19 PDF

International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management
25 years of quality management research – outlines and trends

Daniel Carnerud,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Daniel Carnerud, (2018) "25 years of quality management research – outlines and trends",
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 35 Issue: 1, pp.208-231, https://
doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-01-2017-0013
Permanent link to this document:
Downloaded by Universidad Nacional de Colombia At 09:38 23 May 2018 (PT)
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-01-2017-0013
Downloaded on: 23 May 2018, At: 09:38 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 108 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 484 times since 2018*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2015),"Quality management – history and trends", The TQM Journal, Vol. 27 Iss 3 pp. 281-293 <a
href="https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-11-2013-0125">https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-11-2013-0125</a>
(2018),"Total quality management: a critical literature review using Pareto analysis", International
Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 67 Iss 1 pp. 128-154 <a href="https://
doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-07-2016-0146">https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-07-2016-0146</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:506952 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0265-671X.htm
IJQRM QUALITY PAPER

35,1
25 years of quality management
research – outlines and trends
208 Daniel Carnerud
Department of Quality Technology and Management,
Received 6 February 2017 Mid Sweden University, Östersund, Sweden
Revised 1 August 2017
Accepted 29 September 2017
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore and describe how research on quality management (QM)
has evolved historically. The study includes the complete digital archive of three academic journals in the
field of QM. Thereby, a unique depiction of how the general outlines of the field as well as trends in research
topics have evolved through the years is presented.
Design/methodology/approach – The study applies cluster and probabilistic topic modeling to unstructured
data from The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, The TQM Journal and Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence. In addition, trend analysis using support vector machine is performed.
Findings – The study identifies six central, perpetual themes of QM research: control, costs, reliability and
failure; service quality; TQM – implementation and performance; ISO – certification, standards and systems;
Innovation, practices and learning and customers – research and product design. Additionally, historical
surges and shifts in research focus are recognized in the study. From these trends, a decrease in interest in
TQM and control of quality, costs and processes in favor of service quality, customer satisfaction, Six Sigma,
Lean and innovation can be noted during the past decade. The results validate previous findings.
Originality/value – Of the identified central themes, innovation, practices and learning appears not to have
been documented as a fundamental part of QM research in previous studies. Thus, this theme can be regarded
as a new perspective on QM research and thereby on QM.
Keywords TQM, Quality management, Text mining, Cluster modeling, Probabilistic topic modeling,
Quality movement
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
For a considerable period of time, quality has been at the center of management studies and
debates concerning theoretical as well as practical issues (Aune, 1999; Boaden, 1996, 1997;
Chiles and Choi, 2000; Dale et al., 2001; Dean and Bowen, 1994; Fisher and Nair, 2009;
Garvin, 1988; Kroslid, 1999; Miller, 1996; Rogberg, 2006; Sousa and Voss, 2002; Zairi, 1994).
Hence, it is fair to say that defining, delimiting and describing the essence of quality and its
various incarnations in the field of management studies has fascinated scholars for years.
Indeed, Perla and Parry (2011) and Schoengrund (1996) would argue that this fascination
has continued for centuries. During recent decades, many different quality-related topics
have appeared in theory as well as in practice, such as: quality control (QC), total quality
control, company-wide quality control, zero quality control, quality improvement,
quality management (QM), total quality, total quality management (TQM) and business
excellence (BE) (Bergman and Klefsjö, 2010; Dahlgaard et al., 2007; Dale et al., 2007;
Oakland, 2014). Additionally, with the aim of underlining the shared origins and values of
the topics, all-inclusive descriptions such as the quality movement and quality revolution
are also present (Dahlgaard-Park, 1999, 2011; Senge, 1992; Winter, 1994). The multitude of
terminologies would perhaps not pose such a dilemma if it was simply a question of a
number of synonyms, however, as Klefsjö et al. (2008) elegantly summarize the issue – do we
International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management really agree on what we are talking about and does it matter? Barley and Kunda (1992),
Vol. 35 No. 1, 2018
pp. 208-231
Giroux and Landry (1998), Xu (2000) and Zbaracki (1998) would most probably agree with
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0265-671X
Klefsjö et al. (2008) that terminologies and rhetoric do matter and that they influence the
DOI 10.1108/IJQRM-01-2017-0013 evolution and development of academic fields and communities.
In recent years, scholars have noted that the interest in quality-specific topics seems to have Quality
decreased on account of other up-and-coming management research topics such as BE, management
Six Sigma and Lean (Andersson et al., 2006; Dale et al., 2000; Dahlgaard and Dahlgaard-Park, research
2006; Foley, 2001). The emergence of these new, distinctive and sometimes competing
management perspectives and initiatives has added new fuel to the existing debate regarding
specific quality-related occurrences being possible fads or fashions (Abrahamson and
Eisenman, 2008; Abrahamson and Fairchild, 1999; Bergquist et al., 2012; Brown, 2013; Hackman 209
and Wageman, 1995; Rahman, 2004; Singh and Smith, 2006; Van Der Wiele et al., 2000).
Consequently, fundamental issues regarding the research field and its evolution can be
said to be as relevant as ever before.
In an attempt to investigate the issue of changes in QM research throughout the years
and its current outlooks, Lo and Chai (2012) apply quantitative methods on bibliometric
data. A quantitative approach is advocated since the only, or to the best of their knowledge
predominant, method of analyzing QM research and its transformations through the years
seems to be a qualitative one (Lo and Chai, 2012). Not discarding valuable insights gained
from previous studies, Lo and Chai (2012) nonetheless see a value in complementary
quantitative approaches which might help to discover and describe novel patterns and
perspectives previously omitted. Reflecting on the results of their study, Lo and Chai (2012)
conclude that quantitative analysis coupled with qualitative evaluations of core results does
indeed generate noteworthy perspectives relevant to the concepts and assumptions
investigated. Hence, they suggest additional studies based on quantitative methodology,
emphasizing comparative studies of academic journals within the field as a way of
broadening the view and understanding of QM (Lo and Chai, 2012). This study responds to
this request from Lo and Chai (2012) and applies text mining processes to explore and
describe how QM research has evolved over 25 years in three scientific journals.
Background
Over the last few decades, data mining has been used frequently within business
intelligence (BI), and text mining is now expanding as a method to extract knowledge
(Carneiro Moro et al., 2014; Chakrabarti, 2003; Kent, 2014). Text mining and data mining
share the same purpose: to look for valuable patterns, correlations and trends in large data
sets with the help of statistical and mathematical techniques; a process too complex and
resource-demanding for manual processing (Aggarwal and Zhai, 2012a, b; Liu, 2011).
Not surprisingly, text mining is increasingly used in quality and business development and
new areas of application are being continuously developed and tested in theory as well as in
practice (Choudhary et al., 2009; Finch, 1999; Heim and Field, 2007; Kent, 2014;
Khamis et al., 2013; Köksal et al., 2011; Lo, 2008).
Research on QM literature with the aim of identifying changes over time has been
undertaken previously (Ahire et al., 1995; Gupta et al., 2014; Rahman and Sohal, 2002; Sila and
Ebrahimpour, 2002; Zain et al., 2001). Martínez-Lorente et al. (1998) note that the term TQM
started to become popular in the mid-1980s, but that the elements that shaped it were actually
developed during the 1950s-1970s. Dereli et al. (2011) conclude that QM has started to attract an
increasing amount of interest from the service industry during the last decade. Furthermore,
they distinguish an interest in ISO and quality certifications in the literature and ask for further
studies which identify their distribution over the years (Dereli et al., 2011). Lo and Chai (2012)
establish that QM research has evolved around customer satisfaction, implementation of TQM,
monitoring quality cost, measuring service quality and studying TQM outcomes. Core research
themes from which succeeding themes have sprung are found to be service quality,
customer satisfaction and TQM framework identification (Lo and Chai, 2012). Furthermore,
conceptual developments are noticed; from an initial focus on statistical control, a gradual shift
has taken place toward strategic aspects such as improving general and key business
IJQRM processes (Lo and Chai, 2012). Subsequently, recent developments in TQM consist of a shift
35,1 toward providing quality service and measuring its success (Lo and Chai, 2012).
Dahlgaard-Park et al. (2013) determine that the total number of articles in the field of TQM
has been decreasing after having reached its peak in 1995. Whereas, the number of
papers focusing on techniques and tools within the QM framework in terms of Lean,
Just-in-Time/Toyota Productions System, Benchmarking and Six Sigma has been increasing
210 (Dahlgaard-Park et al., 2013). Additionally, papers focusing on core values/key principles
regarding the need to build a quality culture in terms of leadership, people-based management,
continuous improvement, management based on facts, and focus on the customer have slightly
increased during the last decade. Dahlgaard-Park et al. (2013) conclude that their findings
establish that QM is now at a more mature stage, where focus has shifted from tools,
techniques and core values which are needed for building a quality and BE culture.
Furthermore, Dahlgaard-Park et al. (2013) find that organizational culture is becoming
increasingly important for organizations in the pursuit of quality and excellence. With the
exception of Lo and Chai (2012), the studies are mainly literature reviews conducted through a
qualitative approach, with the methods of Dereli et al. (2011) and Martínez-Lorente et al. (1998)
balancing in-between. Moreover, as noted by Dahlgaard-Park et al. (2013), both Lo and Chai
(2012) and Dereli et al. (2011) are based on the same study object, Total Quality Management
and Business Excellence (TQMBE), and both studies together cover a period of only 15 years
(1995-2008 and 1996-2010). With the aim of extending the scope of years studied as well as
academic journals included, Dahlgaard-Park et al. (2013) incorporate literature from 25 years
(1987-2011) from ABI/INFORM Complete periodical database containing more than 6,800
academic journals. Nevertheless, they still fall back on qualitative methodology and literature
reviews. Consequently, the gap for quantitative studies on QM literature over a longer time
period, including more journals than TQMBE, remains open. With the aim of bridging this gap
to some extent, this study includes 25 years of data from TQMBE as well as The International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management (IJQRM) and The TQM Journal (TQMJ ).
Materials and methods

Data mining process
Within the field of text- and data mining, a Cross Industry Standard Process for Data
Mining (CRISP-DM) has been developed consisting of six phases: business understanding,
data understanding, data preparation, modeling, evaluation and deployment (Wirth and
Hipp, 2000). This study has been conducted according to the CRISP-DM standard and an
overview of the work process is described below and visualized in Figure 1.
Business understanding includes definition of the study objectives; formulation of the
problem; and formation of the strategy to tackle the problem (Wirth and Hipp, 2000).
The purpose of this study was to explore and describe how research on QM has evolved
historically through the application of text mining methodology on the digital archives of
scientific journals in the field. One core strategy for achieving the purpose was to follow in
the footsteps of Lo and Chai (2012) and Dereli et al. (2011), and collect a data set in which a
minimum amount of screening of data was performed. It was believed that such an
approach would facilitate comparison and validation of results as well as offer a relevant
way to explore and describe QM’s historical development.
Understanding data refers to the collection and initial exploration and evaluation of the
data allowing for possible changes in scope and strategy (Marbán et al., 2009). The following
points guided the search for scientific journals from which data could be collected:
• QM or TQM had to be in the title;
• The purpose of the journal should be to present a broad scope of QM research;
• Journals with a long publication history were prioritized;
• Compile list of potential data sources
Quality
• Apply case selection criteria
• Collect data from selected cases:
management
• IJQRM
• TQMJ
research
• TQMBE
Business Data
understanding understanding • Data cleaning (detect, correct or remove inaccurate records)
• Select variables for modeling:
• Research paper abstract
• Year of publication
211
• Scientific journal
Data
• Set up database with selected variables
preparation
Deployment
Data Modeling
• Cluster modeling
• Full period of time
• Intervals of five years
• Time series analysis Figure 1.
The CRISP-DM
Evaluation process (Wirth and
Hipp, 2000) with
• Probabilistic topic modeling on results from cluster summary of key
modeling
• Analysis and interpretation of topic modeling results
actions performed
in the study
• The journals had to be peer-reviewed;

• Source normalized impact per paper (SNIP), impact per publication (IPP) and
SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) had to be available and acceptable for each journal;
• The database structure had to allow large-scale data collection; and
• The journals should, if possible, be distributed by different publishing houses.
Assessment of scientific journals according to the above stated guidelines singled out IJQRM,
TQMJ and TQMBE as suitable objects for the purpose of the study. The three journals were
judged to have a broad enough scope on QM so that specific niches did not distort the
representation, with IJQRM and TQMBE as borderline cases since they emphasize reliability
management and BE, respectively. However, IJQRM had the most extensive digital archive
accessible, which indicated that the journal was an early adopter and conveyor of QM
research giving it a unique position vs other journals in the field. Whereas, TQMBE was
originally published under the name TQM, adding BE to the title in 2003, signaling that TQM
was its main domain. Satisfactory SNIP, IPP and SJR values were available and stable for all
three journals, with TQMBE having a unique position vs the two other journals as it also had
impact factor (IF) obtainable. Furthermore, IJQRM and TQMJ were published by the Emerald
Group, whereas, TQMBE was from the Taylor & Francis Group. Also, testing showed it was
possible to collect data from the three scientific journals (rendered data set described in more
detail under data source). Last but not least, Lo and Chai (2012) highlight TQMJ as an
appropriate source for potential comparison studies and identify IJQRM as one of the journals
which has been cited most. Preparing data includes cleansing the data of distorting
information and values as well as narrowing down the elements and variables to be included
and processed (Kurgan and Musilek, 2006). Data available from IJQRM, TQMJ and TQMBE
were: year of publication, author(s), title, abstract, keywords and type of publication
(e.g. research paper, book review, editorial, etc.). Collecting and studying journal abstracts is
common in text mining (Feldman and Sanger, 2007). The purpose of abstracts is to summarize
the main points of a research paper and they are generally accessible online free of charge,
IJQRM hence, database creation consisting of research paper abstracts offers a cost-efficient approach
35,1 for researchers interested in the specific kind of studies (Delen and Crossland, 2008). Usage of
keywords is also an alternative approach, however, it is seen as a less reliable data source
since researchers are relatively free to choose keywords; consequently, there is a risk of
adding keywords that help index the research paper rather than give it an accurate
classification (Miner, 2012). Consequently, research paper abstract, year of publication and
212 scientific journal were selected as variables for the study. A subsequent step was to isolate the
research paper abstracts from other journal content such as book reviews, editorials and
errata. As the strategy was to collect and organize a database with a minimum amount of
screening, no other profiling or labeling of data was conducted.
The modeling phase concerns the choice and calibration of methods to analyze the data
(Reinartz, 2002). Cluster analysis was chosen as the principal method of data analysis
(lengthier description found under Cluster analysis) and is visualized in Figure 2. As illustrated
in Figure 2, the key operator, besides the assistant operators selecting attributes, reading from
and writing to Excel, is process documents from data. Via this operation, a word vector is
generated, which is needed to perform cluster modeling (as well as probabilistic topic modeling).
In order to generate a word vector, conventional sub operations are required, such as
transforming all cases into either lower or upper case (transform cases), tokenizing, filtering stop
words and filtering tokens, visualized in Figure 3 (Weiss et al., 2012).
In order to create a word vector, it is also necessary to select an underlying scheme for the
vector (Weiss et al., 2012). Examples of such schemes are term frequency, term occurrences
and term frequency-inverse document frequency (tf-idf) (Weiss et al., 2012). According to
Weiss et al. (2012), tf-idf is a well-known method of classifying words according to their
relative importance in a data set.
Hence, tf-idf was chosen as classification scheme for the cluster modeling sessions.
In order to obtain an overall view as well as a more delimited perspective on specific time
periods, cluster modeling was carried out both on the extensive data set and on demarcated
phases in time. Since TQMBE started publishing in 1990, this year was chosen as the
baseline for all modeling activities. As the data set then covered 25 years, intervals of five
years were considered suitable as they gave some room for changes between each interval.
The time periods thus became: 1990-1994, 1995-1999, 2000-2004, 2005-2009 and 2010-2014.
Additionally, time series analysis was assessed to give a valuable insight on the overall data
set as it offers a way to study data from a longitudinal perspective (Chakrabarti, 2003;
Djurfeldt and Barmark, 2010). Hence, trend analysis using support vector machine and
moving average on each journal’s full publications track record as well as on the entire, joint,
data set was carried out.
Process
Figure 2. Clustering
Read excel Process documents...
The study’s text inp fil out wor exa exa clu res
mining process set up exa wor clu Select attributes Write excel
res
in RapidMiner exa exa inp thr

res
Studios ori fil
Figure 3.
The sub operations
for word vector
generation performed Process documents from data
in RapidMiner doc
Transform cases (2) Tokenize (2) Filter stopwords (2) Filter tokens (2)
doc
doc doc doc doc doc doc
Studios doc doc
doc
Evaluation of the modeling means results are secured and compared with the objectives of Quality
the study (Mariscal et al., 2010). In this study, probabilistic topic modeling was selected management
as the principal method for the evaluation and interpretation of the cluster modeling results research
(lengthier description found under probabilistic topic modeling).
Deployment relates to the objectives of the study and ensures that the results are applied
accordingly (Mariscal et al., 2010). The discussion and conclusions in this study are
considered to correspond to the deployment phase of CRISP-DM. 213
Data source
The data source of the study consists of research paper abstracts from three scientific
journals focusing on QM:
• IJQRM
• TQMJ
• TQMBE
The online catalogue of IJQRM starts in 1984. In 1998, the International Journal of Quality
Science merged into IJQRM. TQMJ has been online since 2008 but its predecessor, The TQM
Magazine, started publishing online in 1988. In 1998, Training for Quality merged into
The TQM Magazine. TQMBE was established in 1990 under the name TQM and has been
online from the start. In 2003, BE was added to the title rendering its current name.
During 1990-2014, a total of 4,227 research papers with corresponding abstracts were
published: IJQRM 1,336 papers, TQMJ 1,271 papers and TQMBE 1,620 papers. As data for
each journal’s total publication history was gathered, this was used for time series analysis,
consisting of a total of 4,412 papers with corresponding abstracts; IJQRM 1,475 papers,
TQMJ 1,317 papers and TQMBE 1,620 papers.
An excerpt of SNIP, IPP and SJR values between 2011 and 2014 is shown in Table I,
which supports the notion of all three journals being recognized and reliable resources of
the QM academic community. According to Lo and Chai (2012), TQMBE represents a
global and unbiased perspective on QM as more than 50 percent of its content originated
from authors outside of the UK. Dereli et al. (2011) find that 24 percent of the authors
originate from the UK, which supports the claim of Lo and Chai (2012). However, the
findings of Dereli et al. (2011) also show that 41 percent of TQMBE authors originate from
Europe, which could indicate a bias toward Europe. This line of argument could also find
support in the results of Lo and Chai (2012) as the UK, Europe (Continental) and
Scandinavia are presented and treated as different entities instead of one shared, in which
case they would also add up to approximately 40 percent. Additionally, the findings of
Dereli et al. (2011) show that 50 percent of the authors in TQMBE originate from
English-speaking countries which could indicate a partiality in favor of the English-
speaking world. No bibliometric studies could be found regarding IJQRM and TQMJ,
hence, it is possible that the journals are biased and represent regional rather than
international perspectives on QM.
SNIP IPP SJR SNIP IPP SJR SNIP IPP SJR SNIP IPP SJR
Title 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 Table I.
SNIP, IPP and SJR
IJQRM 1.072 1.39 0.631 1.207 1.463 0.712 1.43 1.299 0.613 1.32 1.415 0.669 scores for IJQRM,
TQMJ 1.07 1.131 0.504 1.086 1.254 0.637 1.045 1.312 0.681 1.096 0.984 0.415 TQMJ and TQMBE
TQMBE 0.923 0.978 0.518 1.054 1.301 0.562 1.393 1.701 0.54 1.157 1.718 0.525 2011-2014
IJQRM Cluster analysis
35,1 Cluster analysis is a collection of multivariate techniques whose main goal is to group data
based on its inherent characteristics (Kaufman and Rousseeuw, 2009). Cluster analysis
should primarily be seen as an exploratory and descriptive technique since results are
highly dependent on the specific variables used in the data set and clusters will always be
formed regardless of the existence of any actual structure in the data (Hair et al., 2014).
214 As the purpose of the study was both exploratory and descriptive, cluster analysis was
chosen as the principal method of analysis.
Even though several clustering algorithms exist, k-means clustering algorithms
dominate in that they are often used as a synonym for clustering algorithms all together
(Wu, 2012). The issue of choosing the optimal k-Means algorithm depends on the data at
hand as well as which algorithms are available in the software package used (Arthur and
Vassilvitskii, 2007; Jain, 2010; Stuti and Veenu, 2013). RapidMinerStudio® was used for
cluster modeling; and experimentation revealed that using Squared Euclidean Distance as a
divergence measure with Bregman divergences as a measure gave stable results.
One of the critical issues to decide upon when applying cluster modeling is choosing an
appropriate stopping rule to determine which number of clusters best represents the data
structure (Child, 2006). There is no standard objective selection process for choosing stopping
rules; in addition, the specific theoretical and practical research situation needs to be taken into
consideration as important conceptual issues may lie embedded in the data, e.g. manageability
and communicability (Hair et al., 2014). Modeling started on the overall data set and was
stopped at seven clusters as additional clusters only resulted in the creation of new extremely
small clusters and no overall changes in results, see Table II. For analytic and comparability
purposes, in the following modeling sequences, the number of clusters was kept to seven.
In cluster analysis, there is no single method for validating, evaluating and labeling
clusters (Aggarwal and Zhai, 2012a, b). This troubling fact is even more of a concern when it
comes to evaluation of unstructured data (text) as this is still a relatively novel area of
research and classical processes for validating structured data (numbers) are not applicable
(Larose, 2005; Miner, 2012). However, one automated procedure on the rise for this purpose
is probabilistic topic modeling (Blei, 2012; Mimno, 2012; Meeks and Weingart, 2012).
Probabilistic topic modeling

Probabilistic topic modeling encompasses several associated methods that group words into
topics on the basis of their most probable association (Aggarwal and Zhai, 2012a, b;
Newman et al., 2009; Welling et al., 2008; Xie and Xing, 2013). Although it is a relatively new
method, topic models are generally considered to be a fast and effective way to identify and
portray the most frequently occurring and probable themes and subjects in unstructured
data sets (Blei et al., 2003; Steyvers and Griffiths, 2007). Figure 4 illustrates, in simplified
terms, how topic models operate and are applied in the study. Figure 4 also shows how
words in research paper abstracts are identified and organized into topics according to the
probability of word association. Further information on how the results display and were
analyzed is given below and in Figure 5.
One well-tested and conventional distributed algorithm for probabilistic topic modeling
is the Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) (Blei et al., 2003). As LDA is well documented and
available through the R® topic modeling package (https://cran.r-project.org/), it was chosen
for topic modeling in this study. As opposed to cluster modeling, in probabilistic topic
modeling, the tf-idf formula is incompatible for word vector creation as every word is
assigned a probability for every topic (Blei and Lafferty, 2009). In its place, term frequency
is the principal method for generating word vectors (Blei and Lafferty, 2009). Consequently,
term frequency was selected as the word vector scheme for the probabilistic topic modeling
sessions. After testing, it was decided that a topic model containing five topics would be
7 clusters Cluster 5 Cluster 5.0 Cluster 5.4

7 clusters (% of total) Cluster 5 Cluster 5 (%) (% of total) Cluster 5.0 Cluster 5.0 (%) (% of total) Cluster 5.4 Cluster 5.4 (%) (% of total)
Cluster 0 637 15 685 31 16 42 6 1 156 19 4

Cluster 1 98 2 165 7 4 92 13 2 73 9 2
Cluster 2 431 10 46 2 1 98 14 2 169 21 4
Cluster 3 519 12 44 2 1 18 3 0 86 10 2
Cluster 4 76 2 824 37 19 77 11 2 110 13 3
Cluster 5 2,207 52 159 7 4 214 31 5 73 9 2
Cluster 6 259 6 284 13 7 144 21 3 157 19 4
Total 4,227 100 2,207 100 52 685 100 16 824 100 19
research
Quality
215
management
Results from
abstracts 1990-2014
TQMBE & IJQRM
clustering TQMJ,
Table II.
IJQRM
35,1 Data (abstract) Topic proportions Topics
and assignments
ISO
1400
Improving the quality of certification
...
environmental management:
216 impact on shareholder value
Rose Sebastianelli, Nabil Tamimi and Kathleen Iacocca Value
Department of Operations and Information Management, market
University of Scranton, Scranton, PA, USA shareholder
...
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to build upon the conceptual model developed by
Feldman et al. (1997) that demonstrated a link between improved environmental perfor-
mance and increased market value for publicly traded corporations. ISO 14000 standards,
Environmental
not yet established at the time of their study, provide the framework for a strategic approach
Figure 4. to environmental management with an emphasis on continuous quality improvement.
Consequently ISO 14000 certification is used as the basis for creating an investment portfo-\
green
feldman
Illustration inspired lio of publicly traded companies. While previous research has examined short-term stock
...
market reactions to ISO 14000 certification, this study evaluates the longer term impact on
by Blei (2012) shareholder value by comparing the ISO portfolio’s performance against other funds. It adds
showing how to the existing literature on the “pay to be green” question
probabilistic topic Quality

models operate on improvement
data from continuous
...
Sebastianelli et al.
(2015)
suitable as it allows for several different topics to display, while five topics is still a
manageable amount for manual analysis. Following the same line of thought, it was decided
to display only the first eight words of a topic in the analysis, i.e. the eight words which
have the highest probability to be associated. As topic models operate on random seeding
for the creation of probability distributions, the outcome will always be slightly different
from one execution to the next (Hornik and Grün, 2011). Therefore, in R, there is a possibility
of running the same model several times on the same data set after which the best fit is
presented – a function called nstart (Hornik and Grün, 2011). In simple terms, the more runs
a topic model does, the more stable the outcome. At some point, however, the results will
start to differ only marginally and relative stability arises. Initial modeling showed that the
topic models stabilized at 1000 runs (nstart 1000). Consequently, doubling the amount of
runs should not have any significant impact on the result. Hence, to strengthen the
reliability of the modeling results, each topic model was deployed twice on the same data set
with 1,000 runs (nstart 1000) and 2,000 runs (nstart 2000), respectively. Figure 5 shows the
results from topic modeling cluster 0 and cluster 5.4.0 and confirms that the difference
between 1,000 runs (nstart 1000) and 2,000 runs (nstart 2000) is minimal and, hence, that
additional runs would be superfluous.
When it comes to the analysis, evaluation and interpretation of topic models, no machine
learning models have yet outperformed that of human judgment even if steady progress is
being made in the field (AlSumait et al., 2009; Dacres et al., 2013; Chang et al., 2009;
Chemudugunta et al., 2008a, b; Wallach et al., 2009; Xie and Xing, 2013). Czarniawska (2014)
summarizes the issue by stating that many researchers have concluded that no software can
interpret the collected field material and say “what it means” or “what it could mean”,
which creates the possibility of several competing or complementing interpretations or
perspectives. The viewpoint is applicable on the conducted study; interpretations and
evaluations represent the author’s assessments. Figure 5 illustrates how results from topic
modeling cluster 0 and cluster 5.4.0 were evaluated and interpreted and act as
exemplification of the overall analytical process. In Figure 5, unique words for cluster 0 and
cluster 5.4.0 are marked in green and yellow respectively and then summarized in the far
1990-2014 (nstart 1,000) 1990-2014 (nstart 2000) Interpretation

Cluster 0 Cluster 0
(15%) (15%)
Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 3 Topic 4 Topic 5 Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 3 Topic 4 Topic 5
Design Quality Reliability Model Control Control Design Quality System Reliability
Process Cost System Approach Process Process Method Cost Reliability Failure
Method Costs Failure System Chart Chart Approach Costs Model Approach
Control, costs, reliability and
Approach Management Systems Time Charts Charts Process Management Maintenance System failure
Analysis Model Paper Paper Proposed Proposed Quality Model Failure Paper
Failure Paper Model Design Design Design Taguchi Process Paper Analysis
Quality System Approach Reliability Capability Distribution Paper Improvement Systems Fuzzy
Study Improvement Data Cost Sample Sampling Proposed Control Time Methodology
1990-2014 Cluster 5.4 (nstart 1,000) 1990-2014 Cluster 5.4 (nstart 2000)
Cluster 5.4.0 Cluster 5.4.0
(4%) (4%)
Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 3 Topic 4 Topic 5 Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 3 Topic 4 Topic 5
Quality Quality Quality Quality Quality Quality Quality Quality Quality Quality
Statistical Improvement Management Process Management Process Management Process Improvement Project
Process Management Process Management Process Management Process Improvement Management TQM
Process control and
Improvement
Improvement Process Control TQM Study Companies Control Management Process Process
Manufacturing Based Companies Project Control Statistical Improvement Describes Change Company
Use Company Total Improvement Weight Methods Project Team Continuous Management
Team Business Customers Change Project Improvement Customer Organization Based Manufacturing
Techniques Programme Improvement Companies Work Business Weight Total Techniques Improvement
research
Quality
217
management
and cluster 5.4.0

modeling cluster 0
Figure 5.
results from topic

Illustration of how the
display as well as how

they were analyzed
IJQRM right column. Figure 5 illustrates that words such as quality and management are common
35,1 in all clusters and consequently are not highlighted. Also, Figure 5 illustrates how process
appears in cluster 0, but is only included in the summary of cluster 5.4.0. This is because
process as well as quality and management appear in several clusters, but, in cluster 5.4.0,
the word appears more often and therefore becomes a distinguishing word for the given
cluster. The results from each cluster and topic were treated in this way and the outcome is
218 presented in Figures 7-12.
Outlines and trends in the data

Figure 6 displays a visual representation of the publications of each journal as well as the
total number of publications during 1990-2014. In addition, Figure 6 shows a trend
analysis using support vector machine as well as sliding average on the totality. From the
time series analysis, it is evident that the total number of published papers is showing a
positive trend, which could be interpreted as showing that QM in general is still a vibrant
and active academic discipline. On the other hand, the positive trend is largely due to
TQMBE increasing the number of annually published papers. In turn, TQMJ is showing
an overall negative trend reaching a peak in 1992, after which a ten-year decrease in
annual publications is manifested, whereupon it increased somewhat and stabilized.
The development of IJQRM can be said to lie in-between the two other journals, with a
decrease in publications between 1995 and 1999 after which it also stabilized – displaying
a slight overall positive trend. This evolvement does not say anything about the standard
of the publications, meaning that an increased number of publications is not necessarily
IJQRM TQMBE TQMJ Total (IJQRM, TQMBE, TQMJ)

Trend (Total (IJQRM, TQMBE, TQMJ)) Average (Total (IJQRM, TQMBE, TQMJ))
200
190
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
110
Value
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
Figure 6. 10
Publication track 0
record for IJQRM,
TQMJ & TQMBE
1990-2014 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
Year
better than a lower number – it could all be a consequence of conscious strategic decisions Quality
from the editorial boards. However, as all three journals show a relatively stable track management
record for the last 12 years, this could indicate that research on QM has reached a more research
stable phase, supporting the conclusions by Dahlgaard-Park et al. (2013) that QM has
matured as an academic discipline. It is good to keep in mind the number of publications
as the cluster modeling on both the totality as well as the five time periods is executed on
the complete data set, not an equalized sample from each journal. As showed in the 219
methodological section, there is not a significant difference regarding the number of
publications between the journals when it comes to the overall data set. But, looking at the
two time periods 1990-1994 and 2000-2014, the results can be accused of being biased
toward TQMJ, respectively TQMBE rather than showing a representative picture of
the specific time periods. However, given that the three journals together represent the
research field, the results do portray what topics were more widespread than others at
the time and thus provide fair snapshots of the time periods.
A visualization for the overall modeling as well as the five time series is presented in
Figures 7-12. In Figure 7, clusters containing 5 percent or more of the total number of
abstracts, i.e. minimum 211 abstracts, are classified as central topics and are marked in
green. Clusters containing 4 percent of the total amount of abstracts, i.e. more than
169 abstracts and less than 211, are categorized as semi-central topics and are marked in
orange. According to this classification, six central topics are identified which together
represent 55 percent of the total amount of data: control, costs, reliability and failure;
Service quality; TQM – implementation & performance; ISO – certification, standards and
systems; Innovation, practices and learning and customers – research and product design.
Five semi-central topics are identified which together represent 20 percent of the total
amount of data: quality awards and business excellence frameworks (BEFs); Performance
management & measurement; Process control & improvement; TQM – improvement,
customers, management and employees and Systems & standards. Together the
11 central and semi-central topics cover 75 percent of the data, with the remaining 25
percent of data dispersed among the 15 residual clusters. A coverage of 75 percent would
indicate that the 11 topics represent the majority of the published research and can thus be
seen as a valid summary of QM research between 1990 and 2014. Regarding cluster 5 and
its subsequent division into seven new clusters, no common denominators for either
cluster 5 or its two dominant clusters 5.0 and 5.4 are identified, which is why they have
been left blank.
Compared with the findings of Lo and Chai (2012) who found QM research to be
concentrated around implementation of TQM, monitoring quality costs, measuring service
quality, customer satisfaction and studying TQM outcomes, there are apparent similarities
and overlaps which are presented in Tables II and III.
It is worth noting that customer satisfaction and customers – research and product design
might not have as clear a fit as the other central topics. A look at Figures 7-12 clarifies the
matching as customer satisfaction and service quality are repeatedly bundled together,
which is why it is fair to say that service quality and customers – research & product design
do indeed correspond to the categories measuring service quality and customer satisfaction
in the findings of Lo and Chai (2012). However, ISO – certification, standards and systems
and innovation, practices and learning do not have an explicit counterpart in the findings of
Lo and Chai (2012). But, as Dereli et al. (2011) found that ISO and certifications were central
themes in QM research, the topic is backed by previous research. This leaves innovation,
practices and learning without justification in preceding findings, indicating that it can be
seen as a previously overlooked central theme of QM research. From the results, it is
possible to observe that IJQRM dominates cluster 0 relating to control, costs, reliability and
failure as well as cluster 4 on QFD. This could endorse that IJQRM has a unique niche vis-à-vis
35,1
220
IJQRM
Figure 7.
Visualization of
IJQRM, TQMJ &

TQMBE 1990-2014
and topic modeling
results from cluster
Cluster 0 (15%) Cluster 3 (12%) Cluster 6 (6%)
control, costs, reliability TQM - implementation and Cluster 5 (52%) ISO - certification,
Six-Sigma and Lean service quality QFD
and failure performance standards and systems
Cluster 5.5 (4%)

Cluster 5.6 (7%)
Cluster 5.1 (4%) Cluster 5.2 (1%) Cluster 5.3 (1%) performance
Cluster 5.0 (16%) Cluster 5.4 (19%) innovation, practices and
quality awards and BEF:s construction benchmarking and TPM management and
learning
measurement
Cluster 5.4.1 (2%)

Cluster 5.0.2 (2%) Cluster 5.0.3 (0%) Cluster 5.0.5 (5%) Cluster 5.4.0 (4%) change management, Cluster 5.4.2 (4%) Cluster 5.4.5 (2%)
Cluster 5.0.0 (1%) Cluster 5.0.1 (2%) Cluster 5.0.4 (2%) Cluster 5.0.6 (3%)
customers - research and process control and leadership, TQM – improvement Cluster 5.4.3 (2%) Cluster 5.4.4 (3%) education, higher Cluster 5.4.6 (4%)
supply chain project studies strategy, tools, models software development and healthcare research
product design improvement communication and customers, management training Japanese and European education and teaching systems and standards
management and frameworks improvement
behaviours and employees
the other two journals, which is also suggested by the title – referring to reliability Quality
management. TQMBE, in turn, dominates cluster 2 concerning service quality and has a lead management
in cluster 3 on TQM – implementation and performance. Cluster 6 covering ISO – certification, research
standards and systems is evenly distributed between the journals as well as cluster 1 covering
Six Sigma and Lean. TQMJ does not dominate any cluster but is instead evenly distributed
over all clusters. Given that TQMJ is the journal with the smallest number of annual
publications for the last 12-year period, it shows that it does not lack coverage of any of the 221
identified topics. All in all, the data shows that there is an overlap between the three journals’
coverage of QM research but with some distinct focus areas, which is expected. This could be
Cluster 1 (18%)
Cluster 2 (10%)
miscellaneous on Cluster 4 (27%) Figure 8.
Cluster 0 (13%) Cluster 3 (6%) Cluster 5 (18%) Cluster 6 (9%)

quality control
quality costs
and design
quality – e.g. self
assessment,
service quality
TQM – improvement
and implementation
customers process control Cluster and topic
and maintenance modeling of 1990-1994
Cluster 0 (26%)
Cluster 1 (23%) Cluster 2 (9%) Cluster 3 (4%) Cluster 4 (5%)
Cluster 5 (25%)
QM and Cluster 6 (7%) Figure 9.
process design and
quality costs
TQM – implementation service quality reliability process control
TQM – systems,
standards and
ISO – implementation
and certification
Cluster and topic
models modeling of 1995-1999
Cluster 2 (15%) Cluster 5 (9%)

Cluster 0 (47%) TQM – implementation Cluster 3 (2%) process control,
service quality and quality function ISO – certification and
QM performance and Six-Sigma quality costs and
customer satisfaction deployment (QFD) implementation
management software reliability
Cluster 0.0 (5%)

quality awards and
Cluster 0.1 (3%)
information
Cluster 0.2 (4%)
supply chain
Cluster 0.3 (10%)
leadership,
Cluster 0.4 (6%)
improvement
Cluster 0.5 (7%)
project management –
Cluster 0.6 (11%) Figure 10.
business excellence technology and
management and
software
benchmarking and implementation and techniques and
performance and
research
Cluster and topic
models systems learning management performance
development modeling of 2000-2004
Cluster 2 (12%)
Cluster 0 (5%) Cluster 1 (52%) quality costs, Cluster 6 (5%)
service quality and TQM – implementation QFD (quality function
ISO – certification QM and performance reliability and Six-Sigma and Lean
customer satisfaction and performance deployment)
process control
Cluster 1.0
(18%) quality and Cluster 1.1 (6%)
Cluster 1.2 (3%) Cluster 1.3 (8%)
Cluster 1.4 (6%)
quality awards and
Cluster 1.5 (5%)
Cluster 1.6 (6%)
performance –
Figure 11.
performance learning
knowledge
management
software quality and
project management
business excellence
sustainability – design
and organizations
research Cluster and topic
management models and measures
modeling of 2005-2009
Cluster 0 (22%)
Cluster 1 (17%)
quality costs,
Cluster 2 (8%)
Cluster 3 (8%) Cluster 4 (3%)
Cluster 5 (33%) Cluster 6 (9%) Figure 12.
service quality and
customer satisfaction
reliability and
ISO – certification and
performance
Six-Sigma and Lean innovation
QM – performance and
research
TQM – implementation
and performance
Cluster and topic
process control
modeling of 2010-2014
IJQRM taken as confirmation that the three journals do indeed cover the same research areas and are
35,1 thus relevant objects of comparison when looking at the evolution of QM research.
A study of Figures 8-12 gives a more detailed understanding of how the aggregated central
topics have taken shape through the years. Service quality and TQM – implementation
have consistently been present in the data from 1990 onwards. From 2000 onwards,
performance was embraced as central topic within TQM research. At the same time, service
222 quality was matched with customer satisfaction, highlighting a relationship between the
two topics. This does not mean that customers – research and product design only belong to
service quality but that the topic is scattered among many clusters in the divided
modeling session and is therefore not apparent in other clusters. Control, costs, reliability and
failure is also present from the start in the form of QC, process control and quality costs &
design with reliability added in 1995. Failure cannot be seen as a specific subject in
Figures 8-12 which is explained in the same way as customers: in itself failure is not large
enough to show in the divided modeling sessions as opposed to the aggregated results. ISO
shows up in the data from 1995 with a gradual shift from implementation toward
performance, with certification as the joining link. As with customers and failure, standards
and systems are not shown in the divided modeling session but are naturally constant
companions of both implementation and performance. As a response to Dereli et al. (2011) who
called for results portraying the development of research on ISO over time, the study shows
that ISO is constantly oscillating between 5 and 10 percent of the research abstracts in each
time period with a peak in 2000-2004 (Figure 10). Lastly, from innovation, practices and
learning, only innovation is apparent as a sole cluster in Figures 8-12 which is explained by
practices and learning being topics associated with many other themes, but, when data is
divided, these do not appear independently.
In relation to Lo and Chai (2012), who identified service quality, customer satisfaction
and TQM framework identification as core research themes from which succeeding themes
evolved, the study partly supports their findings. However, a comparison between findings
from a chronological perspective is awkward primarily since their data starts in 1996 and
the division of time periods is hence not identical. Additionally, TQM framework
identification is an ambiguous term which needs a more detailed description if it is to be
comparable with the results of this study. Nonetheless, the results fully support the notions
of Lo and Chai (2012) that QM has undergone conceptual developments, from an initial focus
on statistical control with a shift toward strategic aspects and a current research interest in
providing quality service and measuring its success. In the study, the shifts are manifested
as quality control, quality costs and process control feature in 40 percent of the abstracts in
1990-1994 (Figure 8) whereas in 2010-2014 (Figure 12), they only correspond to 17 percent of
the abstracts. Inversely, service quality has gone from an initial coverage of 6 percent
in 1990-1994 (Figure 8) to, together with customer satisfaction, incorporating 22 percent of
Lo and Chai (2012) Central topics Semi-central topics
Monitoring quality costs Control, costs, reliability & failure Process control & improvement
Measuring service quality Service quality
Implementation of TQM TQM – implementation and performance Quality awards and business
excellence frameworks
(BEFs)/TQM – improvement,
Table III. customers, management & employees
Corresponding Studying TQM outcomes TQM – implementation and performance Performance management and
categories Lo and measurement/systems and standards
Chai (2012) Customer satisfaction Customers – research and product design
the abstracts in 2010-2014 (Figure 12). The development of service quality and customer Quality
satisfaction could also be seen as being supported by the findings of Dereli et al. (2011), management
who state that QM has attracted increased interest from the service industry. research
Regarding terminology, it is worth noting how QM and TQM appear in Figures 7-12.
In Figure 7 TQM is identified as a specific category both in cluster 3 (TQM implementation
and performance) and cluster 5.4.2 (TQM improvement, customers, management and
employees), whereas QM is not represented in any cluster. In Figures 8-12, QM and TQM 223
are both represented in separate as well as shared clusters. The reasons for this outcome
are twofold. First, TQM is most probably a more common abbreviation than QM in
abstracts, which is why TQM is visible in the probabilistic topic modeling results as
opposed to QM. The results show that quality and management appear in a multitude of
clusters, indicating that QM and consequently QM is indeed the terminology most
commonly used in QM research. The reason for not emphasizing QM in Figure 7 is that
total also appears in some tables indicating that TQM, hence TQM, is also present in some
clusters. Therefore, with the aim of not tangling up and muddling the categorization
between what is QM, TQM or both, only TQM was emphasized as it clearly appeared in
cluster 3 and 5.4.2. In the results from the time series modeling, the dividing lines between
QM and TQM were easier to identify because the terminologies have been spelled out,
even if QM is not apparent as an abbreviation in these results other than as two separate
words. Reconnecting to Martínez-Lorente et al. (1998), who found TQM to be on the rise
during the 1980s, the results show a dominance of TQM in the early 1990s (Figure 8),
where it alone stood for 27 percent of the research abstracts. After this, TQM seems to
have faded out as a particular area of research representing only 9 percent of the abstracts
in 2010-2014 (Figure 12). This development of TQM is supported by Dahlgaard-Park et al.
(2013) who found the topic of TQM to be decreasing whereas papers focusing on
techniques and tools within the QM framework, such as Lean and Six Sigma, were seen to
be increasing. The study also identifies a steady increase of abstracts on Lean and
Six Sigma. Six Sigma represented 2 percent of the abstracts in 2000-2004 (Figure 10),
after which, together with Lean, it covered 5 percent of the abstracts in 2005-2009
(Figure 11) and eventually 8 percent of the abstracts in 2010-2014 (Figure 12).
Then, comparing the three last time periods, it seems as if research in 2000-2009
(Figures 10 and 11) was more dispersed between different tools and techniques than in
2010-2014 (Figure 12), which could point toward a consolidation within the field.
Furthermore, Dahlgaard-Park et al. (2013) established that organizational culture is
becoming increasingly important for organizations in the pursuit of quality and
excellence. Interpreted narrowly, organizational culture does not seem to attract any
specific interest in QM research since the topic does not generate even a small cluster.
On the other hand, organizational culture could be classified as all-encompassing
terminology which permeates many of the identified clusters but is not used in its own
right – which is why it is not revealed in the data.
Discussion
Initially, it is important to acknowledge that cluster modeling will always bundle together
on the basis of similarity. It is highly likely that the cluster modeling is influenced by the
formal similarity or structure of each abstract, meaning that abstracts from each journal
adhere to specific standards, whereby they have a higher probability of being matched as
similar. The same goes for subfields – a subfield may present its research or write abstracts
in a comparable way, which in turn may influence the cluster modeling. This could be the
reason for specific techniques and tools such as ISO, Six Sigma being singled out, possibly
overemphasizing their importance and giving them undeserved presence in the spotlight.
Ultimately, it is important not to take the modeling results as definitive but as a
IJQRM complementary perspective on existing findings, exploring and describing QM research
35,1 over time. Also, it is important to keep in mind that the study only covers journals and
articles published in English, which inherently favors native English speakers (Cho, 2004;
Duszak and Lewkowicz, 2008; Flowerdew, 1999; Uzuner, 2008). Taken together with the
results from Dereli et al. (2011), showing that 50 percent of contributing authors in TQMBE
are linked to English-speaking countries, coupled with the results from Lo and Chai (2012),
224 revealing that approximately 40 percent of the contributors are from Europe, the study
could be suspected of portraying QM from a European and English-speaking perspective,
rather than a global one. When studying differences between North American-based
scholars in strategic management and those established elsewhere in the native
English-speaking world, Pilkington and Lawton (2014) found clear disparities in research
method and epistemology between North American and non-North American English
language academics. According to Pilkington and Lawton (2014), the impact implications on
strategic management teaching, executive development and consulting are likely to be

significant. However, further studies are needed to establish the existence and range of such
possible effects. Given that bibliometric studies regarding country affiliation of authors
have only been found for TQMBE, analyzing and discussing the results of the current
study from such perspectives becomes somewhat ambiguous. However, as the areas are
closely related, it is plausible that the findings of Pilkington and Lawton (2014) are also valid
for QM. This would suggest that QM as a discipline could benefit from studies which
enhance our understanding of how contexts such as language and domicile have influenced
the discipline.
Looking at the results, it is evident that QM research has undergone shifts and
transitions – from an initial domination of TQM and control of quality, costs and
processes toward a predominance of service quality and customer satisfaction as well
as Six Sigma, Lean and innovation. On the other hand, it is important not to exaggerate or
be blinded by the changes but to keep in mind the central themes which are perpetual
and remain at the heart of QM research year after year, although there might be surges in
popularity. Otherwise, an overemphasis on temporary trends risks providing justification
for the criticism regarding theoretical fuzziness and its possible effects on the field
voiced by researchers such as Singh and Smith (2006), Foley (2001), Boaden (1996),
Giroux and Landry (1998).
Lastly, the study should, on account of its methodological approach, be mainly
seen as exploratory and descriptive in nature, not explanatory. The purpose of the study
was to explore and describe how QM research has evolved historically. Therefore, it is
beyond the scope of the study to make any statements on the theoretical, practical or
conceptual similarities or differences between the research topics manifested in the data
as well as why they have come about. Given the applied methods, it would have been
possible to classify the modeling results deductively, based on previous findings and
theories, thereby, tying it closer to existing theorization on the issue. But, on account of
the study being exploratory and descriptive, an inductive path was chosen to give
leverage to the possibility of identifying new perspective and dimensions, however,
grounded in data.
Conclusions
The purpose of the study was to explore and describe how research on QM has evolved
historically. Thus, topics of QM research and their development over time have been
documented. Central topics within QM research are found to be:
• control, costs, reliability and failure;
• service quality;
• TQM – implementation and performance; Quality
• ISO – certification, standards and systems; management
• innovation, practices and learning; and research
• customers – research and product design.
Of the central topics, all besides innovation, practices and learning have previously been
identified as core themes by the studies of Lo and Chai (2012) and Dereli et al. (2011). 225
Hence, innovation, practices and learning can be seen as a newly identified central theme
within QM research which prior studies have overlooked.
Furthermore, it is shown that QM research has undergone shifts of research focus – most
notably from a dominance of TQM and control of quality, costs and processes toward
service quality and customer satisfaction as well as Six Sigma, Lean and innovation.
Finally, the study can be said to support the notion of Lo and Chai (2012) that
quantitative studies are indeed a fruitful methodological pathway that needs further
attention when conducting exploratory and descriptive studies.
Managerial and policy implications

The study brings new perspectives on the evolution of QM which might aid researchers as
well as practitioners to position and comprehend their efforts from fresh dimensions, be they
academic or applied. For individuals and organizations that have applied and abandoned
QM initiatives at a fast pace, the central topics might help to find a more lasting approach
to QM, which could lead to a less volatile future. Conversely, conservative gatekeepers of
traditional QM perceptions may perhaps see an opportunity for innovation and progress in
that some newly introduced terminologies might not merely be temporary fashions and
fads, but actually bring valuable knowledge and learning to the table.
Limitations
The data set for this study consists of research paper abstracts from three scientific
journals. Consequently, it is possible that outlines and trends of QM research that could be
identified through other scientific journals and scientific publications, such as books;
book reviews; general reviews; secondary articles; editorials; guest editorials; awards for
excellence (notifications); conference proceedings; introductions or summaries from
conference and notes from the publisher, are omitted. The Quality Management Journal
(QMJ ) in particular could have added a valuable perspective to the study. QMJ is highly
ranked and cited by the QM research community and, as it is published by the American
Society for Quality, it supposedly could represent how QM research in the USA has evolved
from 1993 and onwards. Since the current study could be suspected of incorporating a
European bias, as discussed in the methodological section, such a complementary viewpoint
could strengthen the study’s validity. Although, given that bibliometric studies regarding
country affiliation of authors has only been found for TQMBE, actions aiming to reduce
regional bias may well, unintentionally, have the opposite effect. Also, the inclusion of QMJ
would not reduce the bias in favor of native English speakers and regions. For this purpose,
it would be necessary to include academic journals written in languages other than English.
Furthermore, inclusion of IJQRM and TQMBE in the data set may have skewed the results
in favor of reliability management and BE, giving the topic a more prominent place than it
actually deserved – especially as the data was not screened prior to modeling. Lastly,
classifications and interpretations have been made qualitatively and are thus exposed to the
risk of subjective judgements negatively influencing the evaluation process. As a way to
minimize such personal bias and thereby improve what Arbnor and Bjerke (2009) refer to
as internal and external validity, it would have been beneficial to utilize validation
IJQRM strategies, such as peer-review or member checking, proposed by Creswell (2013).
35,1 Accordingly, in order to improve the accuracy of future studies, it could be sensible to
reconcile preliminary classifications and findings with viewpoints from scholars
representing a diverse set of perspectives.
Future research
226 Future studies could gain in reliability and relevance by including additional scientific
journals in the data set. For studies where minimal profiling of data is prioritized,
QMJ would be an additional data source to consider. Screening and profiling of data prior
to modeling could be a way to further strengthen the reliability and validity of results,
focusing more distinctly on QM and TQM. It would also expand the list of scientific
journals from which data could be collected, as it would allow specific writings on the
selected topics to be pinpointed as opposed to complete publishing records. Additionally,
it could be possible to include discontinued journals in the data set. This would increase
the list of possible journals to include in the study in addition to, possibly, amplifying
trends and fads. Taking on a Kuhnian viewpoint, such case selection could perhaps help to
identify anomalies and crises within QM as well as clarify how normal science within the
paradigms has evolved and where it is heading. Potential journals which could be
considered for this purpose are: International Journal of Quality Science (merged into
IJQRM in 1998); Journal of Quality Management (discontinued as of 2002), International
Journal of Applied Quality Management (discontinued as of 2000) and the Asian Journal of
Quality (discontinued as of 2012). Furthermore, to increase the relevance of a time series
analysis using number of published papers as baseline data, it would be fitting to expand
the data so that it contains SNIP, IPP and SJR values (or IF when available) for each
scientific journal. This way, it would be possible to link or evaluate the trend regarding the
number of issues annually with the assessed importance by the academic community.
Additionally, further bibliometric studies, with the aim of mapping basic information as
well as tracing links between authors, journals, countries, etc., could help broaden our
understanding of how QM has evolved as well as why.
References
Abrahamson, E. and Eisenman, M. (2008), “Employee-management techniques: transient fads or
trending fashions?”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 719-744.
Abrahamson, E. and Fairchild, G. (1999), “Management fashion: lifecycles, triggers, and collective
learning processes”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 708-740.
Aggarwal, C.C. and Zhai, C.X. (2012a), “A survey of text clustering algorithms”, Mining Text Data,
pp. 77-128.
Aggarwal, C.C. and Zhai, C.X. (2012b), Mining Text Data, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA.
Ahire, S.L., Landeros, R. and Golhar, D.Y. (1995), “Total quality management: a literature review and an
agenda for future research”, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 277-306.
AlSumait, L., Barbará, D., Gentle, J. and Domeniconi, C. (2009), “Topic significance ranking of LDA
generative models”, in Buntine, W., Grobelnik, M., Mladenic, D. and Shawe-Taylor, J. (Eds), Machine
Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases, Springer, Berlin and Heidelberg, pp. 67-82.
Andersson, R., Eriksson, H. and Torstensson, H. (2006), “Similarities and differences between TQM,
six sigma and lean”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 282-296.
Arbnor, I. and Bjerke, B. (2009), Methodology for Creating Business Knowledge, 3rd ed., Sage, London.
Arthur, D. and Vassilvitskii, S.G.H. (2007), “K-means++: the advantages of careful seeding”,
Discrete Algorithms: Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium, (SODA ‘07),
pp. 1027-1035.
Aune, A. (1999), Nordic School of Quality Management, Chapter 2, Studentlitteratur, Lund.
Barley, S.R. and Kunda, G. (1992), “Design and devotion: surges of rational and normative ideologies of Quality
control in managerial discourse”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 363-399. management
Bergman, B. and Klefsjö, B. (2010), Quality from Customer Needs to Customer Satisfaction, research
Studentlitteratur, Lund.
Bergquist, B., Eriksson, H., Garvare, R., Hallencreutz, J., Langstrand, J., Vanhatalo, E. and Zobel, T.
(2012), “Alive and kicking – but will quality management be around tomorrow? A Swedish
academia perspective”, Quality Innovation Prosperity, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 1-18. 227
Blei, D.M. and Lafferty, J.D. (2009), “Topic models”, in Srivastava, A.N. and Sahami, M. (Eds), Text
Mining: Classification, Clustering, and Applications, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 71-94.
Blei, D.M., Ng, A.Y. and Jordan, M.I. (2003), “Latent Dirichlet allocation”, Journal of Machine Learning
Research, Vol. 3, January, pp. 71-94.
Blei, D. (2012), “Probabilistic topic models”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 77-84.
Boaden, R.J. (1996), “Is total quality management really unique?”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 7
No. 5, pp. 553-570.
Boaden, R.J. (1997), “What is total quality management … and does it matter?”, Total Quality
Management, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 153-171.
Brown, A. (2013), “Quality: where have we come from and what can we expect?”, The TQM Journal,
Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 585-596.
Carneiro Moro, S.M., Ribeiro Cortez, P.A. and Ferreira Rita, P.M.R. (2014), “Business intelligence in
banking: a literature analysis from 2002 to 2013 using text mining and latent Dirichlet
allocation”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 1314-1324.
Chakrabarti, S. (2003), Mining the Web: Discovering Knowledge from Hypertext Data, Morgan
Kaufmann, Amsterdam.
Chang, J., Boyd-Graber, J., Wang, C., Gerrish, S. and Blei., D. (2009), “Reading tea leaves: how humans
interpret topic models”, in Bengio, Y., Schuurmans, D., Lafferty, J.D., Williams, C.K.I. and
Culotta, A. (Eds), Proceeding from conference Neural Information Processing Systems 22 2009
(NIPS 2009), Vancouver, BC, December 6-11, pp. 288-296.
Chemudugunta, C., Smyth, P. and Steyvers, M. (2008a), “Combining concept hierarchies and statistical
topic models”, Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge
Management, pp. 1469-1470.
Chemudugunta, C., Smyth, P. and Steyvers, M. (2008b), “Text modeling using unsupervised topic
models and concept hierarchies”, available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/0808.0973
Child, D. (2006), The Essentials of Factor Analysis, A&C Black, London.
Chiles, T.H. and Choi, T.Y. (2000), “Theorizing TQM: an Austrian and evolutionary economics
interpretation”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 185-212.
Cho, S. (2004), “Challenges of entering discourse communities through publishing in English:
perspectives of nonnative-speaking doctoral students in the United States of America”,
Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 47-72.
Choudhary, A.K., Oluikpe, P.I., Harding, J.A. and Carrillo, P.M. (2009), “The needs and benefits of text
mining applications on post-project reviews”, Computers in Industry, Vol. 60 No. 9, pp. 728-740.
Creswell, J.W. (2013), Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design Choosing Among Five Approaches, 3rd ed.,
Sage publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Czarniawska, B. (2014), Ute på fältet, inne vid skrivbordet (1. uppl.), Studentlitteratur, Lund.
Dacres, S., Haddadi, H. and Purver, M. (2013), “Topic and sentiment analysis on OSNs: a case study of
advertising strategies on Twitter”, CoRR abs/1312.6635.
Dahlgaard, J.J. and Dahlgaard-Park, S.M. (2006), “Lean production, six sigma quality, TQM and
company culture”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 263-281.
Dahlgaard, J.J., Kristensen, K. and Kanji, G.K. (2007), Fundamentals of Total Quality Management
Process Analysis and Improvement, Taylor & Francis, London.
IJQRM Dahlgaard-Park, S.M. (1999), “The evolution patterns of quality management: some reflections on the
35,1 quality movement”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 10 Nos 4/5, pp. 473-480.
Dahlgaard-Park, S.M. (2011), “The quality movement – where are you going?”, Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 493-516.
Dahlgaard-Park, S.M., Chen, C.K., Jang, J.Y. and Dahlgaard, J.J. (2013), “Diagnosing and prognosticating
the quality movement – a review on the 25 years quality literature (1987-2011)”, Total Quality
228 Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 24 Nos 1/2, pp. 1-18.
Dale, B.G., Van Der Wiele, T. and Van Iwaarden, J. (2007), Managing Quality, Blackwell Publishing,
Malden, MA.
Dale, B.G., Wu, P.Y., Zairi, M., Williams, A.R.T. and Van Der Wiele, T. (2001), “Total quality
management and theory: an exploratory study of contribution”, Total Quality Management,
Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 439-449.
Dale, B.G., Zairi, M., Van der Wiele, A. and Williams, A.R.T. (2000), “Quality is dead in Europelong live
excellence-true or false?”, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 4-10.
Dean, J.W. and Bowen, D.E. (1994), “Management theory and total quality: improving research
and practice through theory development”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19 No. 3,
pp. 392-418.
Delen, D. and Crossland, M.D. (2008), “Seeding the survey and analysis of research literature with
text mining”, Expert Systems With Applications, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 1707-1720.
Dereli, T., Durmuşoğlu, A., Delibaş, D. and Avlanmaz, N. (2011), “An analysis of the papers published in
total quality management & business excellence from 1995 through 2008”, Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 373-386, doi: 10.1080/
14783363.2010.532337.
Djurfeldt, G. and Barmark, M. (2010), Statistisk verktygslåda 2 – multivariat analys,
Studentlitteratur, Lund.
Duszak, A. and Lewkowicz, J. (2008), “Publishing academic texts in English: a Polish perspective”,
Journal of English for Academic Purposes, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 108-120.
Feldman, R. and Sanger, J. (2007), The Text Mining Handbook: Advanced Approaches in Analyzing
Unstructured Data, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Finch, B.J. (1999), “Internet discussions as a source for consumer product customer involvement and
quality information: an exploratory study”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 17 No. 5,
pp. 535-556.
Fisher, N.I. and Nair, V.N. (2009), “Quality management and quality practice: perspectives on
their history and their future”, Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, Vol. 25 No. 1,
pp. 1-28.
Flowerdew, J. (1999), “Problems in writing for scholarly publication in English: the case of Hong Kong”,
Journal of Second Language Writing, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 243-264.
Foley, J.K. (2001), “From quality management to organization excellence: don’t throw the baby out with
the bath water’ ”, Proceedings of the Fourth International and Seventh National Research
Conference on Quality Management, Sydney, pp. 154-177.
Garvin, D.A. (1988), Managing Quality: The Strategic and Competitive Edge, Simon and Schuster,
New York, NY.
Giroux, H. and Landry, S. (1998), “Schools of thought in and against total quality”, Journal of
Managerial Issues, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 183-203.
Gupta, V., Garg, D. and Kumar, R. (2014), “Depiction of total quality management during a span of
2003-2013”, Journal of Engineering and Technology, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 81-86.
Hackman, J.R. and Wageman, R. (1995), “Total quality management: empirical, conceptual, and
practical issues”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 309-342.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (2014), Multivariate Data Analysis, Quality
7th ed., Pearson Education Limited, Essex. management
Heim, G.R. and Field, J.M. (2007), “Process drivers of e-service quality: analysis of data from an online research
rating site”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 962-984.
Hornik, K. and Grün, B. (2011), “Topicmodels: an R package for fitting topic models”, Journal of
Statistical Software, Vol. 40 No. 13, pp. 1-30.
Jain, A.K. (2010), “Data clustering: 50 years beyond K-means”, Pattern Recognition Letters, Vol. 31 No. 8, 229
pp. 651-666.
Kaufman, L. and Rousseeuw, P.J. (2009), Finding Groups in Data: An Introduction to Cluster Analysis,
Vol. 344, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken.
Kent, E.L. (2014), “Text analytics – techniques, language and opportunity”, Business Information
Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 50-53.
Khamis, N., Rilling, J. and Witte, R. (2013), “Assessing the quality factors found in in-line
documentation written in natural language: the JavadocMiner”, Data & Knowledge Engineering,
Vol. 87, September, pp. 19-40.
Klefsjö, B., Bergquist, B. and Garvare, R. (2008), “Quality management and business excellence,
customers and stakeholders: do we agree on what we are talking about, and does it matter?”,
The TQM Journal, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 120-129.
Köksal, G., Batmaz, İ. and Testik, M.C. (2011), “A review of data mining applications for quality
improvement in manufacturing industry”, Expert Systems With Applications, Vol. 38 No. 10,
pp. 13448-13467.
Kroslid, D. (1999), “In search of quality management: rethinking and reinterpreting”, PhD-dissertation,
Linköping University.
Kurgan, L.A. and Musilek, P. (2006), “A survey of knowledge discovery and data mining process
models”, The Knowledge Engineering Review, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 1-24.
Larose, D.T. (2005), Discovering Knowledge in Data an Introduction to Data Mining, Wiley-Interscience,
Hoboken, NJ.
Liu, B. (2011), Web Data Mining: Exploring Hyperlinks, Contents, and Usage Data, 2nd ed.,
Springer, Heidelberg.
Lo, Q.Q. and Chai, K.H. (2012), “Quantitative analysis of quality management literature published in
total quality management and business excellence (1996-2010)”, Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, Vol. 23 Nos 5/6, pp. 629-651.
Lo, S. (2008), “Web service quality control based on text mining using support vector machine”,
Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 603-610.
Marbán, O., Mariscal, G. and Segovia, J. (2009), “A data mining and knowledge discovery process
model”, in Ponce, J. and Karahoca, A. (Eds), Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery in Real Life
Applications, I-Tech, Vienna, February, pp. 1-16.
Mariscal, G., Marban, O. and Fernandez, C. (2010), “A survey of data mining and knowledge
discovery process models and methodologies”, The Knowledge Engineering Review, Vol. 25
No. 2, pp. 137-166.
Martínez-Lorente, A.R., Dewhurst, F. and Dale, B.G. (1998), “Total quality management: origins and
evolution of the term”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 378-386.
Meeks, E. and Weingart, S. (2012), “The digital humanities contribution to topic modeling”, Journal of
Digital Humanities, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 1-6.
Miller, W.J. (1996), “A working definition for total quality management (TQM) researchers”,
Journal of Quality Management, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 149-159.
Mimno, D. (2012), “Computational historiography: data mining in a century of classics journals”,
Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage ( JOCCH), Vol. 5 No. 1, p. 3.
IJQRM Miner, G. (red.) (2012), Practical Text Mining and Statistical Analysis for Non-Structured Text Data
35,1 Applications, 1st ed., Academic Press, Waltham, MA.
Newman, D., Asuncion, A., Smyth, P. and Welling, M. (2009), “Distributed algorithms for topic models”,
Journal of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 10 No. 2009, pp. 1801-1828.
Oakland, J.S. (2014), Total Quality Management and Operational Excellence: Text with Cases,
4th ed., Routledge, New York, NY.
230 Perla, R.J. and Parry, G.J. (2011), “The epistemology of quality improvement: it’s all Greek”, BMJ Quality
and Safety, Vol. 20 No. S1, pp. i24-i27.
Pilkington, A. and Lawton, T.C. (2014), “Divided by a common language? Transnational insights into
epistemological and methodological approaches to strategic management research in
englishspeaking countries”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 47 No. 5, pp. 299-311.
Rahman, S.U. (2004), “The future of TQM is past. Can TQM be resurrected?”, Total Quality

Rahman, S.U. and Sohal, A.S. (2002), “A review and classification of total quality management research
in Australia and an agenda for future research”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Reinartz, T. (2002), “Stages of the discovery process”, in Klösgen, W. and Zytkow, J.M. (Eds), Handbook
of Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, Oxford University Press, Inc., New York, NY,
pp. 185-192.
Rogberg, M. (2006), “Den modeföljande organisationen. Om acceptansen av TQM och andra populära
managementmodeller”, PhD-dissertation, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm.
Schoengrund, C. (1996), “Aristotle and total quality management”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 7
No. 1, pp. 79-92.
Sebastianelli, R., Tamimi, N. and Iacocca, K. (2015), “Improving the quality of environmental
management: impact on shareholder value”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Senge, P. (1992), “The real message of the quality movement: building learning organizations”,
Journal for Quality and Participation, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 30-38.
Sila, I. and Ebrahimpour, M. (2002), “An investigation of the total quality management survey based
research published between 1989 and 2000: a literature review”, International Journal of Quality
& Reliability Management, Vol. 19 No. 7, pp. 902-970.
Singh, P.J. and Smith, A. (2006), “Uncovering the faultlines in quality management”, Total Quality
Sousa, R. and Voss, C. (2002), “Quality management re-visited: a reflective review and agenda for future
research”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 91-109.
Steyvers, M. and Griffiths, T. (2007), “Probabilistic topic models”, Handbook of Latent Semantic
Analysis, Vol. 427 No. 7, pp. 424-440.
Stuti, K. and Veenu, M. (2013), “Evaluation of text document clustering approach based on particle
swarm optimization”, Central European Journal of Computer Science, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 69-90.
Uzuner, S. (2008), “Multilingual scholars’ participation in core/global academic communities:
a literature review”, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 250-263.
Van Der Wiele, A., Williams, A.R.T. and Dale, B.G. (2000), “Total quality management: is it a fad,
fashion, or fit?”, ASQ Quality Management Journal, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 65-79.
Wallach, H.M., Murray, I., Salakhutdinov, R. and Mimno, D. (2009), “Evaluation methods for topic
models”, Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference on Machine Learning, ACM,
pp. 1105-1112.
Weiss, S.M., Indurkhya, N. and Zhang, T. (2012), Fundamentals of Predictive Text Mining, Springer
London, London.
Welling, M., Chemudugunta, C. and Sutter, N. (2008), “Deterministic latent variable models and their Quality
pitfalls”, In SDM, pp. 196-207. management
Winter, S.G. (1994), “Organizing for continuous improvement: evolutionary theory meets the quality research
revolution”, in Baum, J.A. and Singh, J.V. (Eds), Evolutionary Dynamics of Organizations, Oxford
University Press, pp. 90-108.
Wirth, R. and Hipp, J. (2000), “CRISP-DM: towards a standard process model for data mining”,
Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on the Practical Applications of Knowledge
Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 29-39.
231
Wu, J. (2012), Advances in K-Means Clustering: A Data Mining Thinking, Springer Science &
Business Media, Heidelberg.
Xie, P. and Xing, E. (2013), “Integrating document clustering and topic modeling”, Uncertainty in
Artificial Intelligence – Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Conference, Bellevue, WA, August 11-15.
Xu, Q. (2000), “On the way to knowledge: making a discourse at quality”, Organization, Vol. 7 No. 3,
pp. 427453.
Zain, Z.M., Dale, B.G. and Kehoe, D.F. (2001), “Total quality management: an examination of the
writings from a UK perspective”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 129-137.
Zairi, M. (1994), “TQM: what is wrong with the terminology”, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 6 No. 4,
pp. 6-8.
Zbaracki, M.J. (1998), “The rhetoric and reality of total quality management”, Administrative
Science Quarterly, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 602-636.
Further reading
Glenisson, P., Glänzel, W., Janssens, F. and De Moor, B. (2005), “Combining full text and bibliometric
information in mapping scientific disciplines”, Information Processing & Management, Vol. 41
No. 6, pp. 1548-1572.
Nair, A. (2006), “Meta-analysis of the relationship between quality management practices and firm
performance – implications for quality management theory development”, Journal of Operations
Newman, D., Chemudugunta, C., Smyth, P. and Steyvers, M. (2006), “Analyzing entities and topics in
news articles using statistical topic models”, in Mehrotra, S., Zeng, D., Chen, H., Thuraisingham, B.
and Wang, F.Y. (Eds), Intelligence and Security Informatics, Springer, Berlin and Heidelberg,
pp. 93-104.
Rosen-Zvi, M., Chemudugunta, C., Griffiths, T., Smyth, P. and Steyvers, M. (2010), “Learning
author-topic models from text corpora”, ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS),
Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 1-38.
Corresponding author
Daniel Carnerud can be contacted at: daniel.carnerud@miun.se
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

19 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

19 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management

25 years of quality management research – outlines and trends

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

IJQRM QUALITY PAPER

Materials and methods

• The journals had to be peer-reviewed;

in RapidMiner exa exa inp thr

Studios ori fil

Probabilistic topic modeling

7 clusters Cluster 5 Cluster 5.0 Cluster 5.4

Cluster 0 637 15 685 31 16 42 6 1 156 19 4

probabilistic topic Quality

1990-2014 (nstart 1,000) 1990-2014 (nstart 2000) Interpretation

and cluster 5.4.0

results from topic

display as well as how

Outlines and trends in the data

IJQRM TQMBE TQMJ Total (IJQRM, TQMBE, TQMJ)

IJQRM, TQMJ &

Cluster 5.5 (4%)

Cluster 5.4.1 (2%)

Cluster 0 (13%) Cluster 3 (6%) Cluster 5 (18%) Cluster 6 (9%)

Cluster 2 (15%) Cluster 5 (9%)

Cluster 0.0 (5%)

Lo and Chai (2012) Central topics Semi-central topics

strategic management teaching, executive development and consulting are likely to be

Managerial and policy implications

Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 411-422.

You might also like