Total Quality Management & Business Excellence

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ctqm20

Quality 2030: quality management for the future

Anders Fundin, Johan Lilja, Yvonne Lagrosen & Bjarne Bergquist

To cite this article: Anders Fundin, Johan Lilja, Yvonne Lagrosen & Bjarne Bergquist (2020):
Quality 2030: quality management for the future, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence,
DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2020.1863778

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2020.1863778

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group

Published online: 29 Dec 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1938

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ctqm20
Total Quality Management, 2020
https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2020.1863778

Quality 2030: quality management for the future

ac*
Anders Fundin , Johan Liljab, Yvonne Lagrosenc and Bjarne Bergquistd
a
SIQ – The Swedish Institute for Quality, Drakegatan 6, SE 412 50, Gothenburg, Sweden;
b
Department of Quality Management and Mechanical Engineering, Mid Sweden University,
Östersund, Sweden; cSchool of Innovation, Design and Engineering, Mälardalen University,
Eskilstuna, Sweden; dBusiness Administration and Industrial Engineering, Luleå University of
Technology, Luleå, Sweden

Quality management (QM) has shown an impressive ability to update and evolve. The
purpose of this paper is to highlight themes that have been identified as vital and
important for research projects within QM during the coming decade. The paper is
also an attempt to initiate research for the emerging 2030 agenda for QM, here
referred to as ‘Quality 2030’. This article is based on extensive data gathered
during a workshop process conducted in two main steps: (1) a collaborative
brainstorming workshop with 22 researchers and practitioners (spring 2019) and (2)
an appreciative inquiry summit with 20 researchers and practitioners (autumn
2019). The process produced five collectively elaborated and designed future
research themes for QM: (a) systems perspectives applied, (b) stability in change,
(c) models for smart self-organising, (d) integrating sustainable development, and
(e) higher purpose as QM booster. The process also identified a positive core of
QM, defined as core values and aspects in the field and practice that need to be
preserved and nurtured in the future.
Keywords: quality management; Agenda 2030; sustainable development; complex
systems; higher purpose; self-organisation; systems theory; Quality 5.0

1. Introduction
Over the years, quality management (QM) has shown an impressive ability to update and
evolve in response to the context and shifting needs of organisations. Hermel (1997), for
example, describes the development of QM in terms of four great periods, from the begin-
ning of the twentieth century to the 1980s, with the focus shifting from inspection in the
first period to total quality in the fourth. Dahlgaard (1999) describes the development of
QM in three phases from the mid-1940s to the early 1990s. A few years later, Deleryd
and Fundin (2015) proposed the concept of Quality 5.0, asserting that after four major gen-
erations of QM is a new paradigm and a fifth generation of QM with a predominant focus
on sustainability.
From a futuristic viewpoint, the need to evolve seems as high as ever. Several impor-
tant contextual changes can already be spotted. For example, the goals expressed in the
2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (United Nations Sustainable Development
Goals, n.d.) consider the core values of QM from another perspective. The future also
seems to hold an increasing degree of uncertainty and complexity for QM to operate in.
The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic exemplifies the interconnectedness and volatility that

*Corresponding author. Email: anders.fundin@siq.se; anders.fundin@mdh.se

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
2 A. Fundin et al.

current and future organisations need to handle. Recent discussions in the Dutch Academy
pointed to the urgent need for a fourth paradigm of QM to meet the needs of the future (van
Kemenade & Hardjono, 2019). The proposed paradigm, in line with Backström et al.
(2017), labelled the ‘emergence paradigm of QM’, is described as a radical change of
metaphor. Rather than leading and approaching the organisation as an ‘army’ or a
‘robot’ as in the early paradigms of QM, the emergence paradigm stresses the need to
approach QM as ‘a jazz combo that continuously improvises within the context’ (van
Kemenade & Hardjono, 2019, p.161). The cited authors predict that QM leadership will
use even more shared and participatory practices such as appreciative inquiry and the
Socratic café. In sum, the proven ability of QM to evolve still seems crucial.
What would be the most vital and important QM research projects that we need to
initiate now in order to develop QM practice and knowledge for future success? The
authors of this paper have explored and co-created future practices around this question
together with eight Swedish universities that are pioneers in QM and the SIQ Excellence
Centre of the Swedish Institute for Quality (SIQ), including organisations from both the
private and the public sphere, all dedicated to QM excellence in the future.
The purpose of this paper is to highlight themes that have been identified as vital and
important for research projects within QM during the coming decade. The paper is also an
attempt to initiate research for the emerging 2030 agenda for quality management, here
referred to as ‘Quality 2030’.
The article is based on substantial data gathered during a workshop process carried out
in two steps: (1) a collaborative brainstorming workshop with 22 researchers and prac-
titioners (spring 2019) and (2) an appreciative inquiry summit with 20 researchers and
practitioners (autumn 2019). The process collectively designed five research themes for
future QM practice and research: (a) systems perspectives applied, (b) stability in
change, (c) models for smart self-organisation, (d) integrating sustainable development,
and (e) higher purpose as QM booster. Additionally, the process identified a positive
core of QM, defined as core values and aspects in the field and practice of QM that
need to be nurtured in the future.
The article has the following disposition: First, the research methodology is presented
followed by a consolidation of the empirical results from the workshop process. This is
followed by a synthesis of the resulting Quality 2030 agenda together with suggested refer-
ences and perspectives for projects related to each research theme. Finally, the article pre-
sents conclusions and ideas for future research.

2. Research methodology
The paper is based on several sources of data gathered during workshops. The workshop
process was inspired by dialogic organisation development (Bushe & Marshak, 2015;
Marshak & Bushe, 2013) and design thinking (Brown, 2008, 2009; Kelley, 2001, 2005).

2.1. The workshop process

The process was conducted in two steps: (1) a collaborative brainstorming workshop with
22 researchers and practitioners (spring 2019) and (2) an appreciative inquiry summit with
20 researchers and practitioners (autumn 2019). Table 1 presents the numbers of partici-
pant organisations and respondents in the process by organisation type.
Appreciative inquiry (AI), used in the second step, is an important advance that origi-
nated in action research (Bushe & Pitman, 1991; Cooperrider & Srivastva, 1987). AI was
 Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 3

Table 1. Numbers of participant organisations and researchers/experts in the two-step workshop

process by organisation type.
Participants No of organisations No of respondents
Public sector 3 4
Private sector 5 12
Universities 8 15
Research institute 1 2
Total 17 33

not only a great fit to achieve the goal of step 2 but also provided the participants with a
first-hand experience of the participatory, self-organising tools and practices proposed as
the core of the next QM paradigm required (van Kemenade & Hardjono, 2019).
During the AI summit, the participants were guided towards identifying and forming
a future research agenda for QM according to the first three steps of the 4D cycle (Dis-
covery, Dream, Design, and Destiny) of AI as shown in Figure 1. The summit used
‘QM 2030’ and four subtopics that emerged as an affirmative topic choice from the
brainstorming idea clusters in step 1. The workshop then started with the Discovery
phase – a collective inquiry in pairs led by generative questions such as ‘Try to remem-
ber and tell more about when you have experienced what we want to strengthen in QM
for the future?’ and ‘What are the historical strengths of QM that you believe are essen-
tial elements that must be nurtured for the future and why?’ The participants then
entered the Dream phase of the cycle and self-organised to brainstorm on what the situ-
ation might be if the strengths and success factors identified occurred more frequently.
Based on the images that unfolded of what might be the future of QM, participants
were asked to select and design the most promising and attractive QM research
theme and work packages. The ongoing final phase, called Destiny, refers to the

Figure 1. The 4D cycle of appreciative inquiry with the four phases of Discovery, Dream, Design,
and Destiny (Cooperrider et al., 2008).
4 A. Fundin et al.

follow up and implementation of the desired designs after the summit. For further
details about appreciative inquiry, see, for example, Cooperrider et al. (2008).
Given the action research approach used, openly sharing aspects related to the quality
of the conducted process is a critical requirement (Bradbury et al., 2019b). An important
aspect is reflexivity, referred to as ‘the extent to which self-location as a change agent’ is
acknowledged by the authors. It is further argued that authors take a personal, involved,
and self-critical stance as reflected in clarity about their role in the action research
process, clarity about the context in which the research takes place, and clarity about
what led to their involvement in this research (Bradbury et al., 2019a, p.17)
An attempt to contribute with such clarity is described below.

2.2. The authors’ role in the process

All four authors of this paper were part of the steering group of the Swedish Quality Man-
agement Academy (SQMA) during 2019. As such, they were involved in the design and
implementation of the two steps in the workshop process described here. The first
author, Director of research at the Swedish Institute for Quality (SIQ), facilitated the
first step (the collaborative brainstorming workshop). The second author facilitated the
second step (the appreciative inquiry summit), given his extensive experience in appreci-
ative inquiry. However, the design was co-created together with the entire SQMA steering
group, including representatives from eight Swedish universities. During the workshops,
all the authors also took part in the discussion and other processes together with the
other participants. However, only the first author played the role of facilitator in the first
step.

2.3. The context of the research

Both workshops were officially arranged by the Swedish Institute for Quality. SIQ is the
national centre for business excellence in Sweden. The research institute is a non-profit
organisation founded in 1990 with the support of the Swedish government and the SIQ
members’ association, today comprising more than 100 private companies, institutions,
and public sector undertakings. SIQ is assigned the responsibility of promoting quality
development in Sweden by creating, gathering, and spreading knowledge in quality and
business excellence. The national institute strives to support and inspire all types of organ-
isations to continuously improve and learn from others.
SIQ, in coordination with SQMA, is closely linked to Swedish universities and
research institutes. SQMA is represented by eight universities in Sweden: Chalmers Uni-
versity of Technology, Karlstad University, Linköping University, Luleå University of
Technology, Mid Sweden University, Mälardalen University, Royal Institute of Technol-
ogy, and Uppsala University. The SIQ Excellence Centre also coordinates with eleven
private and public organisations in state-of-the art research on QM.

2.4. What motivated the authors to participate in this research

The authors are all active members of the academic community, driving quality manage-
ment research and education in Sweden. They share SQMA’s goal of strengthening QM
research and practice by working together. All the authors were therefore highly interested
in co-creating a national research agenda for QM. Regarding Quality 2030, used as the
affirmative topic, the authors also have a history of initiating and managing projects and
 Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 5

conducting QM research on sustainable development, particularly the 2030 Agenda for

Sustainable Development (Eriksson et al., 2016; Fundin et al., 2018; Klefsjö et al.,
2008; Lagrosen & Lagrosen, 2019; Lilja et al., 2019; Siva et al., 2016).

3. Results from the empirical investigation

This section presents the results from the two-step workshop process.

3.1. Results from step 1: collaborative brainstorming workshop

The brainstorming resulted in 22 specific project ideas for future QM research, which were
considered interesting and relevant for both the industry and academia. These ideas were
then clustered in several steps into themes. The authors used the themes as the basis for for-
mulating four affirmative subtopics, shown in Table 2. These subtopics were later used to
design four corresponding interview guides for the AI summit conducted in the second step.

3.2. Results from step 2: the appreciative inquiry summit

The second step provided several results, including success factors of experiences shared
during 20 reflective AI interviews. This section aims to share the end results regarding the
five QM research themes selected and designed for Quality 2030. During the AI summit,
the five research themes were presented by self-organised design teams in two-minute
pitches that were recorded on video. The themes were not only communicated by words
but also visualised through various drawings and prototypes of Lego. We reproduce the
text here to reflect the essence of those recordings. Figure 2 shows the resulting five
themes. Notably, theme E is based on the results from the Dream phase of the process,
as the participants prioritised teaming up around the other four themes during the final
Design phase. However, the interest in theme E was strong and the input rich. It is, there-
fore, presented as part of the agenda.

3.2.1. Research theme (A) system perspectives applied

The design team behind this theme highlighted the importance of advancing knowledge
and practice in three areas where a wider systems perspective was considered necessary.

(1) Creating a picture of customers and stakeholders depending on the group and the
organisational level.
(2) Understanding the value creation process – where we are, what precedes, and what
follows.

Table 2. Four affirmative subtopics formulated by the authors based on a clustering of 22

research project ideas generated in step 1.
Affirmative subtopics
A stable core as an enabler of rapid movement and innovative thinking
Self-organisation for significant value and success
A more systemic/holistic view and understanding of value creation for speed and success
An inviting and inquiring leadership that drives engagement, involvement, and success
6 A. Fundin et al.

Figure 2. The five research themes of the Quality 2030 agenda as identified in the study. The arrows
indicate that the themes all aim to explore and expand the fronts of QM knowledge and practice.

(3) Studying a time and a life cycle perspective, for example, metal delivered from
recycling being reprocessed to a car and then back to recycling again.

The suggested research design would create archetypes through studies and stories
related to areas 1–3. Analysing archetypes would be conducted with either reinforcing
or weakening loops.
The team highlighted the need for multiple system perspectives to enable better
decisions. In sum, a guiding question for the theme is, how could QM make further pro-
gress in not only advocating but by applying system perspectives?

3.2.2. Research theme (B) stability in change

The design team behind this theme highlighted the importance of advancing knowledge of
the dynamics between stability and change through three work packages.

(1) Review of state-of-the art research regarding principles and frameworks for
leading and managing through rapid changes.
(2) Performing multiple case studies, including both fast- and slow-moving organis-
ations. The cases should be similar and different in terms of speed of change to
aid the understanding of the dynamics between stability and change.
(3) Using the new knowledge gained from steps 1 and 2 in testbeds to operationalise
and examine the new theories as new case studies.
 Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 7

The new knowledge could bring about improvements in frameworks and management
models to lead and govern through rapid changes. It could also lead to improved capabili-
ties to drive change and stability simultaneously. In sum, a guiding question for the theme
is, how could QM be taken further by considering stability and change as potential syner-
getic allies?

3.2.3. Research theme (C) models for smart self-organising

The design team behind this theme highlighted the importance of advancing knowledge
and practice related to self-organisation. The smart self-organisation models, which this
theme aims to achieve, are validated models to help leaders combine and balance self-
organisation with traditional leadership. The theme included three work packages entitled
calls for change:

(1) Deriving power and insights from existing theories and models with different per-
spectives on self-organisation but which also harness the ability of organisations to
enact differently, for example, to solve problems or to better handle challenges.
This step would postulate concepts and mental models for the final experimental
step.
(2) Learning from best practice; studying international benchmarks on innovative
ways of how self-organisation relates to and coexists with traditional leadership.
Such results aim to inspire and stimulate the concept development of models for
smart self-organisation brought into the final step.
(3) Co-designing, testing, applying, and studying various contextualised combinations
of self-organisation and traditional leadership in selected organisations and depart-
ments. The case selection would depend on commitment from leaders and
employees.

The work package aims to facilitate the capability of organisations and leaders to more
wisely organise and lead compared to traditional leadership. A guiding question for the
theme is, what would be the best way to realise the potential of self-organisation?

3.2.4. Research theme (D) integrating sustainable development

The design team behind this theme highlighted the importance of revealing how QM is
related to sustainable development. The work package focused on building new knowledge
to improve communication in order to achieve and accelerate the integration of sustainable
development into QM. It contains three critical steps towards integrating quality with econ-
omic, ecologic, and social sustainability:

(1) Investigate how the three sustainability dimensions are related in QM terms. The
target is to create a model describing the relationship between quality and sustain-
ability. The model should also describe how the three sustainability dimensions
(economic, ecologic, and social) are related.
(2) Testing and verification towards integrating sustainability with quality. Conduct a
survey with two central questions: (a) ‘What do you think of when you hear the
word quality?’ and (b) ‘What do you feel when you hear the word quality?’
Such a survey will form a starting point to design communication content, that
8 A. Fundin et al.

is, the feelings and thoughts that management needs to change and address in its
communication.
(3) Improved ways of communicating quality by integrating communication with
current sustainability challenges.
(4) To summarise, a guiding question for the theme is, how could the target and
focus of QM be expanded to integrate sustainable development in a natural
manner?

3.2.5. Research theme (E) higher purpose as QM booster

The brainstorming team behind this theme highlighted the importance of advancing knowl-
edge and practice concerning managing and enabling quality in relation to a higher purpose
for a more sustainable and flourishing future. An expanding body of knowledge suggests
that a higher purpose can be a strong driver of improvements and performance in organ-
isations. The team aimed to explore that potential and advance practice, as summarised
in three guiding questions:

(1) How might QM be used as a core strategy of organisations or a society aiming to

create a more sustainable future? Could, for example, the Toyota Kata (see Rother,
2009) be expanded and set to work towards a vision of a more sustainable organ-
isation, region, nation, or world?
(2) How could a strong and authentic organisational purpose (e.g. contributing to a
more sustainable and flourishing world) boost the engagement to improve and
deliver quality? What is the difference between being perceived as authentic
and as fake?
(3) How might a higher purpose help to bridge and connect multiple organisations
across organisational borders into improving and delivering quality?

3.2.6. The positive core of QM – elements to be preserved for the future

Given the resulting themes in the Quality 2030 research agenda (see Figure 2), the future of
QM can easily be understood as only a matter of expansion. However, as part of acknowl-
edging the importance of ‘stability in change’, the workshop process itself focused on iden-
tifying what in AI is referred to as ‘the positive core’ of QM, that is, its strengths to be
preserved for the future. The corresponding question included in the AI interview guide
during the Discovery phase was, ‘No matter how the field and practice develop or
change, what is it in today’s quality management that you appreciate and believe we
should keep and maintain?’ The 38 answers to that question were then clustered into six
core elements, as seen in Table 3. The clustering was made through a dialogue-based itera-
tive process by the two first authors of this paper.

4. Getting the research themes in quality 2030 started

Given the five themes identified as part of the Quality 2030 research agenda, what could
and would be the fruitful perspectives to get these themes started? This section aims to
provide what we propose as a few valuable starting points. These are also analysed in
the light of previous research such as main challenges in organisations (Swedish Quality

Table 3. The positive core of quality management (QM) as articulated during the AI summit.
Identified positive core element
of QM
Value as a guiding and unifying
WHY for the entire
organisation.
Leading with a systems
perspective and in
collaboration.
A belief in human potential,
aiming to strengthen the
system around people, for
people.
Providing systematics and
methodologies for inquiring
and understanding
underlying causes and
variation.
Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 9
Articulated components
clustered into the element Interpretation during the analysis
. Customer focus ‘A tradition of creating and
. Customer orientation working in practice with a
. Put our value streams at unifying external target for the
the centre entire organisation, a higher
. Understanding of purpose’.
stakeholders
. Leadership that drives a
purpose
. System approach ‘A unique ability to apply and
. Collaboration and holistic hold models that attempt to
view embrace and grasp the totality
. A tradition of and complexity of reality.
collaboration and culture Collaboration and systems in
of inclusion focus’.
. Cooperation
. The legacy of system
thinking and the whole,
how do we support it in
practice
. Ability to collaborate
. We understand how
organisations work
. Everyone’s involvement ‘People, and all the people of the
and commitment organisation, are stressed as the
. Employee participation most important resource for
. The good human view (on organisations to learn, develop,
employees but also on the and succeed over time’.
customer and
stakeholders)
. Release the collective
(commitment), letting
people be part of a learning
journey
. Focus on the
management’s
commitment
. Make decisions based on ‘Enabling understanding of
facts variation and robustness with a
. Data-driven problem tradition in reliability and
solving and systematic statistics. Providing tools and
(basic) mindset for studying and
. Structured approach understanding underlying
. Systematics (awareness, relationships/causes’.
understanding of/for
variation, robustness/
predictability)
. Structure and stability
(Continued)
10 A. Fundin et al.

Table 3. Continued.
Identified positive core element Articulated components
of QM clustered into the element Interpretation during the analysis
. The process can be both an
obstacle and a support
. Quality technology tools
can have other uses

Research that is close to
practice, relevant, and
interactive.
. The internship-related
approach that exists in the
field (research approach)
. Interactive (research)
approach
. Scientific methodology
with a philosophical view
of improvement
‘An academic research that has
developed knowledge and
practice interactively in
partnership with organisations
and businesses. Practically
close and relevant’.

Knowledge on HOW to . Evaluate and be aware of ‘An ideal, an expectation, and

develop organisational
capacity for learning, change,
and adaptation.
their own ability practices to enable continuous
. Reflection and learning improvement and development
. Ability to improve within organisations’
(problem solving, process
development and
innovation)
. Transparency for change
and renewal

Note: The positive core corresponds to what the participants appreciate and value about QM and believe we
should keep and maintain.

Management Academy [SQMA], 2018) and propositions for research in QM (Fundin et al.,
2018; Eriksson et al., 2016).

4.1. Inspiration for research theme A: system perspectives applied

Systems thinking has long been considered a core ingredient of QM. For example,
Deming (1994) considered ‘appreciation for a system’ as the first of the four areas
of profound knowledge needed for management. However, moving from knowledge
and appreciation to practice and application remains a challenging task. Some of the
challenges, as well as potential rewards, of doing so are illustrated in the Harley-David-
son development (Oosterwal, 2010) on how the company transformed and designed
their product development system and how it continuously was developed through
organisational learning. Harley-Davidson were able to improve internal efficiency
through leadership forums that reflected on systems thinking. Senge (see Senge,
2006) and others from MIT have worked directly with the leadership, exploring
novel ways of applying systems thinking. One of the major takeaways was the
insight that short-term improvements often involve significant long-term consequences.
For example, moving or depleting resources from future development projects to fire-
fighting in current projects can provide immediate cost savings but may damage the
long-term viability of the organisation (Repenning, 2001). This is also in line with
Fundin et al. (2018) who address a need for research that determines how context
 Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 11

influences the way QM is applied and investigates how it can improve organisational
learning and innovation, exploring the ways the principal values of QM can be better
integrated into organisations. System perspectives applied also implies what Eriksson
et al. (2016) and Fundin et al. (2018) are addressing in terms of making QM a strategic
issue for not only company owners but also customers by involving them in the
improvement activities (Eriksson et al. 2016). It is also what SQMA (2018) describes
in terms of the importance to increase knowledge about systematic QM at a strategic
level.
Organisations can be perceived as complex social systems, and applying systems
thinking may help one understand how the joint system behaves (Sadia, 2016). Obviously,
systems thinking is also a significant feature of a learning organisation (Senge, 2006).
More recent work on leading complex adaptive systems might also inspire this theme
(Uhl-Bien & Arena, 2017, 2018).

4.2. Inspiration for research theme B: stability in change

The term ‘stability in change’ refers to the notion that organisations need not just con-
tinuity, or stability, but also change, as has been elaborated by Fry and Srivastva
(1992), for example. The accessibility heuristics (Kahneman, 2011) highlight aspects
that generate interest. Such factors may include disruptive technology or global
warming, or our inability to evaluate low risks. Our cognitive bias risks leading us
to believe that all organisations must be ready for rapid changes. However, in line
with Fundin et al. (2018), SQMA (2018), and Eriksson et al. (2016), there is a need
to find ways to combine the efforts of the often inward-looking QM and preparing
the organisation for rapid changes, or to maintain two ideas simultaneously. Indeed,
developing the organisation’s ability to handle new external forces while maintaining
stability and handling the internal processes was one of the three significant challenges
that Swedish top-level management respondents highlighted in a 2018 study (SQMA,
2018). Swedish managers see the need to use digitalisation, recruit employees with rel-
evant competencies, and create robust processes that are easy to adapt for new possibi-
lities as formidable challenges. Fundin et al. (2018) describe this as a need to explore
how QM can contribute to organisational ambidexterity and adaptability while Eriksson
et al. (2016) address this in terms of developing processes that are robust yet still easily
adaptable. The word pairs of stable/flexible and robust/changeable were considered
almost as antonyms. This phenomenon is also introduced as ‘emergent quality improve-
ment’, a new paradigm of managing operations (Backström et al., 2017; Fundin et al.,
2017). The well-known organisational ambidexterity framework of Benner and
Tushman (2003) has inspired a great deal of recent QM research attempting to
explore the difficulties of combining the internal control perspective to eradicate
errors and the external perspective to explore new markets or find better ways to
satisfy current and potential customers. A sustainable organisation in a fast-changing
environment needs to be both inward- and outward-looking and work both with
exploration (external innovation such as innovation of products) and exploitation (inno-
vation with an internal focus, for instance, on processes).
In 2019, a family of innovation standards was released: the 56 000 series on innovation
management (International Organization for Standardization [ISO], 2019). Its application
in relation to quality standards might inspire research in this theme addressing the question
whether and how innovation and more radical change is the future of QM, which is elabo-
rated by Lilja et al. (2017).
12 A. Fundin et al.

4.3. Inspiration for research theme C: models for smart self-organisation

QM has historically been focusing on leadership and improvement practices for complex
and challenging situations. It is in these conditions that cause–effect relationships can be
analysed and understood for solution implementation based on technical expertise
(Snowden & Boone, 2007). However, research shows that an appropriate leadership
style is one that enables and supports self-organisation in the face of increasingly
complex and challenging situations (e.g. Bushe & Marshak, 2015; Marshak & Bushe,
2018; Uhl-Bien & Arena, 2018). For example, tracking what happens, supporting initiat-
ives that hold promise, spreading what has been learned, and scaling up successful inno-
vations are important leadership roles (Bushe & Marshak, 2015). This kind of leadership,
aimed at leading an improvised jazz combo rather than an army, is also called for in terms
of the new ‘emergence paradigm’ of QM (Fundin et al., 2017; van Kemenade & Hardjono,
2019). This theme is also in line with SQMA (2018) in terms of making it possible for
organisations to improve the ability to handle new conditions, new thinking about
process management (Eriksson et al., 2016), how to facilitate organisational learning
and innovation, and the role of different contexts while applying QM (Fundin et al.,
2018). Furthermore, an increasing number of what Laloux (2014) referred to as evolution-
ary-teal organisations do not even see a need for classical power hierarchies or managers.

4.4. Inspiration for research theme D: integrating sustainable development

Linking quality and sustainability has received increasing interest in the context of
growing societal needs in areas such as quality-based management for future-ready corpor-
ations serving society and the planet (Ramanathan, 2019); excellence for sustainability
(Isaksson, 2019); development of operations in a more sustainable way in several dimen-
sions, such as economic, social, and ecologic sustainability (SQMA, 2018); and manage-
ment of quality for a sustainable future (Vandenbrande, 2019). The planetary boundaries
(Rockström et al., 2009; Steffen et al., 2015) show limitations, but transformation is cer-
tainly feasible (Randers et al., 2018).
The research theme will focus on new models and on examining how to position
quality in relation to sustainability. The funnel model conceptualised by Deleryd and
Fundin (2015) and the arguments in line with Quality 5.0 outline one base. A critical
enabler for the research theme is the strategic alliance with sustainability experts and
researchers associated with the UN’s sustainability goals (e.g. Randers et al., 2018).
This theme might also be inspired by the integration of environmental management
systems (EMS), for example, with quality management systems (QMS), which has been
a focus area with the introduction of the ISO 14000 system standards (e.g. Aboulnaga,
1998).

4.5. Inspiration for research theme E: higher purpose as QM booster

This research theme twists the relationship in not just assuming that QM should contribute
to sustainability. It also aims to explore how a higher purpose, such as contributing to a
more sustainable and flourishing world, could boost QM. Such a twist has been elaborated
recently, for example, by Quinn and Thakor (2019), who explored steps for creating a
purpose-driven organisation. Cooperrider and Fry (2012) coined the term ‘mirror flourish-
ing’ to describe similar boosting effects, stating that ‘when people learn about and work
toward building a sustainable world they too are poised to flourish in ways that elevate
innovation, personal excellence and workplace well-being’ (p. 3). In addition, Lagrosen
 Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 13

and Lagrosen (2019) explored the underlying mechanisms for sustainable QM, finding that
it was driven by a higher purpose (e.g. to grow and enrich life) rather than just profitability.
Higher purpose as QM booster has certainly also some indirect linkages to earlier research
in terms of leadership with a need of research on how the role of quality managers can be
broaden to include quality at a strategic level (Elg et al., 2011), and how top managers can
adopt the responsibilities of quality managers (Fundin et al., 2018), but also on how QM
can be made a strategic issue for company owners (Eriksson et al., 2016).

5. Synthesis of findings
Given the individual results presented in Section 4, many of the research themes identified
suggest a shift in QM, dynamically combining and moving between multiple perspectives
or paradigms of management. This is in line with the perspectives of van Kemenade and
Hardjono (2019), who argue the need to move QM towards epistemic fluency, as defined
by Markauskaite and Goodyear (2016), in terms of ‘the capacity to understand, switch
between and combine different kinds of knowledge and different ways of knowing
about the world’. This is also in line with the new Quality 5.0 paradigm in terms of apply-
ing QM as a means to determine how to make better decisions and apply new working pro-
cedures to achieve sustainable operations and, by extension, a sustainable society (Deleryd
& Fundin, 2015).
Another vital aspect of the five themes presented here as an emerging research agenda
for QM is that they ideally should be conducted with close interaction. There is much to
gain if these five themes can be coordinated rather than driven as five separate research
projects or areas. The call to develop a systems perspective, now set on the agenda,
should inform all research conducted in accordance with the agenda. See Figure 3.

6. Conclusions
The article presents results from a participatory research during 2019, involving several
researchers and practitioners. The study was designed in two steps: (1) a collaborative
brainstorming workshop with 22 researchers and practitioners (spring 2019) and (2) an
appreciative inquiry summit with 20 researchers and practitioners (autumn 2019). The
studies resulted in an agenda for quality management for the future – Quality 2030.

6.1. General conclusions

Quality 2030 consists of five collectively designed themes for future QM research and
practice: (a) systems perspectives applied, (b) stability in change, (c) models for smart
self-organising, (d) integrating sustainable development, and (e) higher purpose as QM
booster. The study also identified a positive core of QM (values and aspects that need to
be preserved and nurtured), consisting of the following elements: (1) value as a guiding
and unifying WHY for the entire organisation; (2) leading with a systems perspective
and in collaboration; (3) belief in human potential, aiming to strengthen the system
around people, for people; (4) providing systematics and methodologies for inquiring
and understanding underlying causes and variation; (5) research that is close to practice,
relevant, and interactive; and (6) knowledge on HOW to develop organisational capacity
for learning, change, and adaptation.
The results have critical research implications for Quality 2030 with important linkages
to other research domains. QM needs to be revitalised, which requires both
14 A. Fundin et al.

Figure 3. The five research themes of the Quality 2030 agenda together with the positive core of QM
as identified in the study. The arrows indicate that all themes aim to explore and expand QM knowl-
edge and practice. The tree metaphor also suggests that the research agenda aims to grow new
branches to the existing foliage of the QM tree while staying connected to and being nurtured by
the life-giving trunk consisting of the positive core of QM.

interdisciplinary and participatory research approaches that enable fast adoption of knowl-
edge. Our study also shows implications on what to nurture and preserve in terms of posi-
tive core elements.
The results also reflect practitioners’ support on how to design future QM strategies. In
an operational reality with many competing forces, Quality 2030 implies that many con-
flicting forces could be important to achieve a sustainable future. The results also imply
that nurturing and preserving positive core elements could lead to a stable transformation
of QM for fast-changing environments.

6.2. Limitations and future research

Although the study has a wide representation of QM researchers from all Swedish univer-
sities engaged in QM research, it is confined to one country. Moreover, the eight organis-
ations from both the public and private sectors do not constitute a sufficiently
representative group to allow strong generalisations of the results. Nevertheless, the QM
area needs to be revitalised with linkages to other research domains to support practice.
We suggest that future research should involve other research domains to develop,
 Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 15

nurture, and foster the QM agenda and revitalise QM. The methods used in the study could
be adopted as a basic framework for future research. However, we also propose that future
research should focus on developing an interactive research approach. While the agenda
provides content, the methods are critical means to not only integrating the new content
of the QM 2030 agenda into operations but also consciously deciding what to preserve
and nurture in order to achieve a sense of stability in QM transformation. This is important
in fast-changing environments. As for the future of QM, we believe that it would be equally
important to both identify the core strengths of QM to be preserved and built upon and
understand how to expand or evolve QM.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

ORCID
Anders Fundin http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3187-7932

References
Aboulnaga, I. A. (1998). Integrating quality and environmental management as competitive business
strategy for 21st century. Environmental Management and Health, 9(2), 65–71. https://doi.
org/10.1108/09566169810211168
Backström, T., Fundin, A., & Johansson, P. E. (Eds.). (2017). Innovative quality improvements in
operations: Introducing emergent quality management. Springer International.
Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The
productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238–256. https://doi.
org/10.5465/amr.2003.9416096
Bradbury, H., Glenzer, K., Ku, B., Columbia, D., Kjellström, S., Aragón, A. O., Warwick, R.,
Traeger, J., Apgar, M., Friedman, V., Hsia, H. C., Lifvergren, S., & Gray, P. (2019a).
What is good action research: Quality choice points with a refreshed urgency. Action
Research, 17(1), 14–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750319835607
Bradbury, H., Waddell, S., O’Brien, K., Apgar, M., Teehankee, B., & Fazey, I. (2019b). A call to
action research for transformations: The times demand it. Action Research, 17(1), 3–10.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750319829633
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–96.
Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires
innovation. HarperBusiness.
Bushe, G. R., & Marshak, R. J. (2015). Dialogic organization development: The theory and practice
of transformational change. Berrett-Koehler.
Bushe, G. R., & Pitman, T. (1991). Appreciative process: A method for transformational change. OD
Practitioner, 23(3), 1–4.
Cooperrider, D., & Fry, R. (2012). Mirror flourishing and the positive psychology of sustainability+.
The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 46(Summer), 3–12.
Cooperrider, D., & Srivastva, S. (1987). Appreciative inquiry in organizational life. In W. Pasmore,
& R. Woodman (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development (pp. 129–169).
JAI Press.
Cooperrider, D., Whitney, D. D., & Stavros, J. (2008). The appreciative inquiry handbook: For
leaders of change. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Dahlgaard, S. M. P. (1999). The evolution patterns of quality management: Some reflections on the
quality movement. Total Quality Management, 10(4–5), 473–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/
0954412997424
Deleryd, M., & Fundin, A. (2015, October 26–27). The fifth generation of quality concept [Paper
presentation]. The World Quality Forum of International Academy for Quality (IAQ),
Budapest, Hungary.
16 A. Fundin et al.

Deming, W. E. (1994). The new economics for industry, government, education (2nd ed).
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Advanced Engineering Study.
Elg, M., Gremyr, I., Hellström, A., & Witell, L. (2011). The role of quality managers in contempor-
ary organisations. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 22(8), 795–806. https://
doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2011.593899
Eriksson, H., Gremyr, I., Bergquist, B., Garvare, R., Fundin, A., Wiklund, H., Wester, M., &
Sörqvist, L. (2016). Exploring quality challenges and the validity of excellence models.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 36(10), 1201–1221.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-12-2014-0610
Fry, R., & Srivastva, S. (1992). Introduction: Continuity and change in organizational life. In S.
Srivastva, & R. E. Fry (Eds.), Executive and organizational continuity: Managing the para-
doxes of stability and change (pp. 1–16). Jossey-Bass.
Fundin, A., Bergman, B., & Elg, M. (2017). The quality dilemma: Combining development and stability.
In T. Backström, A. Fundin, & P. E. Johansson (Eds.), Innovative quality improvements in oper-
ations: Introducing emergent quality management (pp. 9–33). Springer International.
Fundin, A., Bergquist, B., Eriksson, H., & Gremyr, I. (2018). Challenges and propositions for
research in quality management. International Journal of Production Economics, 199, 125–
137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.02.020
Hermel, P. (1997). The new faces of total quality in Europe and the US. Total Quality Management, 8
(4), 131–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/0954412979578
International Organization for Standardization. (2019). Innovation management system: Guidance
(ISO 56002:2019).
Isaksson, R. (2019). Excellence for sustainability: Maintaining the license to operate. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2019.1593044
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.
Kelley, T. (with Littman, J.). (2001). The art of innovation: Lessons in creativity from IDEO,
America’s leading design firm. Crown Business.
Kelley, T. (with Littmann, J.). (2005). The ten faces of innovation: IDEO’s strategies for defeating
the devil’s advocate and driving creativity throughout your organization. Doubleday.
Klefsjö, B., Bergquist, B., & Garvare, R. (2008). Quality management and business excellence, cus-
tomers and stakeholders: Do we agree on what we are talking about, and does it matter? The
TQM Journal, 20(2), 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542730810857354
Lagrosen, Y., & Lagrosen, S. (2019). Creating a culture for sustainability and quality: A lean-
inspired way of working. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 1–15. https://
doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2019.1575199
Laloux, F. (2014). Reinventing organizations: A guide to creating organizations inspired by the next
stage in human consciousness. Nelson Parker.
Lilja, J., Hansen, D., Fredrikson, J., & Richardsson, D. (2017). Is innovation the future of quality
management? Searching for signs of quality and innovation management merging.
International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 9(3/4), 232–240. https://doi.org/10.
1108/IJQSS-03-2017-0024
Lilja, J., Hansen, D., Richardsson, D., & Svedin, I. (2019, October 13–15). How quality management
needs emergence for engaging Agenda 2030: As “improving” increasingly means getting a
complex system to take transformative steps towards sustainability and flourishing. [Paper
presentation]. The 22nd QMOD Conference, Krakow, Poland.
Markauskaite, L., & Goodyear, P. (2016). Epistemic fluency and professional education: Innovation,
knowledgeable action and actionable knowledge. Springer.
Marshak, R. J., & Bushe, G. R. (2013). An introduction to advances in dialogic organization devel-
opment. OD Practitioner, 45(1), 1–4.
Marshak, R. J., & Bushe, G. R. (2018). Planned and generative change in organization development.
OD Practitioner, 50(4), 9–15.
Oosterwal, D. P. (2010). The lean machine: How Harley-Davidson drove top-line growth and profit-
ability with revolutionary lean product development. Amacom.
Quinn, R. E., & Thakor, A. V. (2019). The economics of higher purpose: Eight counterintuitive steps
for creating a purpose-driven organization. Berret-Koehler.
Ramanathan, N. (2019). Quality-based management for future-ready corporations serving society
and planet. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.
1080/14783363.2019.1599715
 Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 17

Randers, J., Rockström, J., Stoknes, P. E., Golüke, U., Collste, D., & Cornell, S. (2018).
Transformation is feasible: How to achieve sustainable development goals within planetary
boundaries (Report dated October 17 to the Club of Rome). Stockholm Resilience Centre
and BI Norwegian Business School.
Repenning, N. P. (2001). Understanding fire fighting in new product development. The Journal of
Product Innovation Management, 18(5), 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.
1850285
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å, Chapin III, F. S., Lambin, E., Lenton, T. M.,
Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H., Nykvist, B., De Wit, C. A., Hughes, T., van der
Leeuw, S., Rodhe, H., Sörlin, S., Snyder, P. K., Costanza, R., Svedin, U., … Foley, J.
(2009). Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology
and Society, 14(2), Retrieved June 26, 2020, from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/
iss2/art32/ https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03180-140232
Rother, M. (2009). Toyota kata: Managing people for improvement, adaptiveness and superior
results. McGraw-Hill Professional.
Sadia, R. (2016). The relationship between employee health, quality culture and organizational effec-
tiveness: Findings from the literature. International Journal of Design & Nature and
Ecodynamics, 11(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.2495/DNE-V11-N1-1-9
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. Random
House Business Books.
Siva, V., Gremyr, I., Bergquist, B., Garvare, R., Zobel, T., & Isaksson, R. (2016). The support of
quality management to sustainable development: A literature review. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 138(2), 148–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.020
Snowden, D. J., & Boone, M. E. (2007). A leader’s framework for decision making. Harvard
Business Review, 85(11), 1–9.
SQMA. (2018). Organisationers främsta utmaningar: En studie med fem års horisont [Organisations’
main challenges: A study with a five-year horizon]. The Swedish Quality Management
Academy. Swedish Institute for Quality, Göteborg.
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., Biggs, R.,
Carpenter, S. R., de Vries, W., de Wit, C. A., Folke, C., Gerten, D., Heinke, J., Mace, G.
M., Persson, L. M., Ramanathan, V., Reyers, B., & Sörlin, S. (2015). Planetary boundaries:
Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 347(6223), 736–747. https://
doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855
Uhl-Bien, M., & Arena, M. (2017). Complexity leadership: Enabling people and organizations for
adaptability. Organizational Dynamics, 46(1), 9–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2016.
12.001
Uhl-Bien, M., & Arena, M. (2018). Leadership for organizational adaptability: A theoretical syn-
thesis and integrative framework. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 89–104. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.12.009
United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. (n.d.). Transforming our world: The 2030
agenda for sustainable development. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/
transformingourworld
Vandenbrande, W. W. (2019). Quality for a sustainable future. Total Quality Management &
Business Excellence, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2019.1588724
van Kemenade, E., & Hardjono, T. W. (2019). Twenty-first century total quality management: The
emergence paradigm. The TQM Journal, 31(2), 150–166. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-04-
2018-0045