Adapting Total Quality Management (TQM) to Government

Author(s): James E. Swiss

Source: Public Administration Review, Vol. 52, No. 4 (Jul. - Aug., 1992), pp. 356-362
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Society for Public Administration
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3110395 .
Accessed: 15/06/2014 23:07

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Wiley and American Society for Public Administration are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Public Administration Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.21 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 23:07:12 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Duringthe past ten years,totalqualitymanagement
(TQM) has had a majorimpacton businessmanage-
mentpractices,and has been adoptedby such high
profilecorporationsas GeneralMotors,Motorola,and
Xerox(Gabor,1990). Morerecently, TQM has begun
to spreadto manygovernment organizations.'TQM
has evenbeen endorsedby President Bush,who said,

Government "Reassertingour leadershipwillrequirea firmcommit-

mentto totalqualitymanagement
continuous improvement....
and theprinciple
Qualityimprovement
of
prin-
ciples apply...tothe publicsectoras well as private
James
E. Swiss,
North
Carolina
StateUniversity (CarrandLittman,
enterprise" 1990,p. 2).
Such enthusiastic endorsements oftensuggestthat
TQM can be transferred fromtheprivatesectorto the
Is totalqualitymanagement (TQM)usefulforpublic publicsectorwithverylittlemodification. Thesesug-
sectororganizations? JamesE. Swissarguesthatthe gestionsare mistaken.TQM can indeedhave a useful
orthodoxform ofTQMexpressed in theworksofW. roleto playin government, butonlyifitis substantially
EdwardsDemingand others willnotworkwellingov- modified to fitthepublicsector'suniquecharacteristics.
ernment agenciesfor ofreasons.Amongother Thisarticle
a variety attempts to sketchtheadaptationsnecessary
factorslimiting theusefulness
oforthodox TQMforpub- to turnorthodox,business-orientedTQM into a
licsectoragenciesis thestressonproducts rather
than reformed TQMthatwillsucceedin thepublicsector.
services,on welldefinedconsumer groups,on inputs
andprocessesrather thanresults,and on an organiza- TotalQuality Management's
tionculturewitha single-minded preoccupationwith BusinessBackground
quality. Swissdoes,however} see morehopefora con-
Totalqualitymanagement foruse
requiresadaptation
tribution ifa limited"reform TQM"approachis adopt-
in thepublicsectorbecauseitis verymucha product of
ed. Adopting majorfeaturesofthemoreorthodox
qualitycontroland industrial
statistical engineering and
approach,reform TQMwouldemphasizeclientfeed- almostall ofitsearlyapplicationswereforassembly-line
back,performance monitoring,continuous improve- workand otherroutineprocesses.TQM was originally
ment,and worker participation. developed by an Americanstatistician, W. Edwards
Deming,buthis approacheswereadoptedmuchmore
enthusiasticallyin post-WorldWarII Japanthanin his
nativecountry.WhenJapaneseproducts such as elec-
tronicsand automobiles beganto outperformandoutsell
American products, theU.S. businesssectorstartedto
reemphasize in partbyborrowing
quality, suchJapanese
techniques as TQM. Therewerea number offalsestarts;
forexample,manyorganizations brokeoffa relatively
smallpiece of TQM-qualitycircles-andattempted to
makethemtheprimary and free-standing
technique for
achievingquality. However,by the mid-1980s, many
U.S. corporations began to encouragequalitythrough
integrated,multifacetedsystems.

356 1992,Vol.52,No.4
Review*July/August
PublicAdministration

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.21 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 23:07:12 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The PrincipalTenetsof(Orthodox)
TotalQualityManagement IFfrst the
customer
andforemost,
Severalrelatedbut distinctsystemsattemptto increase isthe determiner
ultimate ofquality
organizationalquality.Although Deming-basedTQM is not
theonlyqualitysystem,2 hisversion, inTQM,is
encapsulated notindividualefforts. Whenqualityslips,it is almostalways
byfarthemostinfluential and widespread.BecauseDeming thesystemthatis wrong,notthepeople (Carrand Littman,
is a synthesizer,
TQM containsmanyoftheconceptsofother 1990,p. 196;Walton,1986,p. 92). Becauseit is thesystem
qualitymanagement systems,even thosenotusingtheterm working through committed peoplethatproducesresults, itis
TQM. Accordingly, I willtermDeming'sTQM theorthodox a gravemistaketo focuson individuals.Mostof the time,
approachandwilldiscussitsparticulars. when one individualappearsto be performing betterthan
TQM is a complicated and demanding system thatcannot others,the difference in performance is onlyrandomvaria-
be completely summarized in a fewparagraphs.None the- tion. Thustoday'ssuperior workeris likelyto be tomorrow's
less, manyof itsmostimportant pointscan be capturedin averageone, becausea well-working systemshouldlead all
sevenbasictenets.3 BecauseTQM was first appliedto manu- workers, responding to intrinsic motivators, to perform well.5
facturing,itstenetssometimes referto products.However, Meritpayand otherindividually oriented rewardsareaccord-
TQM proponentsmaintainthata deliveredservicecan be inglymisguided and represent a "lottery" (Deming,1986,p.
viewed as a product,and, therefore, TQM principlesneed 110). Becausemanagement by objectives(MBO) is so often
onlyminormodifications whenappliedto businessor gov- used forindividualmeasures,it, too, leads the manager
ernment services(Kennedyand Young,1989,p. 87; Deming, astray. AllMBO,according toTQM,shouldbe dropped.
1986,p. xi. One TQM articlesummarized thisapproachby saying,"It
is worthnotingthatmanagement by objectivesand perfor-
TQM'sPrimary Tenets mancestandards worksagainsta quality-supportive organiza-
tionalculture. Objectives and performance standards focus
Firstandforemost, thecustomer is theultimatedeterminer
on individual performance whenthe individual can seldom
ofquality.A product maymeetall specifications. However, if
controlthe systemwithinwhichhe or she mustwork....
itdoes notprovidethecustomers withtheperformance they
People becomevictims or beneficiaries of normalvariations
wish-if it is too complex,or expensive,or unattractive-
builtintothe system" (Scholtesand Hacquebord,1988b,p.
thenthequalitytesthas beenflunked.
47). Another said,"IntheDemingview,certainpractices are
Second,qualityshouldbe builtintotheproductearlyin the alwayswrong.Amongtheseare meritpay, incentivepro-
production process(upstream) rather thanbeingadded on at grams,the annualreviewof people, any systemthatranks
the end (downstream).Many productsand servicesgo the employees,management by objectives..."(Aguayo, 1990,
through thestagesofdesign,production, inspection,rework- p. 131).
ing (forproducts),and thenresponseto consumercom- Fifth,qualityrequirescontinuousimprovement of inputs
plaints.The early,upstream stagesofdesignand production andprocesses. Qualityis nota staticattribute; itis a constant-
are thecrucialones. If theproductor serviceis designedto ly changing targetbecauseit represents a delighted (notjust
be easyto produce,and ifthoseproducing ithavethetrain- satisfied) customer.As the customer's expectations rise,so
ingand incentives to maintain consistently highquality,then mustthe product'squality.Whatis a high-quality product
downstream inspections, reworkings, and responsesto con- todaywillnotbe one tomorrow. Thistenetleadsto theprin-
sumercomplaints are unnecessary.This saves money,but cipleof continuous improvement-every monthnew waysof
more importantly, it makes the customermuch happier. improvement mustbe considered and implemented.
Accordingly, TQM generallyopposes mass inspectionsof
productsbecause such inspections providea safetynetthat Moreover, thiscontinuous improvement shouldbe direct-
shiftsqualityresponsibilitiesaway fromthe initialdesigners ed not at outputs but at the inputs and processes thatthe
and producers. managercan directly control.The businessmanagershould
stopfocusing on theoutputmeasureofprofits, becauseprofit
Third, preventing is thekeytoproducingbigh is a short-term
variability measurethatcan lead to cutting comers.The
quality. Slippagesin qualityarisefromtoo muchvariation managershouldfocusinstead,according to TQM,on improv-
in theproductor service. As productsand servicesdeviate ingorganizational processesand inputsin orderto improve
froma desired norm,theirdependabilitydrops rapidly. quality, becauseincreasedqualitywilllead to customer loyal-
Deminghas said,"IfI hadto reducemymessageformanage- ty,andlong-range profitswillinexorably follow(Scholtesand
mentto justa fewwords,I'd sayitall had to do withreduc- Hacquebord, 1988a,p. 31).
ingvariation" (Bryce,1991,p. 16). Becausepreventing vari-
abilityis the mostimportant path to quality,TQM's most Thistenetdirectly contradictsthe rationaleof all recent
important tools are processcontrolcharts.Such chartsare government management reforms.Program budgeting, zero
used to trackqualityby charting a product'sdeviationfrom base budgeting (ZBB), MBO, and pay for performance all
theoptimum; thesedeviations are thencategorized and ana- attempted to move the government manager's focus away
lyzed.4 frommeasuringinputsand processesand towardresults.
TQM urgesbusinessmanagers to movein theoppositedirec-
Fourth, qualityresultsfrompeopleworking withinsystems, tion.Deming,in fact,madeelimination ofMBO one ofhis 14

Adapting
Total
Quality
Management
(TQM)toGovernment 357

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.21 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 23:07:12 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 taneously.Thismakesuniformity of outputmoredifficult,
In itsunmodifed 7QMis
orortbodoxform, and italso meansthattheconsumer willevaluatetheservice
notonlyon theresultbutalso on thebehaviorand eventhe
appearance. of thepersondelivering it.If an efficient police
strikinglyillsuited tothe government environment. officerquicklylocatesstolencarsbut seems ill-groomed or
points,and laterelaborated:"Focuson outcomes...must be curt,many of his or her customers will not be totally satisfied,
abolished,leadership putin itsplace"(Deming,1986,p. 54). despitereceiving a highquality output.
Sixth,qualityimprovement requires strongworkerpartici- Accordingly, qualitymeasuresforservicesare extremely
pation.Becausequalitydependsupon theproduction work- complex.Factoranalysesofcustomer surveys have indicated
ers doingit rightthefirsttimeand upon constantimprove- thatoverallqualitymeasuresforservicescan be brokeninto
mentof inputsand processes,whichonlyworkersknow such componentsas access, communication, competence,
intimately,workerparticipation in theongoingimprovement courtesy,creativity, reliability,
responsiveness, security, tangi-
process is crucial. Managersand workersshould work bles,and understanding (Parasuraman etal., 1985;Cravenset
together "without fear-withoutworrying thateach mistake al., 1988; Garvin,1984,1988). For manyserviceseach of
discovered willbe punished.Theyalso need to work"with- thesecomponents mustbe measuredand weighedbeforeit
out barriers"-using matrix-like structures and qualitycircles can be determined thata high-quality servicehas been deliv-
to breakdowncommunication barriers betweenhierarchical ered.
levelsandbetweenfunctional units. TQM'stenetaboutreducing variationis also moredifficult
qualityrequirestotal organizational commitment. to applyto services.The qualitytracking chartsand thecon-
Seventh, cern about the product driftaway from the optimumapply
Qualityis achievedonlywhenmanagers createan organiza-
tionalculturethatfocuseson consistently producing quality much more directly to assembly-line production (e.g., mea-
productsand thenon improving themeveryperiod.If this suresofhowwelltheautodooris fitted) thanto government
totalcommitment flags,qualitywilldropoffrapidly, and the servicesthatoftenhave controversial or unclearnorms.For
organization willinevitablybeginto slipbehindcompetitors. example, no clear consensus exists about whatprocesses
shouldbe trackedand standardized fora street-level bureau-
This requirement fortotalorganizationalcommitment cratsuch as a mentalhealthprofessionalor a classroom
seems clearerwhen consideredin lightof the otherTQM teacher.
tenetsalreadydiscussed. TQM is an extremely demanding
regimen. It requiresall membersof an organization to con-
stantlychangein orderto improve, evenafterachieving what
TheProblemofDefinngtheGovernment Customer
seemsto be a highstandard ofperformance. It requiressuch TQM'smostimportant principle is to delightthecustomer.
high levels of performance thatvirtually no mistakesare Accordingly, the singlemostimportant questionis: Who is
made,and after-the-fact inspections to catchmistakes become the customer? Mostdiscussionsof TQM in government pay
unnecessary. BecauseTQM is so demanding, onlyan unusu- little or no attention to thatquestion.In business,thecompa-
allyintenseandunambiguous organizational culturecan keep ny can usuallychooseitsown market niche,and thusdefine
workersso committed and focused.Thisorganizational cul- itstarget customers: luxury car buyers, forexample,or price-
turemustbe maintained by activeand continuous interven- consciousfoodpurchasersFormanypublicagencies,on the
tionfromthetop. otherhand,defining thecustomer is a difficult and politically
controversial issue. For the Bureauof Land Management
(BLM),is themaincustomer thegrazinginterests, themining
OrthodoxTQMin Government or theenvironmentalists?
interests, Ifsomecombination, how
muchweightshouldbe givento each?Whether or notBLMis
In itsunmodified or orthodoxform, TQM is strikingly ill deliveringquality services depends entirely upontheanswer.
suitedto thegovernment environment. The use of TQM in withdirectly
Competing clients, contradictory demands,can
government has severalmajorproblems:insufficient modifi- be foundin mostgovernment services, from education to
cationforservices;insensitivity to the problemsof defining healthcare. Although thesebattles maybe lessfierce for
governmental customers; inappropriate emphasison inputs thosefewgovernment servicesthathave routine, uncontro-
and processes; and demandsfortop-levelintensity thatcan versialmissions, theyarenevertotally absent. Forexample,
rarelybe metbythegovernmental culture. JamesQ. Wilson(1989,pp. 122-126)has pointedoutthe
competing thatfight
clienteles fortheoutputs
oftheseeming-
Servicesvs. Products lynoncontroversial
postalservice.
TQMwas originally designedforroutine
processessuchas Moreover, government haveobligations
organizations to
manufacturing,yetmostgovernment agenciesproduce ser- morethantheir immediate theagency's
clients.Sometimes
vicesrather
thanproducts. Although theproblemof applying mostimportant customers-the public-arenotonly
general
TQM to businessservicesis widelydiscussedin theTQM lit- absentbuttotally andyettheagencymustrisk
inattentive,
erature(Deming,1986,pp. 171ff;Ferderber,
1981;King,1987; offendingitsimmediatecustomers inordertoservethegen-
Plsek,1987), solutions
areelusive.TQMremains muchmore eralpublic.Forexample, a governmentagencythatoversees
difficult
to applyto servicesbecauseservicesare morelabor banksand treatsbanksas itscustomers
willgreatly
damage
intensive,
and theyare oftenproducedand consumedsimul- the publicgood by keepingbanks,in TQM's phraseology,

358 PublicAdministtion
Review*.July/August
1992,Vol.52,No.4

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.21 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 23:07:12 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
delighted.Yet iftheagencyputsthetaxpaying generalpub-
it willlook in vain fortheirdelightedreaction;the
lic first,
generalpublic will remainresolutelyuninterested in the
Because
government must
agencies senea wide
agency'sworkunlessthereis a crisis.
variety who
have
ofcustomers and
divergent
widely
This conflictbetween a program'sdirectcustomers
(clients)and itsultimate
ofwhomaretaxpayers)
customers (thegeneralpublic,most
is oftenveryacuteforprograms that
ewn
contradictory
demands...theprinciple
of
are not universallydistributed. The problemarisesbecause
any definition of qualityis alwaysconstrained by cost-a oreven
delighting customers
satisfing too
begs
highquality$15,000car is of coursenotthesameas a high
quality$60,000car. In businessthiscostconstraint does not many tobea clear
questions oruseful
goal.
usuallyaffect customer satisfaction
becausethebuyerof the
productis also its recipient, so he or she can choose theRecentsurveys showthatsuchsystems havebeenwidely
appropriatelevelofcostand qualityin orderto be delighted.installed,thattheycontinue tospread, andthatmostgovern-
No such balanceis likelyfornonuniversal government mental
ser- usersratethema success.8 Suchsystems allowmany
vices such as health care, education,or water projects publicagenciesto nowtrackresults, notjustprocesses.
becausethebuyeris oftennottherecipient.The buyingcus- Becauseitis so difficult to determine outputs in thepublic
tomers(generaltaxpayers) willoftenprefer to minimize sector,
costs. everysuccessshouldbe savoredand nurtured. As
At the same time,the directcustomers (recipients) already
of such noted, orthodox TQMdisputes allthis.According to
programs mayexpecta levelofqualitythatis foundonlyat a one TQMbook,"Many government agencies havedifficulty
veryhighprice,becausetheydo notpay the fullcost. No developing performance indicators. Thisis becausethey
balancebetweencostsand features focuson resultsindicators
is likelyto please both related to finaloutput toexternal
groups. customers, ratherthanon howprocesses areperforming in
making thoseproducts andservices. Remember, ifprocesses
The literature
on citizensurveys in governmenthas point-
perform as intended, output shouldbe ofhighquality.You
ed out the difficulty
of measuring government performance
beginbymoving away from theconcept ofresults indicators
by publicreaction.Generally,publicratingsof programsare
toprocesscontrolindicators" (Carr andLittman, 1990, pp.61-
onlytenuously relatedto objectivemeasuresofprogram per-
2).
formance.Surveyresultsare easilybiased by isolatedbut
highlypublicizedeventsor by ideologicalattitudes.6Of TQMproponents correctly pointoutthatinbusiness, out-
course,surveysremainusefulifviewedas one piece oforga- putsin theform ofquarterly profit reports represent short-
nizationalinformation,but thesesurveyweaknessesreflect term visionandcanoften leadto goaldisplacement. They
thesesame inescapableproblemsof defining customersand failto recognize thatin theverydifferent worldofgovern-
ofmeasuring services. ment,it is stressing inputsand processesthatrepresents
Becausegovernment
short-term business as usual,andtherefore focusing on gov-
agenciesmustservea widevariety of
customerswho havewidelydivergent
ernmental processes is likely to leadto goal displacement. In
and evencontradictory
demandsand becausethegeneralpublicremainsa "hidden
the public sector,a move toward stressing outputs is in fact
usuallya movetoward thedesired longer-range vision.9
customer" withyetadditional,oftenincompatible demands,
government agenciesoftenhaveto delivera serviceor prod-
uct thatreflectsan uneasycompromise. In such cases, the TheProblem ofGovernment Culture
principleof delighting
or even satisfying
customers begstoo OrthodoxTQMdepends on an extremely
strong
organiza-
manyquestionsto be a clearor usefulgoal.7 tionalculture
withan almostsingle-minded
commitmentto
quality.Inordertoshapethatculture, themanagers mustbe
Focusingon InputsandProcesses continuouslyinvolvedin improving management (Walton,
1986,pp. 66, 92; Aguayo,1990,pp. 92, 117). However,
Government has traditionally littleattention
paid relatively
to outputsformanyreasons:Outputsare politically
turnoveroftop-level
managers is rapidformanygovernment
contro- agencies, andgovernment
versialand difficult
culture,structured
to be opento
to measure;legislatorsare primarily con- manyoutside forces,
is almostnecessarily
weaker thanthose
cernedabout inputssuch as budgets;bureaucratic prestige
oftenaccruesfromcontrolof inputs,especiallypersonnel;
ofbusiness.10 Aftersummarizing themanydisincentivesto
and legal requirements oftendemandconstantattention
concentrating on management," one analysisconcludes,
to "What is surprising
is thatgovernment executivesspendany
strict
procedural rules(Behn,1982;Wilson,1989). Withall
theincentives
timeatallon managing their
departments"(Wilson, 1989,p.
in government to focuson inputsand process-
es, thereis a constantthreatofgoaldisplacement-managers
217).
who blindlyhew to theminimal legalrequirements, or build
empires,orputoutfires, ratherthanhelpthepublic.
OrthodoxTQMSummarized
Giventhisunpromising environment,
manypublicorgani-
zationsare justifiably
proudthatoverthepast 15 yearsthey In sum,orthodox TQMcan easilydo moreharmthan
have implemented results-oriented
systemssuch as MBO goodbecauseit canencouragea focuson theparticularistic
performance monitoring systems,and programbudgets. demandsofdirect clients
rather
thantheneedsofthemore

Adapting
Total
Quality
Management
(TQM)toGovernment 359

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.21 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 23:07:12 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
important(butofteninattentive)
customers, thegeneralpub- lessentheresistanceto futuresysteminnovationsand would
lic. OrthodoxTQM can also cause an organization
to neglect also decreasethe likelihoodthattheywould laterstagnate.
or even-if Deming'sadvice is followed-dismantlesuch As a usefulside effect,acceptanceof thisprinciplewould
establishedsystemsas MBO, programbudgets,and perfor- lessenthetemptation changes,sinceover-
to oversellfuture
mance monitoring systemsthatset clear outputgoals and sellingis oftenaimedatmitigatingresistance.
monitor results.12Finally,
orthodoxTQM makesa number
of demandsforoutputuniformity and strong,continuous
organizational
culturethatgovernment is intrinsically
unable Worker
Participation
to meet. Worker nowoftencalledempowerment,
participation, has
Despiteall thesemajorproblems,a greatdeal is worth been a importantmanagement axiomfordecades,but it is
savingin TQM. However,publicmanagersmustadaptthe to putintooperation.TQM'squalitycirclesrepresent
difficult
systemdrastically
to gaintheadvantages. steptowardincreased
a valuableconcrete participation.

Reformed
Implementing
TQMin Government TQM:Relabeling
OldIdeas?
Whatwould a reformed TQM look like?It would retain In all of its forms,TQM incorporates some trulyfresh
orthodoxTQM's feedbackfromclients,its emphasison ideas,particularly thenew toolsfortracking and improving
trackingperformance,and its principlesof continuous routinegovernment processes. However,because reformed
improvementand participation
oftheworkers. TQM also emphasizessuch long-standing managerial princi-
ples as workerparticipation and quantitativeoutputtracking,
Client
Feedback a naturalcritiqueis thatreformed TQM is primarilyold wine
in new bottles. Thereis a littletruth butnew
to thiscritique,
Despite the problemsin makingcustomerreactionthe
guidingprinciplein government management,itis stilluseful bottlesareoftenveryvaluable.Forthesamereasonthatpeo-
to trackthereactionsof an agency'simmediate
clientsand to ple changefashions, ministerschangesermons, and organiza-
use themas one consideration in decisionmaking.
TQM pro- tionschangelogos,management analystsmustperiodically
videsvaluableadviceon howto do this. changethe way theypresentenduringprinciples-listener
boredomcan cause even thebestapproachesto seem stale
Performance
Tracking overtime. If TQM represents a new framework thathelps
freshenenduringmanagement principles,thatcan be an
TQM strongly condemns"managing by thenumbers."At
additionalmajoradvantage.
the same time,one of itsmajorcomponents is quantitative
tracking of qualitythrough controlchartsand otherquantita-
tivetools. Thisperformance trackingcan makeTQM a useful
firstsystemforsome government agencies. AfterTQM is Summary
implemented, its successcan lead to the additionof other
Orthodox TQM is ill suitedto mostgovernment agencies
quantitative but results-oriented
systems,such as program
a stepbackwards
and,in fact,represents (awayfromresults)
budgeting, MBO,and performance monitoringsystems.TQM
is likelyto be a particularly formanyofthem.Reformed TQM,however, jettisonsortho-
systemforthosegov-
usefulfirst
ernment workers and managers whohaveresisted otherman- dox TQM's hostilityto outputgoals and measurements,
agementsystemsbecause theyfearedsuch systemswould deemphasizes itsdemandsforoutputuniformity and organi-
"tumpeople intonumbers." BecauseTQM emphasizesboth zationalculturecontinuity, and sensitizesmanagersto the
intangibles (quality)and people (participation),as well as justan immediate
dangersof satisfying clientele.Yet at the
tracking through numbers,it can be a nonintimidating first same time,reformed TQM saves the orthodoxprinciples of
step forthosewho have been put offby the quantitative employeeempowerment, continuousimprovement, and
aspectsofothersystems. quantitative of productqualityand of clientreac-
tracking
tions.
Continuous
Improvement If introduced to
and withsensitivity
withoutoverselling
Each earlierpublicmanagement innovation was resisted government'suniquecircumstances, TQM can make
reformed
by manyworkers.Moreover, once the systems were imple- to contemporary
a usefulcontribution publicmanagement.
mented,theywereoftentakenforgranted and therefore
atro-
phiedovertime. Forboththesereasons,TQM'scontinuous
improvement if internalized
principle, by workersand man- of politicalscience
JamesE. Swiss is associateprofessor
agers,maybe itsmostvaluablecontribution. The principle at NorthCarolinaStateUniversity.
and publicadministration
suggeststhatreceptivity
to new approachesis essentialfor He is authorofPublicManagement Systems:Monitoring and
highperformance.If fullyaccepted,thisprinciplewould ManagingGovernment Performance 1991).
(Prentice-Hall,

360 PublicAdministtdon
Review.July/August
1992,Vol.52,No.4

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.21 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 23:07:12 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Notes
1. AmongthepublicTQM systems thatare discussedin theliterature are gainsthroughout the 1980sforprogram budgeting and MBO. Over90
the citygovernment of Madison,Wisconsin(Sensenbrenner, 1991);the percentof theuserscharacterize thesesystems as "somewhat'or "very"
Madisonpolicedepartment (Couper,1990);theNavalPublications Center effective (Streiband Poister,1989b). Qualitycircles(beforethecurrent
(Whitten, 1989);and the Environmental Protection Agency(Cohenand TQM drivegainedmomentum) wereused by 32 percentof cities,but
Brand,1990). The Department of Defensehas a new position:Deputy only25 percentoftheusersratedthemas "veryeffective." TQM propo-
Undersecretary of Defense forTotal QualityManagement(Keehley, nentswouldascribethislow effectiveness ratingto thefactthatthecir-
1991). For a good discussionof the federalhistoryof TQM, see cleswerenotpartofa broadersupporting qualitysystem.
Milakovich(1990). TQM programswithinsuch stategovernments as Although information aboutusage is notas completeat thestateand
Wisconsin, California,Texas,and Floridaare mentioned brieflyin Carr federallevels,theoverallpattern seemssimilar.A surveyof statebud-
and Littman (1990). getsindicatedthattheyhave increasingly incorporated manyprogram
2. Deming'sinfluencein Japanis reflected by the factthatJapan'smost budgetfeatures(Lee, 1991). At the federallevel, programbudgeting
prestigiousbusiness award is the Deming Prize (Walton, 1986). neverdied in theDefenseDepartment (Ferrara and Dunmire, 1988),and
Pioneering workin thisarea has also been done by Deming'smentors, MBO has livedon thereand in a numberof thelargestfederaldepart-
WalterShewhart and ArmandFeigenbaum.Amongthemostimportant ments.
contemporary qualitytheoristsareJosephJuran(1989), KaoraIshikawa, 9. Ofthemainqualityapproaches,thatofPhilipCrosby(1979) is themost
GenichiTaguchi, and PhilipCrosby(1979). As noted,Demingis a syn- unliketheDeming-based TQM discussedhere, and Crosbyseemsto see
thesizer,and so someoftheprinciples ofall theaboveexceptCrosbyare thelargestplaceforgoal setting.Nonetheless, thearguments madehere
citedand incorporated in hisTQM. aboutqualitysystems'maladaptation forgovernment maybe strongest
3. Deminghas summedup his approachin "Fourteen Points"and "Seven forCrosby.His definition of qualityis verymuchspecification-based:
Obstacles"(Deming,1986,chpts.2 and 3). BecauseDeming'swritings qualityis "conformance to requirements." He espouses"zerodefects," an
are neither fluidnortightly structured,otherauthorshave attempted to approachwithlittleapplication to suchgovernment functions as school
sumup his thoughts in fewer,clearerpoints. Amongtheseare Gabor teaching, regulation, andjob training. Finally, he deemphasizes thequan-
(1990,pp. 18-30),Walton(1986),and Aguayo(1990). The listoftenets titativetoolsthatgivesubstance toTQM'squalityexhortations.
given here drawsfromeach of these authors,but reflectsa greater 10. A praiseworthy attempt to alloweach agencyto adaptTQMto itsparticu-
emphasison pointsmostrelevantto government management.An lar culturemayhave motivated OPM's veryloose guidelinesin imple-
overviewof some of theapplications forgovernment managersis con- menting federal TQM. However,OPM mayhaveovercompensated. In a
tainedinWagenheim and Reurink (1991). thoughtful and interesting critique,Hyde (1991) applaudsthe lack of
4. The analysisof processcharts-distinguishing commoncauses of varia- rigidguidelines butarguesthatOPM has been so carefulto avoid pre-
tion,whichfallwithinstatistical expectations, fromspecialcauses,which scribing specific stepsforimplementing federalTQMthatno clearsystem
do not-is centralto TQM,butbeyondthescope ofthisdiscussion. For is left.He callsfora number ofremedies, including muchmoreattention
thesamereason,I havealso omitted a discussion ofthemanyothersta- to TQM's meansand methodologies.The argument in thisarticlethat
tistical
and graphical toolsofTQM,mostofwhichareveryuseful.Fora reformed TQM mustretainthe quantitative toolsof TQM is, I think,in
good explanation, see Gabor(1990,chap..2). accordance withHyde'spoint.
5. Deming'sbeliefin the universality and nearomnipotence of intrinsic 11. The lackof incentives fortop politicalofficials to focuson management
motivators is striking.He has said thatin his 60 yearsof experiencehe is well illustratedby the mayorof Madison, Wisconsin,Joseph
has nevermeta workerwho was nottrying hisor herhardest(Aguayo, Sensenbrenner. He was perhapstheelectedofficial mostcommitted to
1990,p. 31). Reflecting hisdistasteforevaluations and forextrinsic moti- TQM throughout the 1980s. In an article, he enumerates themanyeffi-
vators,Deminggivesan A to all thestudents in his universitycourses ciencygains,the increasedunionsupport,and the nationalpublicity
(Walton,1986,p. 91). Notall TQM theorists wouldendorsethoseexact engenderedby TQM, but thenstates,"Butthisrecognition was not
views,but almostall (see note 9) would endorsethe same practical enoughto winme a fourth term.Otherpolitical factorsweremorecom-
applications:downplaying outputmeasures, goals,rewards, andratings. pelling"(Sensenbrenner, 1991,p. 75). Sensenbrenner's case is an illustra-
6. Amongthearticles thatpointoutthediscrepancy betweenobjectiveout- tionthatelectedofficials cannotputtheirprimary focuson management
putindicators and subjective surveyresponsesareStipak(1979); Brown matters; theirsuccessis usuallymorecloselytiedto theirpolitical, rather
and Coulter(1983); and Houghland(1987). On the otherhand,Parks thanmanagerial, skills.
(1984) has arguedthatthereare connections, butevenhe concedesthat 12. Mostproponents of output-oriented systems, and particularly of MBO,
theyarenotdirectones.See also thedebatebyStipakandParks(1984). characterize the systemsas participatory, withthe subordinates joining
7. An extreme exampleofa misplacedfocuson onlydirectclientswas the thesuperiors in setting goals and withbothpartiesadjusting the goals
federalDepartment of Housingand UrbanDevelopment (HUD) in the jointlyas the situationchanges. Unilaterally set goals are treatedas
1980s. Reed(1982)reported thattwoofthethreecriteria on whichHUD examplesof an improperly functioning system.WithintheTQM litera-
executivebonuseswerebased were:(1) "Decisionsrarely, ifever,ques- ture,however, MBO and performance monitoring system goals areusu-
tionedbyclientgroups"and (2) "Decisionsconsistently praisedbyaffect- allyportrayed as nonparticipatory "quotas"(i.e., Aguayo,1990,p. 26).
ed groups."Becausethesegoalsignoretheinvisible customer-the gen- Accordingly, output-oriented systems are almostinvariably characterized
eral public-in retrospect, as obstacles,not complements thatcould potentially be incorporated
theyseem to reflect the priorities
thatled to
themassiveHUD scandals. withina participative TQM system.Thustwo pro-TQMauthorssay of
8. Thesesystems the output-oriented systemin the Environmental ProtectionAgency
are mostwidespread at thelocallevel. Streiband Poister
(EPA),"Theactionsof one regionalprogram managerprovidean exam-
(1989a) foundthatby 1988,66 percentof localgovernments used pro-
62 percent ple of how to avoidnumerical quotas." He placed himself as a buffer
grambudgeting, usedMBO,and 67 percent usedperformance
betweenhisstaff and theEPA'snumerical accountability system.He told
monitoring systems.Largercitiesemployedall thesetechniques at even
hisstaff, You keep working on improving theprocess,and don'tworry
higherrates,and the usage figuresrepresented particularlysubstantial
aboutthisquarter's quotas'(Cohenand Brand,1990,p. 112).

Adapting
TotalQuality
Management
(TQM)toGovernment 361

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.21 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 23:07:12 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 References
Aguayo,Rafael,1990.Dr. Deming:TheAmericanWhoTaugbttheJapanese King,CarolA., 1987. "AFramework fora ServiceQualityAssurance System."
AboutQuality.NewYork:LyleStuart. QualityProgress, vol.20 (September), pp. 27-32.
Behn,RobertD., 1982."PolicyAnalysisand PolicyPolitics." PolicyAnalysis, Lee, RobertD., Jr.,1991."Developments in StateBudgeting: Trendsof Two
vol.7, pp. 199-226. Decades."PublicAdministration Review,vol. 51 (May/June), pp. 254-
Brown,Karinand PhillipB. Coulter,1983. "Subjectiveand Objective 262.
Measuresof PublicServiceDelivery." PublicAdministration Review, vol. Milakovich, MichaelE., 1991. "TotalQualityManagementin the Public
43 (January/February), pp. 50-58. Sector."NationalProductivity Review (Spring),pp. 195-213.
Bryce,G. Rex,1991."Quality Management Theoriesand TheirApplication." Parasuraman,A., Valarie Zeithami,and LeonardL. Berry, 1985. a A
Quality,vol.30 (January), pp. 15-18. ConceptualModel of ServiceQuality."JournalofMarketing, vol. 49
Carr,David K. and Ian D. Littman, 1990. Excellencein Government: Total (Fall),pp. 41-50.
QualityManagement in the1990s Arlington, VA:Coopers& Lybrand. Parks,RogerB., 1984. "LinkingObjectiveand SubjectiveMeasuresof
Cohen,Stevenand RonaldBrand,1990. "TotalQualityManagement in the Performance." PublicAdministration Review,vol. 44 (March/April), pp.
U.S. EnvironmentalProtectionAgency."Public Productivityand 118-127.
Management Review, vol. 14 (Fall),pp. 99-114. Plsek,Paul E., 1987. "DefiningQualityat the Marketing/Development
Couper, David C., 1990. "Police DepartmentLearnsTen Hard Quality Interface."QualityProgress, vol.20 (June),pp. 28-36.
Lessons."QualityProgress, vol. 23 (February), pp. 37-40. Reed,Leonard,1982. "Bureaucrats 2, Presidents0." Harper's(November).
Cravens,David W. et al., 1988. "Marketing's Role in Productand Service Scholtes,PeterR. and Hero Hacquebord,1988a. "Beginning the Quality
Quality." IndustrialMarketing Management, vol. 17,pp. 285-304. Transformation." QualityProgress,vol.21 (July),pp. 28-33.
Crosby,Phillip,1979.QualityIs Free. NewYork:NewAmerican Library. , 1988b. "Six Strategies for Beginning the Quality
Deming,W. Edwards,1986.OutoftheCrisisCambridge: MITPress. Transformation." QualityProgress,vol.21 (August), pp. 44-48.
Ferderber,CharlesJ.,1981. "Measuring Qualityand Productivity in a Service Sensenbrenner, Joseph,1991."Quality Comesto CityHall."HarvardBusiness
Environment." Industrial Engineering, vol. 13,pp. 38-48. Review,vol.69 (March/April), pp. 64-75.
JosephA. and DanielJ. Dunmire,1988."Bureaucratic
Ferrara, Influence of Stipak,Brian,1979. "CitizenSatisfaction withUrbanServices:Potential
BudgetPreparation:A Practitioner's View of PentagonBudgeting." Misuseas a Performance Indicator." PublicAdministration Review,vol.
Management Scienceand PolicyAnalysis, vol. 5 (Winter),pp. 1-13. 39 (January/February), pp. 46-52.
Gabor,Andrea,1990. TheMan nbo DiscoveredQuality:How W Edwards Stipak, Brian and Roger B. Parks, 1984. "Communications."Public
DemingBrougbttheQualityRevolution toAmerica. New York:Times Administration Review, vol.44 (November/December), pp. 551-552.
Books. Gregory
Streib, and TheodoreH. Poister,1989a. "Established and Emerging
Garvin,DavidA., 1984. "WhatDoes 'ProductQuality'ReallyMean?"Sloan ManagementTools: A Twelve-YearPerspective." TheMunicipal
Management Review, vol. 25,pp. 25-43. Yearbook 1989.Washington, DC: InternationalCityManagers Association.
, 1988.ManagingQuality. NewYork:FreePress. , 1989b. "Management Tools in MunicipalGovernment: Trends
Houghland, James,1987. "Criteria forClientEvaluation of PublicPrograms." Over the Past Decade." PublicAdministration Review,vol. 49
SocialScienceQuarterly (June). (May/June), pp. 240-248.
Hyde,AlbertC., 1991. "RescuingQualityMeasurement fromTQM." The Wagenheim, GeorgeD. andJohnH. Reurink, 1991"Customer Servicein Public
Bureaucrat, vol. 19 (Winter), pp. 16-20. Administaton." PukcAdninirainReview, voL51(May/june), pp.263-269.
Joseph,1989.Juranon Leadershipfor
Juran, Quality.NewYork:FreePress. Walton,Mary,1986. 7beDemingManagement Metbod.NewYork:Praeger.
Keehley, Pat, 1991. "FQI HighlightsQuality Management."Public Whitten,ShirleyK., 1989. "AwardWinningTotal Qualityat the Naval
Administration Times, vol. 14 (July1), p. 3. Publications and FormsCenter."NationalProductivity Review,vol. 8
Kennedy,DavidA. and BarbaraJ.Young,1989. "Managing Qualityin Staff (Summer), pp. 273-286.
Areas."QualityProgress, vol.22 (October),pp. 87-91. Wilson,JamesQ., 1989.Bureaucracy.NewYork:BasicBooks.

362 PublicAdministraion 1992,Vol 52,No.4

Review.July/August

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.21 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 23:07:12 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions