total quality management in higher …indianresearchjournals.com/pdf/ijssir/2013/june/11.pdf ·...

International Journal of Social Science & Interdisciplinary Research__________________________________ ISSN 2277 3630 IJSSIR, Vol. 2 (6), JUNE (2013) Online available at indianresearchjournals.com

121

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION

INSTITUTIONS

DR. T. SUDHA

PROFESSOR

AMJAD ALI KHAN COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

MOUNT PLEASANT, ROAD NO 3

BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD-34

______________________________________________________________________________

ABSTRACT

The quality of higher education is everybody‟s concern today. Various studies and commission

reports at official level has recognized the same and given recommendations for its

improvement. Government and other constitutional agencies are taking necessary measures. But

these alone, will not serve the purpose unless institutions and faculty take proactive initiatives

and measures. A challenge of foreign institutions entering the Indian higher education is going

to pose the threat of even survival of poor performing institutions. The advantages of Total

Quality management have been valued by many companies around the world. Many

organizations have achieved excellence and competitive lead by putting into practice TQM

policy. Most of the principles of TQM can be implemented in the area of education and training.

This paper highlights the essence of TQM and explains how higher education institutions can

improve the quality by implementing TQM principles.

KEYWORDS: Higher Education Institutes, Total Quality management, Product dimensions,

Service Dimensions, Quality dimensions

Introduction

Academic institutions offering higher education in general and those offering professional

education in particular are undergoing a process of change similar to what business organizations

have undergone a few decades ago when they were confronted by competition. The speed of

change is driven by multiple factors. Demands from industry, information-age mind set of the

students, increased competition and the renewed quest among academic community are some of

the factors driving this change. To ensure that higher education, particularly professional

education, is able to deal with market and technological changes coupled with global

requirements, it is important for institutions offering higher education to use appropriate

curricula, course materials and teaching methodologies that are not only up-to-date, but also

effective from learner‟s point of view. The exponential growth of knowledge, exploding

instructional technologies, enhanced access to practices of premier institutions, accessibility to

knowledge, globalization of education etc require educators and faculty members to continuously

evaluate themselves and improve upon their effectiveness

Higher Education

Higher education imparts in-depth knowledge and understanding so as to advance the students to

new frontiers of knowledge in different walks of life (subject domains). It develops the student


122

ability to question and seek truth and makes him/her competent to critique on contemporary

issues. It broadens the intellectual powers of the individual within a narrow specialization, but

also gives him/her a wider perspective of the world around. According to Ronald Barnett (1992)

there are four predominant concepts of higher education.

i) Higher education as the production of qualified human resources: In this view,

higher education is seen as a process in which students are counted as “products”

absorbed in labour market. Thus, higher education becomes input to the growth and

development of business and industry.

ii) Higher education as training for a research career: In this view, higher education is

preparation for qualified scientists and researchers who would continuously develop the

frontiers of knowledge. Quality within this view point is more about research

publications and transmission of academic rigour to do quality research.

iii) Higher education as the efficient management of teaching profession: Many strongly

believe that teaching is the core of educational institutions. Thus, higher education

institutions focus on efficient management of teaching-learning provisions by improving

the quality of teaching, enabling a higher completion rate among the students.

iv) Higher education as a matter of extending life chances: In this view, higher education

is seen as an opportunity to participate in the development process of individual through

a flexible, continuing education mode.

Interestingly, all these four concepts of higher education are not exclusive; rather they are

integrated and give an overall picture of higher education. If we look at the activities of colleges

and universities, we will realize that teaching, research and extension form the three main

functions of higher education.

Role of higher education in the Society

Higher education is generally understood to cover teaching, research and extension. Scientific

and technological advancement and economic growth of a country are as dependent on higher

education as they are on the working class. Development of indigenous technologies and

capabilities in agriculture, food security and other industrial areas are possible because of our

world-class higher education infrastructure. Higher education also provides opportunities for

lifelong learning, allowing people to upgrade their knowledge and skills from time to time based

on societal needs. The Kothari Commission (1966) listed the following roles of the universities

(Higher education institutions in the modern society)

To seek and cultivate new knowledge, to engage vigorously and fearlessly in the pursuit

of truth, and to interpret old knowledge and beliefs in the light of new deeds and

discoveries;

To provide the right kind of leadership in all walks of life, to identify gifted youth and

help them develop their potential full by cultivating physical fitness, developing the

powers of the mind and cultivating right interests, attitudes and moral and intellectual

values;


123

To provide the society with competent men and women trained in agriculture, arts,

medicine, science and technology and various other professions, who will also be

cultivated individuals, imbibed with a sense of social purpose;

To strive to promote quality and social justice, and to reduce social cultural differences

through diffusion of education; and

To foster in the teachers and students and through them in the society generally, the

attitudes and values needed for developing the “good life” in individuals and society

(GOI, 1966, p. 497-8)

Defining Quality

The British Standard Institution (BSI) defines quality as “the totality of features and

characteristics of a product or service that bears on its ability to satisfy the stated or implied

needs” (BSI, 1991). Green and Harvey (1993) identified five different approaches to defining

quality:

In terms of exceptional (Exceeding high standards and passing required standards);

In terms of consistency (exhibited through “Zero defects” and “getting right the first

time”, making quality a culture);

As fitness for purpose (meaning the product or service meets the stated purpose, customer

specifications and satisfaction)

As value for money (through efficiency and effectiveness); and

As transformative (in terms of qualitative change)

These different notions of quality have lead Reeves and Bedner (1994) to conclude “the search

for a universal definition of quality and statement of law like relationship has been

unsuccessful”.

According to Gummesson (1990) it might be useful to create an insight into the many

dimensions that form a fuzzy entity referred to as quality through social consensus rather than

defining it. Garvin (1998) classified the various definitions of quality into five major groups:

(1) Transcendent definitions: These definitions are subjective and personal. They are

eternal but go beyond measurement and logical description

(2) Product-based definitions: Quality is seen as measurable variable. The basis for

measurement is objective of the product.

(3) User-based definitions: Quality is a means for customer satisfaction. This makes these

definitions individual and partly subjective.

(4) Manufacturing-based definitions: Quality is seen as conformance to requirements and

specifications.


124

(5) Value-based definitions: These definitions define quality in relation to costs. Quality is

seen as providing good value for costs ( Largosen et al, 2004)

Quality has a few central ideas around which the whole concept revolves: Quality as absolute,

Quality as relative, Quality as a process, and Quality as culture. When we consider quality as

absolute, it is given and considered as the highest possible standard. The Egyptian Pyramids and

the Taj Mahal are works of high standards and quality. In product terms, they are attached with

high “brand” values, status and positional advantages. Educational institutions such as Oxford,

Cambridge and Stanford in the west have this absolute quality standard, though in the case of

education it might still be perceptual. Quality as relative suggests that the quality of a product or

service can be described in relative terms. Quality here can be measured in terms of certain

specifications. According to Mukhopadhya (2005) the adherence to “product specification is

actually, the minimum condition for quality but not the sufficient condition”. The sufficient

condition is customer satisfaction and beyond”.

Why Higher Education Institutions should worry about Quality

As teachers, principals, heads of the department and policy makers in education we should worry

about quality of teaching, programmes, and institution because of the reasons

(1) Competition: We are entering a new regime, where competition among educational

institutions for students and funds will be highly significant. With globalization and

GATS (Global Agreement on Trade in Services), the educational environment will be

seized by increased competition. In order to survive in such situation, educational

institutions need to worry about their quality

(2) Customer satisfaction: Students, parents or sponsoring agencies as customers of the

educational institutions are now highly conscious of their rights or getting value for their

money and time spent. They are now demanding good quality teaching and receiving

employable skill set and thus we should constantly worry about the relevance of our

courses and programmes to the needs of the market.

(3) Maintaining standards: As educational institutions, we should always concern about

setting our own standard and maintaining it continuously year after year. In order to

maintain the standard, we should continuously make efforts to improve quality of

educational facilities

(4) Accountability: Every institution is accountable to its own stake holder in terms of the

funds (public or private) used on it. Concern for quality will ensure accountability of

funds utilized and inform the stake holders about taking appropriate decisions. Thus

quality can be considered as a monitoring mechanism.

(5) Improve employee morale and motivation: Concern for quality as an institution will

improve the morale and motivation of the staff in performing their duties and

responsibilities. If quality system is in place, the internal process would be systematic

making every department complementing each other‟s service domain and helping in

developing internal customer satisfaction leading to high morale and motivation.


125

(6) Credibility, prestige and status: If institutions are concerned about quality,

continuously and not once in a while. It will bring credibility to institutions and

individuals because of consistency leading to practice, status and brand value.

(7) Image and visibility: Quality institutions have the capacity to attract better stake holder

support, like getting merit students from far and near, increased donation / grants from

funding agencies and higher employer interest for easy placement of graduates.

History of Quality movement

Quality as a concept is a twentieth century phenomenon that has its roots in the industry and

management. Quality became an issue with the advent of industrialization and adoption of new

scientific approach to management based on division of labour propounded by F.W. Taylor.

With mass-production and breaking down of work into smaller and repetitive tasks handled by

machines, role of workers for self checking of quality was reduced. In the days of craftsmanship,

the responsibility of quality remained with the worker. The later stage necessitated the need for

inspection of the products to ensure they met specifications before they left factory. This came to

be known as “Quality Control”. The table below gives chronology of Quality movement.

Table 1 : The chronology of quality movement

Pre 1900 Quality as an integral element of craftsmanship

1900-1920 Quality control by foreman

1920-1940 Inspection based quality control

1940-1960 Statistical Process Control

1960-1980 Quality assurance / Total Quality Control

1980-1990 Total Quality Management

1990-Present TQM, the culture of continuous improvement, organization-wide quality

management

Source: Sallis (1996)

Dimensions of Quality in Higher education

Quality was originally developed in the manufacturing industry. In the area of higher education,

the adoption of quality control has been superficial and diluted by the exercise of academic

freedom (Largosen, et el, 2004). Further, the prevailing culture of universities is often based on

individual autonomy, which is zealously guarded (Colling and Harvey, 1995). Thus, it is usually

difficult to apply the features of quality to higher education considering the fact that quality

requires team work (Boaden and Dale, 1992). However, the quality of higher education is very

important for its stake holders. Notably, providers (funding bodies and the community at large),

students, staff and employers of graduates are important (Srikanthan and Dalrymple, 2003). The

most commonly used dimensions of quality in higher education are product, software and service

(Owlia and Aspinwall,1996)


126

Table 2: Product dimensions of quality in higher education

Dimensions Definition in higher education

Performance Primary knowledge/skills required for graduates

Features Secondary/Supplementary knowledge and skills

Reliability The extent to which knowledge/skills learned are correct, accurate and

up to date

Conformance The degree to which an institutional programme /course meets

established standards, plans and promises

Durability The depth of learning

serviceability How well an institution handles customer‟s complaints?

Source: Owlia and Aspinwall (1996)

The characteristics of software as an intangible product are more consistent with higher

education. The software quality dimensions widely used in software engineering are: reliability,

efficiency, integrity, usability, maintainability, testability, expandability, portability (Watts,

1987). Owlia and Aspinwall (1996) apply these quality dimensions to higher education, which

are given in the following table.

Table 3 : Software quality dimensions in higher education


Correctness The extent to which the programme/course complies with the specified

requirements

Reliability The degree to which knowledge/skills learned is correct, accurate and up

to date

Efficiency The extent to which knowledge/skills learned is applicable to the future

career of graduates

Integrity The extent to which personal information is secure from unauthorized

access

Usability The ease of learning and communicativeness in the class room

Maintainability How well an institution handles customer‟s complaints?

Testability How fair examinations represent a subject of study?

Expandability Flexibility

Portability The degree to which knowledge/skills learned is applicable to other

fields


Service quality dimensions in higher education

The service dimension of quality is probably more akin to education processes. Unlike physical

goods services are ephemeral to the extent that they can be consumed only as long as the activity

or process continues. Thus there is inseparability of production and consumption. Thus, services

can‟t be stored and are perishable. The consumer is also an integral part of the service process.

Thus, in higher education this framework is more applicable as teaching and learning situations

are more like service. Parasuraman et el (1995) identified the following dimensions of service

quality


127

Table 4 : Service quality dimensions in higher education


Responsiveness Willing and readiness of staff to help students

Reliability The degree to which education is correct, accurate and up to date Understanding customers Understanding students and their needs

Access The extent to which staff are available for guidance and advice

Competence The theoretical and practical knowledge of staff and other presentation skills

Courtesy Emotive and positive attitude towards students

Communication How well the students and lecturers communicate in the class

Credibility The degree of trustworthiness of institution

Security Confidentiality of information

Tangible State, sufficiency and availability of equipment and facilities

Performance Primary knowledge/skills required for graduates

Completeness Supplementary knowledge/skills, use of computer


A conceptual framework

Based on the review of literature on the three different approaches to quality in higher education,

Owlia and Aspinwall (1996) present a conceptual framework that covers six criterions to depict

quality dimensions. These dimensions are indicative of the areas that should be of concern to

ensure quality in higher education.

Table 5 : Quality dimensions in higher education

Dimensions Characteristics

Tangibles Sufficient equipment / facilities Ease of access Visually appealing environment Support services (accomdation, sports…)

Competence Sufficient staff(Academic) Theoretical and practical knowledge, qualifications Teaching experience, communication

Attitude Understanding students needs Willingness to help Availability for guidance and advice Giving personal attention

Content Relevance of curriculum to the future jobs of the students Communication skills and team work Flexibility of knowledge, being cross-disciplinary Containing primary knowledge/skills

Delivery Effective presentation Sequencing, timeliness Consistency, fairness of examinations Feedback from students

Reliability Trustworthiness Giving valid award Handling complaints, solving problems



128

Objectives

1. To discuss the importance of quality in higher education institutions

2. To know the actions required for implementation of TQM principles

3. To determine the success of TQM actions through various measures

Methodology

The data is collected through primary and secondary sources. A sample of 220 respondents

(faculty working in both Government and Private Higher Education Institutes offering

Engineering, Management, Information Technology and Pharmaceutical Science) selected

through convenient random sampling and data is collected through structured questionnaire and

subjective opinions of the respondents on quality indicators. Secondary data is collected through

journals, published papers and websites.

TQM in education The globalization of education, student‟s migration from one country to another are causes for

concerns to educationists. The use of new teaching and learning methodologies, changing

patterns of education delivery, course content, the concept of quality has become an essential

component of the educational process for its success. Continuous improvement and self

evaluation among stake holders such as top management, students, faculty etc is required and

development and encouragement of leadership among the stake holders in the organization

should be made as an ongoing process as well as a system. Synergistic relationship among

faculty: students, Industry: Faculty and students: Industries to ensure the strategic quality among

various combinations are required.

Data Analysis

Demographic characteristics of the respondents

Table 6: Age distribution of respondents

Age Group No. of respondents % of respondents

25 - 34 78 35.45

35 - 44 102 46.36

>45 Years 40 18.18

The majority of the respondents were in the age group of 35-44 years consisting of 46.36percent.

It was followed by the age group of 25.34 years consisting of 35.45percent. Only 18.18percent of

the respondents were above 45.

Table 7: institution-wise distribution of respondents

Institution No. of respondents % of respondents

Business Management 58 26.36

Information Technology 36 16.36

Engineering 84 38.18

Pharmaceutical science 42 19.09


129

The institution wise distribution shows that among the total respondents 38.18 percent of them

were from Engineering Institutions, 26.36 percent of them were from Business Management,

19.09 percent of them were from Pharmaceutical Science and the remaining from Information

Technology.

Table 8: Income distribution of the respondents

Monthly Income No. of respondents % of respondents

Up to 30,000 70 31.81

30,000-40,000 88 40.00

> 40,000 62 28.18

The majority of the respondents (40%) were in the income group of 30,000 – 40,000 and 28.18%

of them earning more than 40,000

Table 9: Work experience of respondents

Work experience No. of respondents % of respondents

3 years and below 26 11.81

4 – 6 years 68 30.90

7 – 9 years 72 32.72

10 years and above 54 24.54

Nearly 33 percent of the respondents had 7-9 years of service. The second highest group was

from the range of 4-6 years indicated by 31percent of the respondents. Only 24.54 percent of the

respondents had more than 10 years of work experience.

Table 10: Involvement in TQM implementation

Involvement in TQM No. of respondents % of respondents

3 years and below 78 35.45

4 – 6 years 82 37.27

7 – 9 years 38 17.27

10 years and above 22 10.00

Majority of the respondents (37 percent) were having 4 – 6 years of experience in TQM

implementation and 10 percent of them were having more than 10 years experience.


130

Table 11: Actions respondents would take in applying TQM principles to the structure and

delivery of the courses taught (The statements have been ranked on a 5-point scale Strongly

Disagree indicating 1 to Strongly Agree indicating 5)

S.

No

Actions Taken Mean

Score

Standard

Deviation

Rank based on

mean score

1 Constantly revise/review course content, structure

and delivery

4.19 0.5137 7

2 Improve teaching methodology constantly (using

reference materials, seminars, etc)

4.43 0.5431 1

3 Survey students for course improvements 3.70 1.2806 12

4 Survey industry for course improvements 4.23 0.3835 6

5 Act as class coach rather than as class boss 4.14 0.4335 8

6 Use handouts that summarize lecture objectives 4.01 0.5195 10

7 Increase feedback with more exams, quizzes, tutorial

questions or homework

4.28 0.5221 5

8 Give more attention to students by increasing

consultation hours

4.30 0.5128 4

9 Base most of student grade on group performance 4.35 0.4559 2

10 Use student daily journal of progress and problems 4.31 0.5204 3

11 Institute a general no-failure policy for the course 3.92 1.3030 11

12 Provide more feedback reports to parents 4.05 0.5267 9

The three major actions the respondents would take in applying TQM principles to structure and

delivery of courses taught are Improve teaching methodology (using reference materials,

seminars, etc) constantly, Base most of student grade on group performance and Use student

daily journal of progress and problems.

Table 12: Measures respondents would use to determine the success of TQM actions (The

statements have been ranked on a 5-point scale Strongly Disagree indicating 1 to Strongly Agree

indicating 5)

S.

No

Measures used Mean

Score

Standard

Deviation

Rank based

on mean

score

1 Students performance based on assignments 4.82 0.5482 1

2 Student opinion surveys 4.41 0.5133 4

3 Alumni surveys 3.75 1.2972 7

4 Course final exam 4.65 0.4537 2

5 Class average GPA compared with class

average grade

4.02 0.5198 5

6 Standardized tests 3.87 1.3025 6

7 Failure rate for the course 4.58 0.4962 3


131

The survey results indicate that the popular measures respondents would take to measure the

success of TQM actions are Students performance based on assignments, Course final exam and

Failure rate for the course.

Conclusion

The economic, social, cultural, technological changes contribute to knowledge society. The

present growth of economic growth can be substantially increased if India becomes super power

in knowledge sector. A conceptual TQM model for excellence is Higher Education Institutes is

based on the following five variables which lead to student satisfaction is proposed.

1. Commitment of top management: Top management, through their supervision of all

processes, should ensure that everybody is committed to achieving quality

2. Course delivery: Expert knowledge must be matched with expert skill to transmit that

knowledge – the fervor to acquire knowledge must be matched with fervor to transmit it.

3. Campus facilities: Utmost attention is to be shown in providing excellent infrastructure

and physical facilities in the campus for student learning, co-curricular and extra-

curricular activities.

4. Courtesy: An emotive and positive attitude towards students will lead to congenial

learning environment.

5. Customer feedback and improvement: Constant feedback from the students leading to

continuous improvement in the process is the key to achieving excellence.

The higher Education system needs to be strengthened which will be capable of honing the

system to attain all-round, multifaceted personality; to acquire leadership qualities, to sharpen

communication and interpersonal skills, to acquire knowledge of the latest trends in technology,

to have exposure to industrial climate and to gain confidence to face changes in the highly

competitive and ever changing world.

References

1. Ali, N. A and Zairi, M. (2005) Service Quality in Higher education, Bradford University

School of Management. Bradford

2. Barnet. R, (1992), Improving higher education: Total quality care, Buckingham,

SRHE&OU

3. Boaden. R.j., Dale B.G., (1992), Team work in Services: Quality circles by another

name? International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol.17 No.3, pp. 126-136

4. Colling .C, Harvey. L., (1995), Quality control assurance and assessment in the link to

continuous improvement, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol.3 No. 4, pp. 30-34

5. Corrigan, J. (1995), The art of TQM Quality Progress Vol.28, pp. 61-64

6. Feigenbaum A.V, (1983), Total Quality Control, McGraw Hill, New York

7. Garvin D.A., (1987), Competing on eight dimensions of quality, Harvard Business

Review, Vol. 65 No.6, pp. 101-109

8. Gummesson E, (1990), Service Quality – a holistic view, Karlstad:CTF

9. Harvey. L , Green D. (1993), Defining „Quality” assessment and evaluation in higher

education, Vol. 18 No.1, pp. 19-34


132

10. Lachlan E.D Crawford and Paul Shutler, (1999) “ Total Quality Management in

education: problems and issues for classroom teacher”, The International Journal of

educational Management, Vol.1 pp.67-72

11. Largosen S, Seyed Hashemi. R and Leitner. M (2004), Examination of dimensions of

Quality in Higher Education, Quality Assurance in Education, vol.12 No.2, pp.61-69

12. Lo V.H.Y.,and D.Sculli, (1996) “An application of TQM concepts in education”,

Training for Quality vol 4, No 3, Pp.16-22

13. Majid Jaraiedi and David Ritz, (1994) “Total Quality Management Applied to

Engineering Education”, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp.32-40

14. Mohammed S. Owlia and Elaine M. Aspinwall, (1997) “TQM in Higher Education – a

review” International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol 14, No.5,

pp.32-40

15. Mukhopadhyay, M, (2005), Total Quality management in Education, Sage Publication

16. NAAC Report On Quality Assurance in Higher Education, (2006)

17. Parasuraman .A, Zeithami, V. A., Berry, L.L.(1985), “A Conceptual Model of Service

Quality and its implications for future research, Journal of Marketing, Vol.49, pp.41-50

18. Ramona Kay Michael and Victor E. Sower, (1997) “A comprehensive model for

implementing total quality management in higher education” Benchmarking for Quality

Management & Technology, Vol. 4 No.2, pp. 104-120

19. Reeves. C.A, Bedner, D.A, (1994), Defining Quality: Alternatives and implication,

Academy of Management Review, Vol.19 No.3 , pp. 419-445

20. Sangeeta Sahney, D.K Banwet and S. karunes, (2004) “A SERVQUAL and QFD

approach to total quality education: a student perspective” International Journal of

Productivity and Performance Management, vol 53, No 2, pp. 143-145

total quality management in higher …indianresearchjournals.com/pdf/ijssir/2013/june/11.pdf ·...

Documents