

People management

Employee management
(a 0:72)

Training (Saraph, Benson and Schroeder, Powell)

Employee relations (Saraph, Benson and Schroeder)
People and customer management (Black and Porter)
Employee empowerment (Ahire, Golhar and Waller)
Employee training (Ahire, Golhar and Waller)
EFQM model

Partnership and resources

Suppliers management

Supplier quality management (Saraph, Benson and Schroeder, Ahire, Golhar and Waller)
Supplier partnership (Black and Porter)
Closer to suppliers (Powell)
Internal/external cooperation (Grandzol and Gershon)
EFQM model

Processes

Customer focus
(a 0:54)

People and customer management (Black and Porter)

Customer satisfaction orientation (Black and Porter)
Closer to customer (Powell)
Customer focus (Ahire, Golhar and Waller, Grandzol and Gershon)
EFQM model

Process management
(a 0:63)

Continuous improvement
(a 0:76)

Process management (Saraph, Benson and Schroeder, Grandzol and Gershon)

Quality improvement measurement systems (Black and Porter)
EFQM model
Quality date and reporting (Saraph, Benson and Schroeder)
Teamwork structures for process improvement (Black and Porter)
Quality improvement measurement systems (Black and Porter)
Open organization (Powell)
Process improvement (Powell)
Continuous improvement (Grandzol and Gershon)
EFQM model
Learning (Grandzol and Gershon)

b
5
Learning
(a
0:82)
a
a 0:52: The minimum advisable level is 0.55 (Van de Ven and Ferry, 1979). Then, the alpha is recalculated after eliminating one item, in order to verify if the scale
improves. The new scale is based on two items (a 0:62).
b
Learning is not one of the ve enablers in the EFQM model. However, it is implied throughout the nine criteria of the model.

J.
J.
Ta
r!
,
V.
Sa
ba
te
r/
In
t.
J.
Pr
od
uc
tio
n
Ec
on
o
mi
cs
92
(2
0
0
4)

27
3

274

J.J. Tar!, V. Sabater / Int. J. Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

Table 5
Results of TQM
Results
(EFQM model)

Results

No. of items

Cronbachs alpha
a

Source

Customer satisfaction
People satisfaction

Customer satisfaction
Employee satisfaction

3
2

0.56

Impact on society
Business results

Impact on society
TQM performance

3
7

0.65
0.82

Grandzol and Gershon

Grandzol and Gershon
EFQM model
EFQM model
Powell

a
a 0:45: This value is low. However, we can accept it because the literature shows that there are signicant differences in this
coefcient, between using a two-category scale and more than two category scales (Churchill and Peter, 1984; Peterson, 1994).

ow charts and problem-solving methodology.

These nominal variables were transformed into
dichotomic ones (does not use/uses the tool
and technique) in order to obtain a summative
scale of the 12 tools and techniques. As the
measurement level in the original scale did not
allow the analyses we intended, we created a
summative scale, where 1 indicated the presence
of a characteristic (use) and 0 indicated the
absence of such characteristic (non-use). The new
summa- tive scale reects the presence or absence
of a characteristic in each of the items it
consists of. Thus, the value of the new scale is a
gure between 0 and 12 (in our case, between 1
and 12, because all the rms studied use internal
audits),
the
use which
of thereects
tools and techniques for quality
improvement.
4. Results
We shall divide this section into three subsections: (a) a descriptive analysis of the use of tools
and techniques; (b) differences among rms
according to size and sector; and (c) validation
of the four hypotheses.
The answers we received show that the most
widely used tools and techniques are, mainly,
audits and graphs. SPC and ow charts rank third
and fourth, but with a great difference compared
to the rst two instruments. The least used ones
are Pareto curves, cause-effect diagrams and
correlation diagrams (Table 6).
As expected, all rms carry out quality audits,
and 84% of them consider them fundamental for

the development of their systems; such high

percentage is due to the fact that this is a
requirement of ISO 9000. Similarly, only 18% of
rms do not use graphs and 48% have not
implemented SPC; however, the interviews
suggest a higher percentage because, although
we did mention that we were referring to the
use of control charts, the answers provided
show that many times respondents were
actually speaking about statistical data or
percentage tables (reect- ing, for instance,
defects or other quality-related issues), without
really applying SPC as we under- stand it. In
those rms using them, the employees collect
datafor example, concerning product refusal
and some manager (the person respon- sible
for production and/or quality) takes mea- sures
and prepares statistics with these data.
Concerning the graphs, they are usually periodic
reports on refused products, statistics, tables, etc.
Flow charts are used in 52% of cases, mostly in
the system documentation, as a method to describe
a specic process. After explaining to respondents
that our interest lied in the formal process, 46% of
them answered in the afrmative regarding the
problem-solving methodology. In this case, we
could see that some rms had a formal, written
problem-solving procedure different from the
methodology used to solve non-conformities.
Therefore, in practice, the ow charts are linked
with problem solving methods.
Regarding quality costs, they are evaluated by
45% of the rms, although very few follow the
procedure as described in the literature (prevention
costs, assessment, internal faults and external
faults), considering that 8% are starting to perform

J.J. Tar!, V. Sabater / Int. J. Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

275

Table 6
Techniques and tools of TQM
Techniques and tools

Internal audits
Graphics
SPC
Flow chart
Problem solving methodology
Quality costs
Histograms
Benchmarking
FMEA
Pareto diagrams
Cause and effect diagrams
Scatter diagram

Percentage of rms
Not familiar
with

Familiar
with

Not
implemented

Used

Regarded as
a basic tool

Implemented

0.0
2.8
10.4
17.9
21.7
12.3
27.4
21.7
40.6
40.6
31.1
46.3

0.0
16.0
37.7
30.2
32.1
42.5
36.8
46.3
34.0
35.8
47.2
37.7

0.0
18.8
48.1
48.1
53.8
54.8
64.2
68.0
74.6
76.4
78.3
84.0

16
62.3
39.6
42.5
42.5
35.8
31.1
31.1
20.8
17.9
19.8
15.1

84.0
18.9
12.3
9.4
3.8
9.4
4.7
0.9
4.6
5.7
1.9
0.9

100
81.2
51.9
51.9
46.2
45.2
35.8
32.0
25.4
23.6
21.7
16.0

these calculations. Thus, only three rms did

calculate the four categories of the total cost of
quality. The remaining rms only calculated the
costs of non-quality (faults), where they included,
amongst others, non-conformities, errors, complaints, goods returned, total or partial repetition
of orders, reprocessing, faulty parts, defects due to
refusal, lost time and persons involved; this
conrms the ndings of other studies (Rayner
and Porter, 1991). Therefore, the system ranges
from a simple calculation of non-conformities or
complaints to the calculation of all the categories
of quality costs as dened by the literature, the
most common case being a calculation of the cost
deriving from faults.
Concerning the other techniques, 32% of rms
carry out benchmarking activities, although the
interviews suggested that this was done in an
informal way; for instance, by analyzing products
manufactured by other rms. 25% of the rms use
FMEA; in fact, after the conversation with the
person in charge of quality, it was found that very
few rms use it, and therefore in practice the value
is even lower, since some of the respondents
associated it with the mere fact of reecting nonconformities. Histograms are used by 36% of the
rms, Pareto curves in 23% of the cases, causeeffect diagrams in 21% and correlation diagrams
in 16% of cases.

In general, the basic tools are those least used by

rms, with signicant differences regarding certain
tools and techniques depending on the type of
rm. In order to analyze the differences between
groups of rms (depending on size and sector), we
used a chi-square test, considering that each tool
and technique takes the values zero and one, as
mentioned in the methodology section (not implemented and implemented, respectively).
Thus, size results in signicant differences
concerning the use of tools and techniques such
as cause-effect diagrams, ow charts and problemsolving methods (po0:05), and weaker ones
concerning the benchmarking variable (po0:10).
In these cases, smaller rms use these four tools
and techniques to a lesser extent than larger-sized
rms. As regards the remaining tools and techniques, although no signicant differences can be
observed regarding use, it can be nevertheless
detected that small rms also use them to a lesser
extent, with the exception of histograms and
correlations, which are seldom used in all groups.
Regarding the sector (industry vs. tertiary
sector), differences can only be observed in quality
costs and ow charts, with a signicance level
lower than 0.05, and in the Pareto curve and
histograms, although accepting a signicance level
of less than 0.10. In this respect, industrial rms
usually resort more often to quality improvement

276

J.J. Tar!, V. Sabater / Int. J. Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

tools and techniques, except the problem-solving

methodology, which is practically the same in the
two groups.
After these two analyses, and in order to verify
Hypotheses 1 and 2, we performed a correlation
analysis between the TQM critical factors and the
TQM results and the tools and techniques for
quality improvement. For this purpose, we created
a variable equivalent to the average of the eight
critical factors, which we used as the TQM level
for a given rm (TQMF) and we created the
TQMR variable, as the average of the four TQM
results. Such procedure is similar to that used by
Powell (1995) and Mart!nez et al. (1998).
Similarly,
we developed the variable called TQMT, equivalent to the total of the 12 tools and techniques,
which was therefore a summative scale whose
maximum would be 12. Such procedure is similar
to that used by Bayo-Moriones and Merino-D!
az
(2001). The TQM factors taken together (TQMF)
correlate positively and signicantly with the use
of tools and techniques (TQMT), and similarly,
the TQM results (TQMR) correlate positively and
signicantly with TQMT, which conrms Hypotheses 1 and 2 (Table 7). This shows that, when
certied rms are more highly committed to a
joint implementation of TQM factors, they are
likely to use the tools and techniques to a
higher extent, which can in turn lead to
improved performance. The eight critical
factors are all signicantly related to TQMT,
except the leadership factor, which may
indicate that the management is not committed
enough to a wider usage of these tools and
techniques among the employees. A higher
commitment to each of the TQM factors may lead
the rm to use these tools and techniques to a
higher extent. This could be due to the fact that a
higher interest in TQM factors allows rms to
understand the need for these tools and techniques, which are often required to develop these
factors.
In order to verify Hypotheses 3 and 4, the
TQMF and TQMR variables were used. We
analyzed the existence of signicant differences
concerning the use of these tools and techniques in
rms with a higher or lower TQM level and in

Table 7
Correlation between critical factor-results of TQM and
techniques and tools
TQMT
TQMF
TQMR
Leadership
Employee management
Learning
Quality planning
Suppliers management
Customer focus
Process management
Continuous improvement

0.41a
0.40a
0.10
0.38a
0.21b
c
0.25
d
0.18
0.31a
0.33a
0.47a

po0:001:
b

po0:05:
c
po0:01:

Table 8
Normality test

Z (KolmogorovSmirnov)
Sig.
Mean
Median
Standard deviation
Group 1: weak TQM environment
Group 2: strong TQM environment

TQMF

TQMR

0.60
0.87
5.24
5.28
0.54
50 (47%)
56 (53%)

0.66
0.77
4.88
4.86
0.52
56 (53%)
50 (47%)

test, which allows us to use the average to

establish
two groups of rms. The average value of TQMF
is 5.24, which sets the boundary between those
rms with a value lower than this and those with a
value equal to or higher than 5.24. The two groups
express a higher or lower TQM level in the rms
studied. The same procedure is applied to the
TQMR variable (Table 8).
Table 9 shows that those rms with a higher
level of implementation of critical factors use the
TQM tools and techniques to a higher extent,
which has a positive inuence upon TQM results,
with signicant differences in both cases. Such
results conrm the previous statements, for a
higher TQM level means a wider use of quality

J.J. Tar!, V. Sabater / Int. J. Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

277

Table 9
Use of the tools and techniques in more and less TQM-advanced rms, and with more and less TQM performance (means) and
differences between the two groups
TQMF

TQMT
a
b

Weak TQM environment

Strong TQM environment

TQMR

Mean

Levenes test
F

T test
t

4.30
6.21

0.58

3.83

Mean

Levenes test
F

T test
t

4.63
6.08

0.54

2.83b

po0:001:
po0:01:

improvement tools and techniques, which in turn

allows rms to improve their TQM results.
Therefore, Hypotheses 3 and 4 are validated.

5. Discussion
The results indicate that TQM tools and
techniques are, alongside critical factors, another
important component of TQM, which emphasizes
their importance for the improvement of TQM
levels and results. Therefore, rms must develop
both the hard and the soft parts of TQM in order
to succeed. This may indicate that TQM is
effective, which may lead to market orientation
(Lai, 2003) and positive performance (Hendricks
and Singhal, 1997).
A positive correlation has been found between
these tools and techniques and the TQM level and
TQM results of rms, and also that those rms
with higher TQM levels and better results are
those which most widely apply TQM tools and
techniques. Therefore, these ndings indicate that
tools and techniques for quality improvement are
necessary for TQM to succeed; and the management should also consider these tools and techniques in order to advance towards total quality.
The results particularly seem to stress two aspects:

2. There is no signicant relationship between the

tools and techniques and the leadership factor.
In this respect, the most important factors in
the successful implementation of these techniques are full management support and commitment and giving the correct training to the right
people at the right time (McQuater et al., 1995;
Bunney and Dale, 1997).
Therefore, the two main weaknesses detected
in certied rms, which their managers must be
aware of if they desire to successfully implement quality programmes, are the limited use of
basic tools and the low managerial commitment
towards the usefulness of these tools. Thus,
managers must understand the importance of
their commitment in order to spread the use of
these tools and techniques and to improve the
TQM level and TQM results. However, tools
alone cannot provide results by themselves. They
must be developed to reect the rms culture
(Govers, 2001). Then, managers must use them in
an integrated way, connected with the critical
factors.
Once the management is aware of these two
weaknesses, the most important issues that must
be addressed for a successful implementation are
the following (McQuater et al., 1995; Bunney and
Dale, 1997):
*

1. All rms carry out quality audits, as part of the

ISO 9000 norm, and most of them use graphs.
However, few rms use the basic tools, which
is where most emphasis must be made by
man- agers.

Ensure managerial understanding of and commitment to these techniques and tools.

Training, which should be undertaken just in
time and given in such a way that employees
can practice what has been taught in a step-bystep manner.

278
*

J.J. Tar!, V. Sabater / Int. J. Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

Using a planned approach for the application

and use of tools and techniques. In these last
two cases, the results of Table 7 show how
personnel management (training, employee
recognition and communication) and quality
planning, correlate positively and signicantly
with the use of TQM tools and techniques.

Considering the results for this study, the

respondents opinions and our experience, we
believe that techniques and tools can contribute
to improving the level of TQM if a climate of
managerial commitment is created. This means
that techniques and tools are a reliable indicator of
a superior level of TQM and therefore, of a
superior performing company in terms of quality,
cost, etc.
Finally, concerning the characteristics of certied rms (size and sector), it can be observed that
there are signicant differences as regards the
TQMT variable. As a rule, in the secondary sector
TQM tools and techniques have a wider application (p 0:018), and smaller rms use the
TQM
tools and techniques to a lower extent (p
0:015).
Therefore, managers of small and service rms
should not forget the tools and techniques for
quality improvement as an important part of
TQM, and should not fail to encourage their use
by a higher number of employees. This applies
mostly to basic tools and techniques, which, as the
results of our study seem to indicate, are the least
6. Conclusions
The results show that there is a positive
correlation, on the one hand, between a rms
TQM level and the use of tools and techniques for
quality improvement, and on the other, between
TQM results and such tools and techniques. When
rms have a wider implementation of TQM
critical factors, they are more interested in the
usage of these tools and techniques, which may
improve their TQM results. These results are
applicable to certied rms in the Alicante area,
because there are no signicant differences
between those rms which
have
been
interviewed and those rms

which have not. In this respect, although the

results cannot be extrapolated statistically to other
rms in Spain or in Europe, a logical extrapolation
(i.e. a generalization based on qualitative criteria)
can be made, since the factors identied agree with
those established in the EFQM model and we have
identied commonly used tools and techniques.
Therefore, the use of tools and techniques for
quality improvement is necessary for quality
improvement and, although not included in ISO
9000 and frequently disregarded, it is an important
sign of TQM maturity, which managers must
implement in their rms in order to improve their
TQM level and results.
This means that many rms, when they begin
their rst steps towards TQM (ISO 9000) can use
few tools (audits, graphics), and they may even be
used only by quality managers or other managers.
When they improve their TQM level, they tend to
use other tools to a greater extent.
In addition, on the one hand, the weakness of
certied rms is a lack of support for and
commitment towards the use of tools and techniques for quality improvement, mainly regarding
the basic tools; on the other hand, it must also be
admitted that there are some companies that have
not beneted from and improved their performance by using these techniques and tools. The
solution can be found in a higher managerial
commitment, promoting their use among all the
employees, together with a planning and training
process covering teamwork methods and the use of
these tools and practices; this would increase the
rms TQM maturity level and its TQM results. In
other words, managers may encourage a higher
number of employees to use these techniques in a
way that benets the whole rm.
Perhaps the most interesting point of this study
lies in the fact that, having focused our attention
on a group of certied rms, we have had the
opportunity to offer empirical evidence about the
importance of techniques and tools of TQM in
the quality improvement process. Our work builds
on previous studies in this area, and complements
other research work which generally focused on
techniques and tools of TQM. However, it presents
new results evidencing the importance of these
techniques and tools for quality management,

J.J. Tar!, V. Sabater / Int. J. Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

and may be used by managers to discover the

potential benets of the use of quality tools and
techniques.
Finally, these contributions could be suitably
complemented by future research work in three
directions: studying these aspects in a larger rm
sample, analyzing case studies in order to verify
the use of these tools and techniques and studying
companies which use a range of quality methods
but are not certied.
References
Adam, E., Corbett, L., Flores, B., Harrison, N., Lee, T., Rho,
B., Ribera, J., Samson, D., Westbrook, R., 1997. An
international study of quality improvement approach and
rm performance. International Journal of Operations and
Production Management 9 (17), 842873.
Ahire, S.L., Golhar, D.Y., Waller, M.A., 1996. Development
and validation of TQM implementation constructs. Decision Sciences 27 (1), 2356.
Badri, M.A., Davis, D., Davis, D., 1995. A study of measuring
the critical factors of quality management. International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 12 (2), 3653.
Bayo-Moriones, A., Merino-D!az, J., 2001. Quality
management and high performance work practice: Do they coexist?
International Journal of Production Economics 73 (3),
251259.
Black, S.A., Porter, L.J., 1995. An empirical model for total
quality management. Total Quality Management 6 (2),
149164.
Boje, D.M., Winsor, R.D., 1993. The resurrection of Taylorism:
Total quality managements hidden agenda. Journal of
Organizational Change Management 6 (4), 5770.
Bunney, H.S., Dale, B.G., 1997. The implementation of quality
management tools and techniques: A study. The TQM
Magazine 9 (3), 183189.
Churchill, G.A., Peter, P., 1984. Research design effects on the
reliability of rating scales: a meta-analysis. Journal of
Marketing Research 21 (4), 98104.
Crosby, P.B., 1979. Quality is Free, the Art of Making Quality
Certain. Hodder & Stoughton, New York.
Dale, B.G., 1999. Managing Quality. Blackwell Publishers,
Oxford.
Dale, B.G., McQuater, R., 1998. Managing Business Improvement & Quality: Implementing Key Tools and Techniques.
Blackwell Business, Oxford.
Das, A., Handeld, R.B., Calantone, R.J., Ghosh, S., 2000. A
contingent view of quality managementthe impact of
international competition on quality. Decision Sciences 31
(3), 649690.
Dean, J.W., Evans, J.R., 1994. Total Quality, Management,
Organization and Strategy. West Publishing Company,
St. Paul, MN.

279

Deming, W.E., 1982. Quality, Productivity and Competitive

Position. MIT Center for Advanced Engineering, Cambridge, MA.
Easton, G.S., Jarrell, S.L., 1998. The effects of total quality
management on corporate performance, an empirical
investigation. Journal of Business 71 (2), 253307.
Ebrahimpour, M., Withers, B.E., Hikmet, N., 1997. Experiences of US- and foreign-owned rms: A new perspective
on ISO 9000 implementation. International Journal of
Produc- tion Research 35 (2), 569576.
Evans, J.R., Lindsay, W.M., 1999. The Management and Control
of Quality. South-Western College Publishing, Cincinnati, OH.
Feigenbaum, A.V., 1991. Total Quality Control. McGraw-Hill,
New York.
Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G., Sakakibara, S., 1994. A framework for quality management research and associated
measurement instrument. Journal of Operations Management 11 (4), 339366.
Goetsch, D.L., Davis, S.B., 1997. Introduction to Total
Quality, Quality Management for Production, Processing,
and Services. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Govers, C.P.M., 2001. QFD not just a tool but a way of
quality
management. International Journal of Production Economics 69 (2), 151159.
Grandzol, J.R., Gershon, M., 1998. A survey instrument for
standardizing TQM modelling research. International Journal of Quality Science 3 (1), 80105.
Hellsten, U., Klefsjo. , B., 2000. TQM as a management
system
consisting of values, techniques and tools. The TQM
Magazine 12 (4), 238244.
Hendricks, K., Singhal, V., 1997. Does implementing an
effective TQM program actually improve operating performance? Empirical evidence from rms that have won
quality awards. Management Science 43 (9), 12581274.
Imai, M., 1986. Kaizen, the Key to Japans Competitive
Success. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Ishikawa, K., 1985. What is Total Quality Control? The
Japanese Way. Prentice-Hall, London.
Juran, J.M., 1988. On Planning for Quality. Collier Macmillan,
London.
Kanji, G.K., 1998. An innovative approach to make ISO 9000
standards more effective. Total Quality Management 9 (1),
6778.
Lai, K.-H., 2003. Market orientation in quality-oriented
organizations and its impact on their performance. International Journal of Production Economics 84 (1), 1734.
Madu, C.N., 1998. An empirical assessment of quality, research
considerations. International Journal of Quality Science 3
(4), 348355.
Mart!nez, A.R., Gallego, A., Dale, B.G., 1998. Total
quality
management and company characteristics: An examination.
Quality Management Journal 5 (4), 5971.
McConnell, J., 1989. The Seven Tools of TQC, 3rd edition. The
Delaware Group, NSW.
McQuater, R.E., Scurr, C.H., Dale, B.G., Hillman, P.G., 1995.

280

J.J. Tar!, V. Sabater / Int. J. Production Economics 92 (2004) 267280

Peterson, R.A., 1994. A meta-analysis of cronbachs coefcient

alpha. Journal of Consumer Research 21 (2), 381391.
Powell, T.C., 1995. Total quality management as competitive
advantage, a review and empirical study. Strategic Management Journal 16 (1), 1537.
Quazi, H.A., Jemangin, J., Kit, L.W., Kian, C.L., 1998. Critical
factors in quality management and guidelines for selfassessment, the case of Singapore. Total Quality Management 9 (1), 3555.
Rao, S.S., Solis, L.E., Raghunathan, T.S., 1999. A framework
for international quality management research: Development and validation of a measurement instrument. Total
Quality Management 10 (7), 10471075.
Rayner, P., Porter, L.J., 1991. BS5750/ISO 9000The experience of small and medium sized rms. International Journal
of Quality & Reliability Management 8 (6), 1628.
Ritchie, L., Dale, B.G., 2000. Self-assessment using the
business excellence model: A study of practice and
process. Interna- tional Journal of Production Economics
66 (3), 241254.
Saraph, J.V., Benson, P.G., Schroeder, R.G., 1989. An
instrument for measuring the critical factors of quality
management. Decision Sciences 20 (4), 810829.
Sitkin, S.B., Sutcliffe, K.M., Schroeder, R.G., 1994. Distinguishing control from learning in total quality management,
a contingency perspective. Academy of Management Review 19 (3), 537564.
Sohal, A.S., Ramsay, L., Samson, D., 1991. Quality management practices in Australian industry. Total Quality
Management 3 (3), 283299.

Sousa, R., Voss, C.A., 2002. Quality management re-visited: A

reective review and agenda for future research. Journal of
Operations Management 20 (1), 91109.
Spector, B., Beer, M., 1994. Beyond TQM programmes.
Journal of Organizational Change Management 7 (2),
6370.
Stephens, B., 1997. Implementation of ISO 9000 or Fords Q1
award: Effects on organizational knowledge and application
of TQM principles and quality tools. The TQM Magazine 9
(3), 190200.
Van de Ven, A., Ferry, D., 1979. Measuring and Assessing
Organizations. Wiley, New York.
Van der Wiele, A., Dale, B.G., Williams, A.R.T., 2000. ISO
9000 series and excellence models: Fad to fashion to t.
Journal of General Management 25 (3), 5066.
Wilkinson, A., Redman, T., Snape, E., Marchington, M., 1998.
Managing With Total Quality Management: Theory and
Practice. MacMillan, London.
Withers, B.E., Ebrahimpour, M., 2001. Impacts of ISO 9000
registration on European rms: A case analysis. Integrated
Manufacturing Systems 12 (2), 139151.
Zackrisson, J., Franze! n, M., Melbin, M., Shahanavaz, H.,
1995.
Quality by a step-by-step program in low scale industries.
International Journal of Production Economics 41 (13),
419427.
Zhang, Z., 2000. Developing a model for quality management methods and evaluating their effects on business performance. Total Quality Management 11 (1),
129137.