Citation
The application of Total Quality Management in construction field operations

Material Information

Title:
The application of Total Quality Management in construction field operations
Creator:
Whiteman, Daniel E
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
xi, 234 leaves : ill. ; 29 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Construction industries ( jstor )
Correlations ( jstor )
Customers ( jstor )
Human resources ( jstor )
Mathematical dependent variables ( jstor )
Null hypothesis ( jstor )
Paperwork ( jstor )
Regression analysis ( jstor )
Subcontractors ( jstor )
Total quality management ( jstor )
Design, Construction, and Planning thesis, Ph. D
Dissertations, Academic -- Building Construction -- UF
Dissertations, Academic -- Design, Construction, and Planning -- UF
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 2002.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 225-232).
General Note:
Printout.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Daniel E. Whiteman.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact the RDS coordinator (ufdissertations@uflib.ufl.edu) with any additional information they can provide.
Resource Identifier:
028839985 ( ALEPH )
50475219 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text









THE APPLICATION OF TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN
CONSTRUCTION FIELD OPERATIONS















By

DANIEL E. WHITEMAN


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2002

























Copyright 2002

by

Daniel E. Whiteman


























This dissertation is dedicated to Diana, my wife of 32 years, and to my two children, Donald and Debra, the three of whom along with this writer represent the Phour D's of the Whiteman family. Without their support and encouragement over the past 10 years, this dissertation would not have been possible.

















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First and foremost I want to acknowledge the Lord Jesus Christ. It was by his grace I was born in the United States, where individuals have the freedom to reach for whatever dreams they may have for their life.

I wish to acknowledge each of the chairmen and directors of the University of Florida's M. E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction. This writer has had to privilege to learn from, to be mentored by, and to be encouraged to complete this dissertation over the past 35 years by these gentlemen. These individuals include the following:

Loys Johnson, who first gave this writer the opportunity to serve as one of his

student assistants in 1967, and who regularly until his passing in 1999 encouraged me to one day apply the experience gained in the industry to preparing young people for a career in construction.

Don Halperin, who as my professor for concrete and industrialized building

taught me that there is much to be learned from even the most tedious of class subjects.

Brisbane Brown, who from the time he joined the faculty regularly kept contact with me and other members of industry to assure that the School of Building Construction was continually developing the course curriculum to meet the needs of the employers for whom the students were expected to produce results once they completed their studies.









Bill Eppes, who as a professor and interim director of the Rinker School was the most influential person in encouraging this writer to return to Gainesville, to complete my dissertation, and to devote my time to teaching and consulting.

Weilin Chang, who believed that the topic of Total Quality Management and its lack of success in the construction industry needed to be studied from the perspective of one who had spent years working in the field operations of an organization.

Charles Kibert, who politely but firmly encouraged me to keep working on completion of this dissertation following my return to full-time employment in the construction industry.

In addition, I wish to acknowledge the chair of my committee, R. Raymond Issa for his constant challenge to me not to give up, even when the pressure and time restraints of managing a construction firm seemed to make finalization of this dissertation an insurmountable task.

I also wish to recognize each member of my committee for assuring that my dissertation remained focused on the topic, and not drifting away from its intended purpose. Those members include Drs. Robert Cox, Ian Flood, Kwaku Tenah, and Diane Schaub.

Finally, this dissertation would not have been completed were it not for the

support and encouragement from Diana Whiteman, my wife of 32 years, and that of my children, Donald and Debra, who said that I would make a great teacher one day. They are the best example I could have of whether that effort can be a success.

















TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

ACKN OW LED GM EN TS ................................................................................................. IV

ABSTRA CT........................................................................................................................x

CHAPTERS

1 INTRODU CTION ....................................................................................................... 1

Background to Total Quality M anagem ent.......................................................................1
Statem ent of the Problem ..................................................................................................5
Study Objectives................................................................................................................11
Structure of the Study .......................................................................................................11
Lim itations of the Study....................................................................................................12

2 LITERATURE SEARCH OF TQM IN CONSTRUCTION ...........................................14

Introduction........................................................................................................................14
D evelopm ent of TQM .......................................................................................................14
D efining the TQM Concept...............................................................................................20
Features and Principles of TQM .......................................................................................23
TQM Im plem entation Issues..............................................................................................30
TQM Problem Solving Steps............................................................................................. 35
Suggested Solutions for TQM Implementation in Construction from Literature..............36
Sum m ary of Literature Search..........................................................................................41

3 RESEAR CH M ETH OD OLOGY ..................................................................................45

Introduction........................................................................................................................45
Questionnaire D esign........................................................................................................45
Questionnaire Adm inistration..........................................................................................50
Sam ple Selection................................................................................................................50
Survey Response............................................................................................................53
Focus Group.......................................................................................................................53





vi









4 D A TA A N A LY SIS .......................................................................................................... 56

Introduction ........................................................................................................................56
Overview of Responses of All Respondents.....................................................................56
Analysis of Cases where Respondents had Formal TQM Plans in Place.........................61
Analysis of Cases where Respondents had No Formal TQM Plans in Place...................71
Cross-tabulation and M easures of Association.................................................................89
Does Having a TQM Plan Vary According to the Utilization of TQM Principles? ..........90 Does Having a TQM Plan Vary According to Length of Involvement in TQM? .............92
Does Having a TQM Plan Vary According to Having an Established TQM Budget? ......93 Does Having a TQM Budget Vary According to Utilization of TQM Principles? ...........95
Does Having a Mission Statement Vary According to Utilization of TQM
P rin cip les? .................................................................................................................. 9 7
Does Having a Mission Statement Vary According to Having a TQM Plan? ...................98
Does Employing a HR Manager Vary According to Having a TQM Plan? ......................100
Does Employing TQM Personnel Vary According to Having a TQM Plan? ....................101
Does Employing a HR Manager Vary According to Utilizing TQM Principles? .............103
Does Employing TQM Personnel Vary According to Utilizing TQM Principles? ...........105
Correlation and Regression Analysis................................................................................106
Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of Having a Formal TQM Plan? ......................107
Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of Having a TQM Budget? ..............................108
Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of Having a Human Resources Manager? .......109 Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of Having a TQM Staff?.................................110
Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of Having a TQM Budget? ............................ 111
Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of Having a Mission Statement? ....................112
Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of Having a Human Resources Manager? .....113 Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of Having a TQM Staff?...............................114
Is Having a TQM Budget a Predictor of Having a Human Resources Manager? .............115
Is Having a TQM Budget a Predictor of Having a TQM Staff?.......................................116
Is Having a Mission Statement a Predictor of TQM Staff?..............................................118
Is Having a Mission Statement a Predictor of Having a Human Resources Manager? .....119 Is Having a Human Resources Manager a Predictor of Having a TQM Staff?................120
Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of TQM Criteria? .............................................121
Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of TQM Criteria? ...........................................125
Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of TQM problems? ..........................................128
Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of TQM problems? ........................................130
R egression M odeling ........................................................................................................ 131
H ypotheses to B e T ested...................................................................................................132
Hl: Utilization of TQM Principles with Respect to Criteria...........................................132
H2: Having a Formal TQM Plan with Respect to Criteria ..............................................135
H3: Having an Established Budget for TQM Implementation........................................138
H4: Having a Published M ission Statem ent ....................................................................140
H5: Employing TQM Personnel and Criteria..................................................................143
H6: Length of Direct Involvement in Implementation of TQM......................................146
H7: Employing TQM Personnel and Problems ...............................................................149
H8: Direct Involvement in Implementation of TQM .......................................................152









K ey Predictors of TQM Criteria and TQM Problem s .......................................................155
Stepw ise Regression M odel for CRITERIA .....................................................................156
Stepw ise Regression M odel for PROBLEM S ..................................................................159

5 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS OF TQM SURVEY DATA ANALYSIS ................... 163

Introduction........................................................................................................................163
Form al TQM Plans v. Utilization of TQM Principles.......................................................163
K ey Predictors....................................................................................................................165
Establishm ent of an Annual TQM Budget.........................................................................165
M anagem ent Involvem ent and Com m itm ent....................................................................166
Custom er Focus .................................................................................................................168
Participative M anagem ent Style.......................................................................................168
Transfer of TQM from the Home Office to Field Operations ...........................................169
Too M uch Paperw ork .......................................................................................................170
Transient N ature of W orkforce.........................................................................................171
Field Em ployees Regard TQM as Irrelevant .....................................................................171
Difficulty in M easuring Results........................................................................................172
Low Bid Subcontracting ...................................................................................................172
Subcontractors and Suppliers N ot Interested in TQM ......................................................173

6 IMPROVING TQM IN FIELD OPERATIONS .............................................. 174

Introduction........................................................................................................................175
M anagem ent Com m itm ent................................................................................................175
Focus on Custom er N eeds and Expectations....................................................................180
W orker Participation and Em pow em ent...........................................................................181
Transfer of TQM to Construction Sites .............................................................................184
Paperwork .......................................................................................................................... 186
Transient N ature of Construction W orkforce ...................................................................186
Relevance of TQM to Construction W orkers ....................................................................187
M easurem ent of Quality Im provem ents ...........................................................................188
Subcontractor and Supplier Interest in TQM ....................................................................191
Other Focus Group Com m ents .........................................................................................194
Com pany A ........................................................................................................................ 194
Com pany B ........................................................................................................................ 195
Com pany C ........................................................................................................................ 195
Com pany D ........................................................... ............................................................ 195
Com pany E......................................................................................................................... 196
Com pany F......................................................................................................................... 196
Com pany G ........................................................................................................................ 196

7 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................197

Introduction........................................................................................................................ 197
Review of Study Objectives............................................................................................197









Review of Study Objectives..............................................................................................197
Hindrances to TQM Implementation on Construction Sites..............................................197
Recommendations to Improve TQM Implementation on Construction Sites ...................201
Establishment of an Annual TQM budget .........................................................................201
Management Involvement and Commitment ..................................................................201
Focus on Customer Needs and Expectations....................................................................202
W orker Participation .........................................................................................................202
Transfer TQM to Construction Sites..................................................................................202
P ap erw ork ..........................................................................................................................202
Transient Nature of Workers ............................................................................................202
Relevance of TQM to Workers..........................................................................................203
Measurement of Quality Improvements ...........................................................................203
Subcontractor and Supplier Interest in TQM....................................................................203
A dditional C onsiderations ................................................................................................203
Recommendations for Future Research............................................................................205
General Contractor TQM studies.......................................................................................206
C ustom er T Q M Studies .....................................................................................................208
Design Team TQM Studies ...............................................................................................208
Subcontractor and Supplier TQM studies..........................................................................209

APPENDIX

A COVER LETTER USED IN TQM SURVEY OF
GENERAL CONTRACTORS ........................................................................................210

B TQM SURVEY OF GENERAL CONTRACTORS ......................................................212

C COVER LETTER USED IN TQM SURVEY OF FOCUS GROUP...............................218

D TQM FOCUS GROUP SURVEY ....................................................................................219

E TOP TEN ITEMS MENTIONED AS AREAS TO OVERCOME IF TQM
IS TO BE SUCCESSFUL: .............................................................................................224

LIST OF REFERENCES......................................................................................................225

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................................................................................233















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

THE APPLICATION OF TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN CONSTRUCTION FIELD OPERATIONS

By

Daniel E. Whiteman

May 2002


Chairman: R. Raymond Issa
Cochair: Robert F. Cox
Major Department: College of Design, Construction and Planning

Total Quality Management (TQM) is a term that has found widespread usage in most manufacturing and industrial operations in the United States. However, its adoption within the construction industry has been slowed for many reasons. In many cases, firms that start enthusiastically to incorporate TQM soon cease their efforts believing it to be too difficult an undertaking.

This study seeks to examine the reasons for the lack of implementation of TQM at the field operations level of a construction company. The primary objectives of the study include identifying the primary obstacles to TQM, establishing why these obstacles become hindrances to implementation, and finally reviewing possible solutions to overcome these roadblocks to success.









An initial review of the literature on TQM both throughout all industries and specifically within construction is used to comprehend the keys to TQM success. The literature search also identifies the hindrances found in similar research studies.

A survey of leading General contractors throughout the country was undertaken to determine the current level of TQM usage, and to further develop the hindrances found or perceived to exist in implementation.

This study then utilized a focus group comprised of twelve mid-Size to large commercial general contractors known to have made concerted efforts in the development of the concept of total quality within their firms. The purpose of this focus group was to review each of the areas identified as elements essential to successful implementation of TQM, and to develop concepts to encourage others to make TQM a cornerstone of their operations.

The primary keys to success in the implementation of TQM in the construction industry were found to include top management commitment and involvement, a customer focused organization, a participative management style, and the transfer of TQM to the field operations. To succeed in transferring TQM to the field, the most important obstacles to overcome were found to be too much paperwork, the transient nature of the workforce, field employees regarding TQM as irrelevant, the system of awarding subcontracts based primarily upon low bids, and the lack of interest in TQM by the subcontracting industry.














CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION


Background to Total Quality Management

Quality is the degree to which a product or service conforms to a set of

predetermined standards related to the characteristics that determine its value in the marketplace and its performance of the function for which it was designed (Chung, 1999). The quest for quality is a journey during which the destination is never reached. It is a constant pursuit, with there always being room for continuous improvement (Chung, 1999). According to Hayes (1981), quality is a way of thinking. Quality cannot be inspected into a product; it has to be built in. Before quality can be built in, it has to be thought in. And, it must be recognized that the customer is the ultimate source of the definition of quality. Quality, in turn, creates customer satisfaction that leads to an improved competitive position (Reed et al., 2000).

Quality systems entail having the organizational structure, responsibilities,

procedures, processes and resources for implementing quality management such that there is a guiding framework to ensure that every time a process is performed the same information, methods, skills and controls are used and practiced in a consistent manner (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001). These systems require companies to document all their procedures, work instructions, specifications and methods for all functions and aspects of the organization. In this way employees are provided with a reference system to assess their work and work improvements.











During the past decade or so, the total quality movement has seized virtually all sectors of the economy. It has become a ubiquitous organizational phenomenon in manufacturing, service, health care, education, and government (Korkonda et al., 1999). The term Total Quality Management (TQM) has been used increasingly to refer to any and all quality improvement activities (Dahlgaard, 1999). Consequently it has become difficult to explain precisely what TQM is. It is accomplished through a set of practices that supports the TQM philosophy (Dean and Bowden, 1994). These practices should function as an independent system (Hackman and Wagerman, 1995) that combines with other organizational assets to generate competitive advantage. The concept of Total Quality Management (TQM) has been defined as a comprehensive company-wide effort dedicated to customer satisfaction through continuous improvement. Total Quality Management is concerned with product quality, customer and human resource satisfaction and organizational quality performance (Yusof and Aspinwall, 1999; Zhang, 2000). With its primary focus being the involvement of everyone in the continuous improvement of quality, it is believed that TQM will produce improved business results, greater customer orientation and satisfaction, employee involvement and fulfillment, teamworking, and better management of employees within the company (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001; Shea and Howell, 1998; Zhang, 2000).

Common critical factors that affect the implementation of TQM principles include management leadership, commitment and support; supplier quality management; employee relations and human resource management; and training and education (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001). The general lack of financial, human and









technical resources is a major problem that smaller enterprises face even if they want to implement TQM in their operations.

A literature review undertaken by Dahlgaard (1999) in attempting to identify the main principles and concepts in a TQM approach, identified the following keys to success:

* Strong management commitment;
* Continuous improvement as a result of a focus on quality;
* Focus on customers;
* Total involvement, commitment and responsibility;
* Focus on processes to make them work better;
* Actions based on facts and use of performance measurements;
* Focus on employees, teamwork, motivation and empowerment;
* Learning, training and education;
* Building a TQM culture2 and implementing organizational change;
* Partnerships with suppliers, customers, and society;
* Total and holistic approach; and
* Scientific approach.

As the concept of TQM developed, quality was adapted as a management tool. The entire system of an organization as well as the external environment became the fields of quality. Quality management became the tool for all people involved in a company both vertically and horizontally. Vertically, it involved all people from top to bottom and from bottom to top. Horizontally it involved all related departments as well as external organizations. TQM is applicable to any organization, regardless of the type of industry (Love and Heng, 2000). Quality became everybody's job and everybody's responsibility. It stresses a systematic, integrated, consistent, SEmpowerment is the voluntary transfer of ownership of a task or situation to an individual or a group having the ability and willingness appropriate to that situation, in an enabling environment.









organization-wide perspective involving all employees (Love and Heng, 2000). TQM develops and adapts to new circumstances continuously. It has been able to integrate new ideas, tools and methods. It is this dynamism of TQM that holds out the prospect that it can be applied albeit in an altered form to construction field operations involving personnel at levels traditionally regarded as below middle management.

In construction, quality has a three-fold meaning (Hart, 1994). Quality in this context means getting the job done on time, ensuring the basic characteristics of the final project fall within the required specifications, and getting it done within budget. However several authors believe that getting the job done without any loss of life or limb should also be included in the definition (Hinze, 1997; Levitt and Samuelson, 1993; Construction Industry Institute, 1999). Utilizing TQM principles offers the promise of fewer accidents, which improves working conditions and produces satisfied employees, who in turn create greater quality (Weinstein, 1996).

According to Davis (2000), treating safety as a subset of TQM is a step in the right direction. Manzella (1997) supports this viewpoint. Safety can exhibit the other core principles of TQM such as continuous improvement, employee empowerment, and the effective use of statistical techniques (Weinstein, 1998; Smallwood, 2000). Jonas (1996) suggests that without the "S" of safety any program designed to implement a TQM program into a construction operation is incomplete, and can be expected to fail in its complete objective.





2 Culture is the values, beliefs, and norms that guide behavior in organizations. It is the set of shared, taken-for-granted implicit assumptions that a group holds and that determines how it perceives, thinks about and reacts to its various environments.






5


Statement of the Problem

Total Quality Management has been successfully utilized in manufacturing and industrial applications for a number of years. These industries have developed techniques by which personnel at every level of the organization from the president down to the workers on the assembly line are trained in their level of responsibility for TQM in its truest form. However, the construction industry has been slow to embrace the concept of TQM (Shriener, Angelo and McManamy, 1995; Love and Heng, 2000). Construction firms have been continually struggling with the implementation of TQM. The absence of TQM practices in construction has seemingly inhibited continuous improvement and innovation from taking place (Love and Heng, 2000).

Historically construction has been an industry reluctant to implement change, and consequently it is has remained behind where it should be on the implementation of total quality management (Sommerville, 1994). While a number of companies are marketing TQM as an integral part of their organization's strengths, few have found it to be a real tool for the improvement of a quality construction project at the jobsite, particularly in the field operations. Those firms that have most successfully developed their TQM programs have done so at the upper and middle management levels. Where this has occurred, TQM is being utilized more as a management tool in the same way that organizations implemented Management By Objectives (MBO) in the early 1970's.

In terms of the MBO philosophy a business has many objectives. While all

businesses do not have the same objectives, they have one that is common, namely to satisfy customers. Peter Drucker, who is credited with the conceptualization of MBO to the world, expected management to focus on goals (output) rather than processes









(input) (Romani, 1997). Managers should be accountable for results, not merely activities. The performance expected of management had to be directed toward the performance goals of the business. These business performance objectives were driven by customer satisfaction.

Preliminary discussions by the researcher with various contractors, trade

association representatives, and TQM consultants within the industry confirmed that the principles of TQM were not applied beyond management levels within general contractors. At the present time, it appears that there are few contractors that have fully implemented TQM at every level within their own field organization, and even fewer at the field level of their subcontractors and suppliers. In a study of the Greek construction industry it was found that only 20% of the firms who participated stated that they had clearly defined and documented quality policies in place (Zantanidis and Tsiotras, 1998). In the same study, 61.22% of the firms recognized that quality provided them with their most important competitive advantage, followed by price at 16.33%. The primary criterion when assessing suppliers was price at 25.63% with quality next at 24.37% of the respondents. While this study focused on the construction industry only in the Greek economy, these findings suggested that, in practice, construction firms were not optimizing the competitive advantage provided by TQM. Douglas and Judge (2001) echo this view with regard to the construction industry lagging behind in the area of quality improvement.

There are several possible reasons for this reluctance to completely implement TQM. The first of these areas of hindrance appears to be the unique nature of construction itself. Almost every project is unique in its design, location, materials and production techniques. (Wells, 1986; Sommerville, 1994). Further, the standards of the









finished product vary widely regarding space, quality, durability, and aesthetic consideration. Every construction project is located on a unique piece of property. In addition, with the exception of chain type operations that are repetitive in design, every project is original design concept. Each building or facility may, therefore, be described as being custom-made (Berger, 2000). It is less well recognized that they vary from each other, even when built to identical plans and specifications (Porteous, 1999). For example, ground conditions may require different foundation depths or systems for two otherwise apparently identical buildings. This is radically different than the typical TQM operation within a manufacturing plant, where the product is produced at a singular site location and is of a design that is produced in mass quantities. Because of this lack of a repetitive production process, led to early perceptions that TQM was for manufacturing only (Chase, 1993).

In the United States, the early leaders of TQM implementation were those in the manufacturing industry, who in large part relied upon the Japanese model developed through Deming and Juran. Ford Motor Company retained Deming in 1981 to consult with them on their "Quality is Job One" plan. In her book on Deming's methods, Walton wrote on Deming's commitment to Ford (Walton (1986):

Dr. Deming, for his part told Bakken that he 'would be delighted to
work with Ford Motor Company,' and that his vision was to take a few
large companies, who by the strength of their work with their supply
base, 'create a prairie bonfire that would consume all America and turn it around'. If Dr. Deming could work wonders with Ford, ... he could
do it anywhere.

Success at Ford with their quality initiative, along with other early proponents of quality improvement, led to the Chief Executive Officers of Ford, American









Express, IBM, Motorola, Procter & Gamble and Xerox, sponsors of the Total Quality Forum to write in an open letter to Harvard Business Review (Robinson, 1991):

TQM is a fundamentally better way to conduct business and is
necessary for the economic well-being of America. TQM results in higher-quality, lower-cost products and services that respond to the
needs of the customer. Quality results are continually improved
through understanding and perfecting the systems by which
organizations operate.

These leaders went on to state:

Results from TQM in our companies range from halving productdevelopment cycle time to a 75% improvement in "things gone wrong"
in shipped products to a $1.5 billion savings in scrap and rework over a
five-year period.

Such top management commitment to TQM has been an essential ingredient in TQM's success in manufacturing.

Likewise, service industries such as healthcare and hospitality; have likewise taken a lead in the area of quality improvement in functions that are not as repetitive as manufacturing. One factor in this success may be attributable to the fact that in these industries, their leadership has taken a pivotal role in establishing a stable workforce in their respective firms. This has led to a cultural environment where the employees are empowered to become involved in the TQM or Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) programs within their facilities (Huq, Z. and Martin T., 2000). Similar findings were identified by Saunders and Graham (1992) in the hospitality industries.

In addition, both the manufacturing and service industries are able to maintain a relatively consistent level of staff, which can be continually trained in their specific operations. Such is typically not the case in the construction industry.









The construction industry does not enjoy continuous demand for its products and services. This scenario implies that the demand for people with the appropriate construction skills also fluctuates. Qualified and trained workers, needing employment of some kind, leave the industry when demand for their services disappears (Krizan and Winston, 1998). The industry experiences an unacceptably high drop-out rate among new entrant trainees (Cjou, 1999). The impact of this occurrence is evident in the lack of investment in, and lack of commitment to, worker training that is an important component of any plan to implement TQM principles.

Once construction activity increases, the shortage of skilled and trained people is even more acute (Krizan and Winston, 1998). To make up for this shortage, the labor force may be augmented with, or even consist of, workers who lack the appropriate training and experience needed to properly execute the essential processes of construction assembly to the expected quality standards. Frequently, these workers are expected to acquire totally new skills 'on the job' but without any structured instruction or training program (Porteous, 1999).

The practice of competitive bidding results in contractors undertaking

construction projects on a "one-off basis (Kanji and Wong, 1998). By implication each project is, therefore, treated as being unique, without the prospect of either the physical structure being reproduced, or the project team, including subcontractors and suppliers working together again on the next project.

The risks associated with this uncertainty lead to limited investment in fixed capital, minimum employment of permanent staff, and the increased use of subcontractors and casual labor (Schneider, 1993).









The importance of the General Contractor, Subcontractor and Supplier

relationships being developed and improved upon from project to project cannot be overstated in construction. (Kale and Arditi, 2001). The subcontractor and supplier team on each project is therefore made up of a different group of members for each project undertaken by the general contractor. There are few opportunities to learn from mistakes on one building when the next one to be constructed is an entirely different one.

Likewise, within each company, the labor pool of superintendents, foremen, and craftsmen is in most cases completely different from one project to the next making any continuity of TQM training efforts difficult (Kanji and Wong, 1998).

This problem of the labor pool is even more exacerbated in areas of significant multi-ethnic labor groups, such as South Florida. In Dade County, it is likely that the labor force on the majority of construction jobsites will include white Americans, black Americans, Cuban, Mexican, Haitian, and French Canadian workers. It is not uncommon to have four different languages being spoken by the foremen to the various workers in the field operations. TQM involves changing the way people interact and work in organizations (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001). As such it is contextdependent and influenced by cultural and structural factors (Tata and Prasad, 1998). Organizational culture is holistic, historically determined, and socially constructed. It involves beliefs and behavior, exists at a variety of levels, and manifests itself in a wide range of features of organizational life (Detert, 2000). Management behavior and organizational culture need to change to fully embrace the TQM approach (Moon and Swaffin-Smith, 1998). TQM requires an organizational culture where all individuals are concerned with quality; want to produce quality products, and where they can









freely question practices that do not produce quality (Reed et al., 2000). Both the physical working environment and cultural issues such as management values, attitudes and behaviors are important factors for the successful implementation of TQM. Only by having a working environment conducive to excellence will there be a positive attitude to it (Yusof and Aspinwall, 1999). Tata and Prasad (1998) argue also that the national culture or the shared values of a society or country influences TQM implementation. The key cultural dimension is social hierarchy of which power distance3 can be used as a measure (Lilrank et al., 2001).


Study Objectives

This study has two primary objectives. The first of these objectives will be to identify those factors that hinder the implementation of the principles of Total Quality Management (TQM) in the actual field operations of a construction jobsite. These inhibitive factors will be identified through a review of the literature on TQM and a survey of a sample of contractors in the United States.

The second objective of this study will be to formulate proposals for

implementation of the principles of TQM in field operations at the level of the Field Superintendent and below. These proposals will be drawn from the literature review and the contributions of a focus group of contractors.


Structure of the Study

This introductory chapter outlines the research problem addressed by this study. This chapter also introduces the two primary objectives of the study, and


3 Power distance indicates the ease with which people from different hierarchy and seniority levels can interact with each other. Small power distance correlates with a









defines the limitations of the study. Chapter 2 consists of a review of the literature on Total Quality Management. This review includes classical TQM writings, multidisciplinary sources and construction-related literature. The next chapter, Chapter 3, discusses the basis for the methodology used in the study, including the design of the research instruments and their administration. In Chapter 4 the data collected are analyzed and the relationships between variables identified and examined. Chapter 5 discusses the research findings in comparison with the literature reviewed. The penultimate chapter, Chapter 6, discusses the results of the focus group survey with a view to the design of an action plan to implement TQM in the field more effectively. The final chapter outlines conclusions and makes recommendations for future study.


Limitations of the Study

This study sought to identify the hindrances to the implementation of TQM in the general contracting industry among mid-size to larger commercial contractors. It did not seek to review those sectors of the industry that are represented by either smaller organizations, or the single family housing industry.

Secondly, this study makes no effort to redefine TQM as it has been developed in other industries such as manufacturing or industrial operations. Rather it sought to use the application of TQM in those industries as a basis from which to redefine its applicability to the construction industry and then particularly on construction sites.

The limited budget and time frame directly influenced the research

methodology that was followed to gather the data used to meet the study objectives. The sample size and selection process were similarly affected by these factors. Despite low level of formalities in communication and decision-making. The U.S. has a power









these limitations an appropriate methodology was followed, a representative sample was selected and a useful sample size was achieved.

In order to investigate the problems associated with implementing TQM on construction sites the number of participants in the focus group was restricted to a representative sample of those companies who had considerable experience with TQM in their site operations, had annual total contract values ranging between $50 million and $2 billion, and were active across the United States.

In Chapter Two a literature search will be conducted to outline an

understanding of the development of TQM historically, to define the current application of TQM in the construction industry, and to ascertain the hindrances that have been identified by other research studies on this subject.


distance rating of 40 on a scale of 0 to 100 while Japan has a rating of 54.
















CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE SEARCH OF TQM IN CONSTRUCTION Introduction

Total Quality Management has been identified as an approach to

management that has evolved from a narrow focus on statistical control to one that encompasses a variety of technical and behavioral methods for improving organizational performance (Dean and Bowen, 1994). It is widely recognized that the origins of TQM lie with quality management specialists like Deming and Juran (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001). Each is known for his 14 and 10 steps respectively to be followed in the quality improvement process. These are listed in Table 2-1.


Development of TQM

As a result of the variety of techniques, tools and behavioral methods Total Quality is an ambiguous concept. The concept reflects three basic principles, namely customer focus, continuous improvement and teamwork (Dean and Bowen, 1994; Stashevsky and Elizur, 2000). People are the key element in achieving these principles. Yong and Wilkinson (2001), however, see TQM as a company-wide effort that emphasizes the principles of customer orientation or focus, process orientation, and continuous improvement. TQM is an enabler that can be used to cultivate continuous change and learning (Love and Heng, 2000). Establishing linkages between these and managerial work practices and desired











performance outcomes in field operations is a major challenge. Douglas and Judge (2001) found that there was a positive relationship between the degree of TQM implementation and organizational performance.

As firms increase their organizational performance in business operations, their organizational performance in terms of financial performance and productivity improved. TQM, therefore, has the potential to produce competitive advantage to organizations undertaking to incorporate its principles (Reed et al., 2000.


Table 2-1. Steps in the quality improvement according to Deming and Juran Step Deming Juran
1 Create constancy of purpose for Build awareness of the need and improvement of product and service opportunity for improvement
2 Adopt the new philosophy Set goals for improvement 3 Cease dependence on mass inspection Organize to reach the goals
4 End the practice of awarding business on Provide training throughout the price tag alone organization
5 Improve constantly and forever the system Carry out projects to solve of production and service problems
6 Institute training on the job Report progress 7 Institute leadership Give recognition
8 Drive out fear Communicate results
9 Break down barriers between staff areas Keep score 10 Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets Maintain momentum by making for the workforce annual improvement part of the processes of the company
11 Eliminate numerical quotas and goals for the workforce in management
12 Remove barriers to pride of workmanship 13 Encourage education and self-improvement for everyone
14 Take action to accomplish the transformation
Adapted from Landesberg (1999)











In a study conducted by Zhang (2000) the extent to which TQM affected quality costs and sales turnover was investigated. On average, the 10 companies who participated in the study had reduced quality costs by approximately 7.6% since the introduction of TQM and approximately 10% of turnover change was due to TQM. The study confirmed that TQM can lead not only to improvement in product quality, but also to improvement in strategic business performance, process quality, supplier quality management, customer focus and human resource management. The long-term performance of firms that implement TQM is improved (Easton and Jarrell, 1998).

Field operation' management practices include the following:

* A. Relationship oriented practices;
* B. Participative leadership and delegation practices; and
* C. Work oriented practices.

Definitions for each of these management practices are listed in Table 2-2 and are drawn from the taxonomy of Yukl (1994:68-69).

In a study conducted by Kathuria and Davis (1999), relationship-oriented practices were found to play important roles in manufacturing settings characterized by a high emphasis on quality. Practices such as team building, supporting, mentoring, inspiring and recognizing were found to motivate workers to manufacture products that were accurate, consistent, durable, and reliable. In the same study it was found that managers who perceived a high management SThe comparable term used in management literature is work force management practices. These practices have been listed in Yukl's taxonomy (1994) and are likely to occur when a manager interacts with subordinates, superiors, peers, or








emphasis on quality demonstrated these practices more strongly than those who perceived a low emphasis on quality. This observation confirms the pivotal role of management in the success of any quality improvement program. It follows, therefore, that where the emphasis on quality is high, construction supervisors will strongly demonstrate appropriate field operation management practices to manage and implement quality.


Table 2-2. Definitions of field operation management practices Practice Definition A. Relationship oriented practice: Motivating and inspiring Using influence techniques that appeal to emotion or logic to generate enthusiasm for the work, commitment to task objectives, and compliance with requests for cooperation, assistance, support, or resources, setting an example of appropriate behavior

Supporting Acting friendly and considerate, being patient and helpful, showing sympathy, and support when someone is upset or anxious, listening to complaints and problems, looking out for someone's interest

Developing and mentoring Providing coaching and helpful career advice and doing things to facilitate a person's skill acquisition, professional development, and career advancement

Managing conflict and teambuilding Facilitating the constructive resolution of conflict and encouraging cooperation, teamwork, and identification with the work unit



even outsiders. We have used the term "field operations" to indicate those activities involving workers on construction sites.








Table 2-2. continued


Networking


Recognizing


Socializing informally, developing contacts with people who are a source of information and support and maintaining contacts through periodic interaction including visits, telephone calls, correspondence, and attendance at meetings and social events


Providing praise and recognition for effective performance, significant achievements and special contributions, expressing appreciation for someone's contributions and special efforts


Rewarding Providing or recommending tangible rewards such as pay increases or promotion for effective performance, significant achievements, and demonstrated competence

B. Participative leadership and delegation:
Delegating Allowing subordinates to have substantial responsibility and discretion in carrying out work activities, handling problems, and making important decisions

Consulting Checking with people before making changes that affect them, encouraging suggestions for improvement, inviting participation in decision making, incorporating the ideas and suggestions of others in decisions

C. Work oriented: Planning/organizing Determining long-term objectives and strategies, allocating resources according to priorities, deterring how to use personnel and resources to accomplish a task efficiently, and determining how to improve coordination, productivity, and effectiveness of the organizational unit








Table 2-2. continued Problem solving


Clarifying roles and objectives


Informing


Monitoring


Identifying work-related problems, analyzing problems in a timely but systematic manner to identify causes and find solutions and acting decisively to implement solutions to resolve important problems or crises


Assigning tasks, providing direction in how to do the work, and communicating a clear understanding of job responsibilities, task objectives deadlines, and performance expectations.
Disseminating relevant information about decisions, plans, and activities to people that need it to do their work, providing written materials and documents, and answering requests for technical information


t -~ - - - -


Gathering information about work activities and external conditions affecting the work, checking on progress, and quality of work, evaluating the performance of individuals and the organizational unit, analyzing trends, and forecasting external events


The ability of top management to create a vision and promote change is at the heart of successful TQM implementation (Reed et al., 2000). Top management needs transformational leadership that is demonstrated with both directive and supportive behavior. Management commitment arises from the tension created by the desire to satisfy a personal need, from the freedom and opportunity to take action, and from making investments and sacrifices that will ultimately produce a profit. This critical and important role for top or senior management is echoed unequivocally throughout the literature on TQM.








Defining the TQM Concept

There are as many definitions and descriptions of total quality as there are authors who have written on the subject (Korukonda et al., 1999). There is little consensus on what TQM means or how it works (Marler, 1998; Yong and Wilkinson, 2001; Ho et al., 2000). It has come to mean different things to different people (Kelemen, 2000). For example, Kelemen (2000) cites examples of various descriptions of TQM whereby it has been described as a management practice and philosophy of management aimed at satisfying the customer; a new way of thinking about the management of organizations; a comprehensive way to improve total organizational performance and quality; a systematic approach to the practice of management; and an alternative to management by control. It is a business philosophy towards change, continuous improvement, learning and transformation (Mohanty, 1998). Different commentators have come out with their own meanings and formalizations of TQM, making a generally accepted definition of the concept rather elusive (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001). Some authors regard philosophies and techniques such as Total Quality Management, Continuous Improvement, Total Quality, Lean Construction, Process Improvement, Concurrent Engineering, and Just In Time (JIT) Management collectively as TQM (Shammas-Toma et al., 1998; Allen and Kilmann, 2001).

Total Quality Management is a management philosophy embracing all activities through which the needs and expectations of the customer and the community and the objectives of the organization are satisfied in the most efficient








and cost effective way by maximizing the potential of all employees in a continuing drive for improvement2 (BS 4778: Part 2, 1991).

Wruck and Jensen (1998:402) define TQM as

a science-based, non-hierarchical, and non-market oriented
organizing technology that has the potential to increase efficiency
and quality.

TQM was defined by Manser (1998:11) as

knowing what needs to be done, having the tools to do it, then
doing it right the first time, every time.3

This definition suggests that TQM has the potential to reduce costs and increase profits within the organization.

According to Richbell and Ratsiatou (1999), the real purpose of TQM is to change the attitudes and skills of an organization so that the culture of the organization becomes one of preventing failure and the norm is operating right the first time. Organizations need to adopt a quality culture, not just a quality process or set of quality techniques (Kanji and Wong, 1998). This quality will be reflected in the basic values, general orientation toward work, taken-for-granted assumptions and expectations, and ideology of the organization (Cameron and Smart, 2001). Anfuso (1994:73) defines TQM as

managing an enterprise to maximize customer satisfaction in the
most efficient and effective way possible by totally involving
people in improving the way work is done.

TQM advocates the involvement of all employees in the decision making process of organizations (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001; Ho et al., 2000).


2 Improvement is the continuous voluntary exertion by a person to accomplish tasks in the best possible way.








Participation in decision making (PDM) is the mutual influence of supervisors and subordinates in organizations. Employees view PDM as the major motive for participating in TQM (Stashevsky and Elizur, 2000). Anfuso suggests that total quality should be looked at by management as the way to involve people and the way to improve processes. Another definition by Slockbower and Brown (1993:11) suggests that TQM is

the achievement of substantial, measurable quality improvements at
least cost that are customer driven.

According to The Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) (1992:3),

total quality management is a continuous improvement process to
meet customer requirements and corporate expectations - a
philosophy of doing the right thing the first time. Quality is defined
by the customer. Conforming to the customer's expectations is the
measure of quality.

TQM, according to Hackman and Wageman (1995), involves a set of

assumptions, change principles, and intervention strategies that focus on customer, process, and system.

Oakland (1993:22-23) suggests TQM is

essentially a way of planning, organizing and understanding each
activity of the organization and depends on each individual at each level. For an organization to be truly effective, each part of it must
work together towards the same goals, recognizing that each person
and each activity affects and in turn is affected by others. TQM is
also a way of ridding people's lives of wasted effort by bringing
everyone into the processes of improvement, so that results are
achieved in less time. The methods and techniques used in TQM
can be applied throughout any organization.


3 Doing it right the first time means less waste, less rework, and lower costs.








This definition highlights the potential of TQM to be applied to any type of organization, whether it be manufacturing, service, or construction.

Miller (1996:157) proposed the following working definition of TQM:

an ongoing process whereby top management takes whatever steps
necessary to enable everyone in the organization in the course of
performing all duties to establish and achieve standards which meet
or exceed the needs and expectation of their customers, both
internal and external.

This definition outlines the important role played by the executive and

senior management of any organization in the implementation and empowerment of the employees to initiate quality standards which meet or exceed the quality demanded by their customers.

By adapting the elements of the various definitions, the following working definition would be appropriate for construction firms, and for the purpose of this study:

TQM is a continuous4 process whereby the top management of
construction firms take whatever steps are necessary to enable
everyone in the organization, especially construction field
supervisors and construction workers in the course of executing all
their activities on construction sites to establish and achieve
standards, which include completion on time, within budget, to optimum quality standards, and without loss of life or limb, and
exceed the needs and expectations of their clients, both internal and
external."


Features and Principles of TQM

There is no universal set of features and principles underlying the

implementation of TQM. Rather as TQM has developed over time the list has


4 "Continuous" refers to an improvement activity that is explicitly designed and organized for continuity (Lilrank et al., 2001). Improvement is a planned change in the state of affairs of an organization that is perceived as positive in relation to the








grown to include a wide array of features that have evolved from its implementation in different types of organizations each with its own unique characteristics. TQM is to be considered as a dynamic continually improving concept, ready to test and accept new techniques as they are developed.

The following seven defining concepts were synthesized from the 14-point Deming management method (see Table 2.1) by Anderson et al. (1994) in their study of building blocks to their theory of quality management:

* Visionary leadership;
* Internal and external cooperation;
* Learning;
* Process management;
* Continuous improvement; * Employee fulfillment; and
* Customer satisfaction.

While visionary leadership normally refers to top management, leading by informing, inspiring, and through participative consulting would be appropriate for construction supervisors responsible for implementing and managing quality at the construction site or field level. Since employee participation is a fundamental principle behind TQM, communicating task-relevant information to employees is an important aspect of the "informing" behavior of construction supervisors to enable work to be done effectively. This informing behavior involves disseminating relevant information about decisions, plans, and activities to people that need it to do their work, providing written materials and documents, and answering requests for technical information


organization's goals, policies or vision. The magnitude of improvements may be described as a continuum ranging from incremental to radical changes.








Shammas-Toma et al. (1998) suggest the following six key features of

TQM:

* Customer/supplier relationships;
* Prevention of defects;
* Leadership;
* Change in organizational culture;
* Emphasis on teamwork; and
* Use of statistical tools.

In their study on cultural and structural constraints on TQM

implementation, Tata and Prasad (1998) examined the influence of a company's

culture and structure through the following seven building blocks of TQM:

* Management leadership where management's role is to create overall
guidelines and parameters for workers;
* Employee involvement through empowerment,5 teamwork and
coordination across functional areas;
* Responsibility for quality at source with decentralized decision-making,
employee empowerment and training in quality control techniques;
* Effective teamwork and coordination using existing horizontal
coordination and communication networks;
* Focus on customer through obtaining customer feedback, meeting and
exceeding the needs of external and internal customers;
* Benchmarking6 due to companies considering themselves interdependent
with others; and
* Continuous improvement through the "kaizen" philosophy of small and
continuous improvements.






5 Where it exists empowerment is most likely to be something that top or senior management creates for other managers, but is often not extended to lower order workers. Those most needing empowerment are the ones who are excluded from it (Moon and Swaffin-Smith, 1998).

6 Benchmarking is the process of improving performance by continuously identifying, understanding, and adapting outstanding practices and processes found inside and outside the organization. This practice is widely used in manufacturing but needs to be used in construction on a broader scale than at present (Fisher, Miertschin and Pollock, 1995)






26


In the paper entitled "Principles of Quality Management," of Population

Reports published by John Hopkins University (Kols and Sherman, 1998), the

following list of basic management principles was provided:

* Strengthen systems and processes;
* Encourage staff participation and teamwork;
* Base decisions on reliable information;
* Improve communication and coordination; and
* Demonstrate leadership commitment.

Douglas and Judge (2001) identified from the TQM literature that they

reviewed seven key or common practices that combine to support the TQM

philosophy. These were the following:

* Top management team involvement;
* Adoption of a quality philosophy;
* Emphasis on TQM oriented training;
* Focus on the customer;
* Continuous improvement of processes
* Management by fact; and
* Use of TQM methods.

In their 1988 study of 162 general managers and quality managers of 89

divisions of 20 companies Saraph et al. (1989) determined that the TQM critical

factors were the following:

* Top management leadership;
* Role of the quality department;
* Training;
* Product design;
* Supplier quality management;
* Process management;
* Quality data reporting; and
* Employee relations.

In a study conducted in Europe, Black and Porter (1996) found the

following to be the TQM critical success factors from 204 responses:








* People and customer management (Employee involvement and focus on
customer);
* Supplier partnerships (Internal and external cooperation/supplier
management);
* Communication of improvement information (Use of statistical tools/data
reporting);
* Customer satisfaction orientation (Focus on customer);
* External interface management (Internal and external cooperation/supplier
management);
* Strategic quality management (Management leadership);
* Teamwork structures for improvement (Teamwork and coordination);
* Operational quality planning (Role of quality department);
* Quality improvement measurement systems (Use ofstatistical tools/data
reporting); and
* Corporate quality culture (Adoption of a quality philosophy and Change in
organizational culture).
*
The italicized factors are the equivalents drawn from Table 2-3. They

found the most important TQM critical success factor to be strategic quality

management that emphasized the visible commitment and support of top

management. This finding is consistent with that of the other authors.

Table 2-3 shows that the only TQM feature commonly identified by all the

authors was management leadership. This is not surprising since, as noted in the

literature, any initiative that is not supported by top management is doomed to fail.

The features identified by four of the author groups were the following:

* Customer focus;
* Employee involvement;
* Process management; and * Continuous improvement.


There was some agreement between three groups of authors on a further

three features, namely:

* Teamwork and coordination,
* Learning and training, and
* Use of statistical tools and data reporting.








Table 2-3. Matrix of TQM features


Saraph Dougla Anderso Shammas Tata Populatio Total et al. s and net al., -Toma et and n Reports Criteria (1988) Judge, (1994) al. (1998) Prasad (1998) Listed (2001) (1998) Management 6 leadership
Employee 4 involvement
Responsibility for 1 quality at source
Teamwork and 3 coordination
Focus on customer 4
Benchmarking 1
Continuous 4 improvement
Change in 1 organizational
culture
Use of statistical 3 tools/data reporting
Process 4 management
Learning/training 3
Adoption of a 1 quality philosophy

Management by 1 fact

Product design 1
Role of quality 1 department

Use of TQM 1 methods


Internal and external cooperation/supplie r management


2








The classical TQM literature stresses employee involvement and satisfaction as the most important drivers of continuous improvement and customer satisfaction (Eskildsen, 2000).

Similarly, in a study of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Western Australia conducted by Rahman (2001) leadership of top management was found to play a significant role in stimulating quality consciousness among SMEs. People aspects such as teamwork, skills, and creativity were found to be critical to being competitive. There was a need for increased sensitivity to customer needs that could be improved through data collection, analysis and communication. Rahman's ranking of the quality management criteria is shown in Table 2-4.




Table 2-4. Rahman's Ranking of TQM criteria Rank TQM criteria
1 Leadership
2 People
3 Processes, products and services
4 Strategy and planning
5 Information and analysis
6 Customer focus
7 Organizational performance Adapted from Rahman (2001)

These factors are similar to the categories needed for TQM adoption as determined by the Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Award (MBNQA) in the United States. The Baldridge Award was established to recognize those firms in America that typify the finest in quality improvement within their industries. These are the following with the ranking from Table 2-4. included in parenthesis:

* Management leadership (1); * Information and analysis (5); * Strategic quality planning (4);








* Human resource development and management (2);
* Management of process quality (3);
* Quality and operational results (7); and
* Customer focus and satisfaction (6).

Reed et al. (2000) in their study confirmed that there was a well-established link between training and the performance of firms. High performing organizations were found to invest a larger percentage of payroll costs in training compared to the recommended industry norm. Other studies have also shown that training improves quality (Davis, 2000).

Mohanty (1998) argues that the ultimate objective of TQM is to minimize total cost. Increased profitability due to reduced unit cost and production of more outputs helps reduce the price of the product. Consequently better quality and lower prices keep customers satisfied. In turn, customer satisfaction helps to sustain market share and improve the ability to penetrate new markets. Therefore, a sustainable position in the market provides value to stakeholders on a continuous basis and induces motivation for evolving innovative strategies.


TQM Implementation Issues

The implementation of TQM is one of the most complex activities that any company can attempt due to the fact that it involves a change in working culture and impacts people (Yusof and Aspinwall, 2000). Although there are many corporate success stories, there is also considerable testimony to the difficulty of establishing and maintaining an effective TQM program (Wruck and Jensen, 1998; Shea and Howell, 1998; Yusof and Aspinwall, 2000). Precisely why problems in implementing TQM should arise so often is not always clear. It has been suggested that the absence of information regarding the different components of TQM and








how to implement them might be possible reasons (Shea and Howell, 1998). Consequently, organizations operating in the construction industry must be willing to learn (Love and Heng, 2000). Successful implementation of TQM requires that all critical factors for success be addressed effectively (Kassicieh and Yourstone, 1998). Many construction companies, as with firms in other industries, are very enthusiastic about their TQM programs in the initial stages. However, over time they either do not apply those programs properly or the TQM principles conflict with their policies. In these instances TQM is doomed to failure. TQM cannot remedy all organizational shortcomings. It does not generate value for all firms. This is most evident in Brown's study of the failure of TQM in over two-thirds of companies, which begin implementation (Brown, 1993).

Employees often experience divergence between espoused and operational policies (Brewster and Richbell, 1983). This implementation gap between what management says and how they act or expect employees to act is a crucial barrier to the successful implementation of TQM (MacDonald, 1993). Transforming vision to reality requires a complete change in prevailing attitudes and culture. Careful attention must be given to the establishment of both corporate and departmental quality goals, the identification of the potential conflicting goals, the evolutionary process of developing the quality goals and their measurements, and the top management commitment to quality (Shani and Mitki, 1994). This process must flow from management through to the shop floor or field operations. There needs to be a shift in the focus of power away from management to field operations for successful implementation of TQM. The shift must be permanent, consistent and visible (Richbell and Ratsiatou, 1999). Top management must be








seen to be practicing what they preach. Employees should not only be involved in

quality improvement but also in making decisions relating to quality improvement

(Richbell and Ratsiatou, 1999; Chandler, 2000).

Problems may arise in attempting to move the organization in a change

such as applying TQM that may be hard to discern. Reasons for these problems are

the ingrained ideas of employees about the nature of the business and their

reluctance to adapt to the new principles. Unless management recognizes that

employees need continuous development to expand their skills, the organization

will experience implementation problems.

Schriener et al., (1995) suggest the following list of stumbling blocks to

making TQM work:

* Lack of commitment from upper management;
* Authoritarian behavior, hierarchical thinking;
* Fuzzy vision or mission;
* Unattainable goals;
* Goals that do not solve core problems;
* Not listening to customers;
* Press of current business;
* Too many inefficient meetings;
* Skepticism, fear, resistance to change;
* Lack of meaningful measurements;
* Impatience, looking for a quick fix; and
* Obsession with the bottom line, seeing quality as overhead.

Glover (2000) list the following as being barriers to achieving full-blown

TQM:

* Lack of support and commitment from both senior and middle
management;
* Business short-termism;
* Lack of integration between TQM and Human Resource practices; and
* Lack of contextual application.








In the same study, Glover (2000) found that TQM was welcomed as being

associated with increased involvement of workers. There was an expectation that

TQM would lead to a softening of management authoritarianism and closer and

cooperative working relationships and improved communication. The study

showed that the failure of TQM in many areas had nothing to do with the workers'

basic orientation to work, but was related to the failure of management to

implement and maintain it effectively. It was also established that businesses could

accrue benefits from encouraging involvement, communication and consultation.

Several other factors have been cited in TQM literature that impede or

impinge upon the effective implementation of TQM programs. These include the

following:

* Creation of a cumbersome bureaucracy due to increases in paperwork and
other requirements to track benefits of programs (Harari, 1993a; 1993b);
* Unnecessary creation of dual structures to create a total quality
organization when TQM should rather be integrated into the way business
was already done on a daily basis (Brown, 1993);
* Feeling that because TQM has been adopted in some form in other
organizations managers have to use it (Harari, 1993a; 1993b);
* Ignoring the uniqueness of each organization that implements TQM
programs such as type of firm, industry conditions, maturity of firm, and
general readiness for change (Whalen and Rahim, 1994; Dooley and Flor,
1998; Wruck and Jensen, 1998);
* Lack of effective measurement of quality improvement (Whalen and
Rahim, 1994);
* Lack of proper training (Katz, 1995;Wruck and Jensen, 1998);
* Lack of effective communication and coordination due to projects being
dominated by uncertainty and unpredictability with problems dealt with as
and when they arose (Shammas-Toma et al., 1998);
* Incorrect perceptions of the success or failure of TQM programs based on
expectations and outcomes (meeting of expectations) of the TQM effort as
shown in Figure 2-1 (Dooley and Flor, 1998);
* Lack of carefully developed plans (Dooley and Flor, 1998);
* Complexity of transfer of training due to factors such as personality,
motivation, ability, work-related attitudes, and work environment; and








training generalization where there are ample opportunities to apply what has been taught (Marler, 1998);
* Lack of experience in implementing quality management systems (Zantanidis and Tsioris, 1998);


Expectations


Outcomes
Figure 2-1. Perceptions of outcomes of TQM efforts



* Too much rhetoric and reliance on the presence of a TQM program
(Douglas and Judge, 2001);
* Excessive paperwork, overemphasis on customer satisfaction, and mistaken
strategic alignment (Lilrank et al., 2001); and
* Implementation of only selected parts of TQM programs (Zbaracki, 1998;
Wruck and Jensen, 1998; Douglas and Judge, 2001).

Allen and Kilmann (2001) found that companies making more extensive

use of the core TQM practices were more apt to report higher levels of

performance than those that stopped at the rhetoric stage.

Hackman and Wageman (1995:339) argue that

total quality as articulated by Deming, Ishikawa, and Juran is a set
of powerful interventions wrapped in a highly attractive package.
When implemented well, TQM can help an organization improve
itself and, in the process, better serve its community and its
members. If TQM is to prosper, however, rhetorical excesses will
have to be kept in better check than they are at present, and
researchers will have to do a better job illuminating the mechanisms
through which TQM practices realize their effects.

Shammas-Toma et al. (1998) suggest the use of design-build, one

subcontractor and computer-aided design (CAD) at first glance seemed to be


High Expectations High Expectations Low Outcomes High Outcomes


Low Expectations Low Expectations Low Outcomes High Outcomes








logical practices to improve coordination and communication problems within organizations practicing TQM. However they found in their study of the UK construction industry that these practices had created further fragmentation and have been driven by firms seeking to allay contractual risk and only taking on those elements of a construction project contract where profits could be made. TQM was not a major consideration. They found that clients expected to be protected through contractual provisions and selected designers and contractors on price. There was inadequate training of the work force to control quality and identify sources of problems. The prevailing organizational culture reflected uncooperative and suspicious relationships. Teamwork was commonly hindered by accusations, recriminations and blame. Measurable quality criteria were absent.

However, it is possible with the necessary will and commitment that TQM implementation problems can be addressed.


TQM Problem Solving Steps

According to Wruck and Jensen (1998), similar sequences of problem solving steps are suggested by the leading figures of the quality movement. Table 2-5. Problem solving steps
Step Juran Mizuno
1 Analyze the symptoms Seek out the problem points
2 Theorize as to causes List possible causes
3 Test the theories Identify the primary causes of the problem
4 Establish the cause(s) Devise measures to correct the problem
5 Simulate a remedy Implement the corrective measures
6 Test the remedy under operating Check the result
conditions
7 Establish controls to hold the gain Institutionalize the new measures Adapted from Wruck and Jensen (1998)








Those problem solving steps suggested by Juran and Mizuno are illustrated in Table 2-5.


Suggested Solutions for TQM Implementation in Construction from Literature

If the construction industry is to improve its performance and

competitiveness, there needs to be a cultural and behavioral shift in the mind-set of all participants in the construction process (Love and Heng, 2000; Kanji and Wong, 1998) especially top or senior management. Traditional practices will have to be unlearnt so that innovation and continuous improvement can be encouraged and become a norm.

The findings of a study conducted by Marler (1998) suggest that

continuous improvement is positively related to TQM training, flexible work, and flexible technologies. Further, training employees in problem-solving and statistical process control will promote continuous quality improvement. Employer-provided training was found to increase productivity and performance by as much as 16% if the training could be specifically applied to the work that the worker was engaged in. What was taught in the training programs must be carried over to the job setting (Leavitt, 1988). Adequate opportunities to use what is learned must be provided to workers. These views are echoed by Kassicieh and Yourstone (1998). They argue that training that is not immediately applied has little chance of achieving a significant impact on the TQM efforts of an organization. They further suggest that the effectiveness of training processes rests heavily on the opportunities that individuals and teams have to apply their new knowledge.








Extensive and broad-based the training that includes management

supervisors, and hourly paid workers greatly enhances the chances of success in implementing a TQM strategy (Kassicieh and Yourstone, 1998; Chandler, 2000). Training both managers and workers is an essential component for prevention of errors in both design and delivery of products and services in TQM organizations. Training provides a forum for communicating new organizational strategies, new values, and new ways of performing work. It indicates to those being trained that the company values educated and trained workers. People have to be educated about quality concepts and trained in the use of quality tools and techniques (Reed et al., 2000). In the absence of training for organizational change initiatives such as TQM implementation, management will have to rely on other methods to communicate the nature and the why of change. The lack of communication is a significant barrier to improvement. Training is an effective means to overcome this barrier by communicating the tools and strategy for change (Kassicieh and Yourstone, 1998). Further, training in TQM principles, implementation and evaluation is a key to successful implementation of TQM along the dimensions of cost reduction and profit increase (Reed et al., 2000). While rewards for quality ideas increase morale they do not have a significant effect on cost or profit.

Dooley and Flor (1998) suggest that TQM implementation plans need to be carefully developed taking into account factors such as type of firm, industry conditions, maturity of the firm, and general readiness of the firm to be receptive to change. They also argue that expectations need to be managed by being realistic about what can be achieved with TQM concepts and methods. Further, firms should benchmark other organizations to determine what type of quality rates can









reasonably be expected. There is presently a lack of benchmarking standards for the construction industry. However, construction can follow the lead of manufacturing (Fisher, Miertschin and Pollock, 1995)

Hackman and Wageman (1995) found that TQM interventions worked at the individual level when there was logical organization of work, incentive schemes, and training. They contended that jobs needed to be designed to motivate workers to want to improve their work.

Since TQM is a management strategy intended to produce continuous improvement in work processes, workers should be empowered to stop work operations if quality problems arose (Marler, 1998). They should be able to fix problems themselves that affect the quality of their work. In this way problems are resolved at the point at which they occur (Tata and Prasad, 1998).

In order to improve communication of TQM objectives, performance

measurement systems have to be introduced. For construction these could include construction cycle time, late delivery rates, order lead times, client complaints and dissatisfaction indices, and waste and scrap rates (Wruck and Jensen, 1998). TQM performance measures should be customer oriented, operations oriented to track day-to-day progress, and function or task specific to allow isolation of the contribution of particular tasks to performance.

According to the findings of a study by Douglas and Judge (2001),

management needs to invest in the time and resources necessary to implement comprehensive TQM programs and not just selected aspects of TQM. The seven features of TQM they identified had to appear to operate as an integrated system. When TQM is seen as a parallel activity to a business operation, it leads to failure.









Further, there should be a supportive organizational structure in place to allow TQM techniques to be woven into the firm's fabric. According to Reed et al. (2000), TQM will not work without the demonstrated long-term commitment of top management.

Allen and Kilmann (2001) propose the following practices as effective to achieve successful TQM implementation:

* Use of quality councils within the existing management structure but also
includes construction field supervisors who meet regularly to link the
firm's operational activities with the strategic quality plan developed by
senior management;
* Use of teams of trained workers to simplify work and reengineer processes;
* Measure internal and external customer satisfaction.

Reed et al., (2000) suggest that cross-functional communication at various levels through organizations is necessary to solve quality problems. This communication means establishing and using teams. Major quality improvement projects are multifunctional in nature, thus requiring multifunctional teams. Sommerville (1994) argues that the lack of teamwork and management behavior may be the more detenrminate factor in the success of TQM within the construction industry. The execution of contractual obligations contained within the construction project demands that human resources be brought together into some form of coherent team. Since the majority of the work performed by most general contractors is outsourced to subcontractors it is essential that are included in the team, strategy, structure and tasks of TQM (Wong and Fung, 1999).

Shammas-Toma et al. (1998) suggest that variation is a distinctive feature of construction making it different from manufacturing needs to be managed by site managers. Construction field supervisors need to have the flexibility to









stabilize the "upstream" conditions in which packages of work are carried out. These packages of work should not be commenced until they have been fully planned, resourced and realistically targeted with respect to their performance. They also argue that new forms of contract could lead to confusion, ambiguity and conflict as conventional roles are redefined and redistributed. They suggest that effective teamwork will only be achieved if all parties are bound together by mutually set, internalized goals rather than by contractual arrangements alone. The attitudes of the parties to each other in their work relationships are more important than the provisions that formally bind them. The concern with contractual obligations would direct focus more on contractual responsibility to deliver a package of work, impeding in the process flexibility, coordination and effective management of flows. With respect to the management of flows it is necessary to understand the nature of variation, diagnose errors correctly and authorize people to act on the diagnoses.

In a study undertaken by the Chartered Institute of Building (1995) in the Japanese construction industry the following features of the empowering and holistic problem solving approach characteristic of successful TQM were identified:

* Participatory - everybody feels part of the process;
* Fundamental - it aims for deep seated and continuous transformation;
* Incremental - improvement is brought about gradually by small step
changes;
* Continuous - it consists of a permanent search for improvement;
* Holistic - improvement is achieved by looking at the whole system, not
parts of it in isolation; and
* Reflective - learning from what is already known to be done well and from
what others could do better.








A system of TQM reward and punishment could be introduced to create

lasting improvements in efficiency. These could include considerations such as the following:

* Participation and job improvement in terms of which workers participate in
the TQM process and apply their specific knowledge to solve problems;
* Public recognition where outstanding quality efforts by individuals and
teams are recognized during awards ceremonies;
* Pay-for-knowledge systems where employees are rewarded with increases
in wage rates for achieving a number of milestones subsequent to training
and learning such as memorizing the steps of an activity, performing it
under supervision, performing it unsupervised, and then teaching the
activity to another employee;
* Monetary pay-for-performance in terms of which individuals are
encouraged to change their behavior (Wruck and Jensen, 1998).

The effectiveness of a TQM approach is likely to be enhanced with

increases in the use of group-based compensation and rewards (Chandler, 2000).

In their study Allen and Kilmann (2001) found that firms making more extensive use of non-monetary rewards reported higher performance levels than those that used monetary rewards extensively. They suggested that non-monetary rewards were appropriate for firms just getting started with TQM.

The importance of project teams was identified in a study by Ahmad and

Sein (1997), which concluded that for TQM to succeed, project teams needed to be developed and empowered to make plans, set priorities, designate resources, evaluate their progress and communicate recommended changes.


Summary of Literature Search

In this chapter the literature on TQM has been extensively discussed. This process included a review of the available resources for the following subject matter:









* Classical TQM literature based on the work of the TQM guru's Juran,
Deming and Ishikawa;
* Recent literature drawn from a wide range of industries and disciplines;
and
* Recent literature that covered TQM implementation in construction
specifically.
*
This review indicated that there is a small body of literature on TQM in

construction as it relates to construction in comparison with other industries. The

review was undertaken for the following reasons:

* To define the concept and practice of TQM;
* To formulate a definition of TQM as it relates to construction field
operations;
* To identify and highlight the characteristic and defining principles and
features of TQM;
* To identify the critical issues that affect implementation of TQM in other
industries; and
* To examine possible solutions to these issues as they apply to construction.
0
It was found that over time TQM as a concept and practice has evolved

from a narrow focus on statistical control to one that encompasses a large and

diverse range of technical and behavioral methods for improving organizational

performance. Consequently, TQM is an ambiguous concept that reflects three

basic principles, namely customer focus, continuous improvement and teamwork.

It was established that people are the key element in achieving these principles.

There was little if any agreement in the literature on a definition for TQM.

However, by drawing on the wide range of attempted definitions, it was possible to

formulate a working definition for TQM as it related to construction field

operations, namely that:

TQM is a continuous process whereby the top management of construction firms take whatever steps are necessary to enable
everyone in the organization, especially construction field
supervisors and construction workers in the course of executing all








their activities on construction sites to establish and achieve
standards, which include completion on time, within budget, to optimum quality standards, and without loss of life or limb, and
exceed the needs and expectations of their clients, both internal and
external.

There was very little agreement on the characteristic and defining features

of TQM. However, the most common revolved around the issues of leadership,

continuous improvement, customer satisfaction and worker involvement.

Several implementation issues were highlighted. These included the

following:

* Management support;
* Measurement of quality improvements;
* Training;
* Communication;
* Planning;
* Paperwork; and
* Selective implementation.
0
Finally, some solutions drawn from the literature were examined. These

addressed some of the problems with the following:

* Need for cultural and behavioral shift;
* Relationship between continuous improvement and training;
* Need for broad based training involving all workers;
* Company wide and comprehensive application of TQM principles;
* Worker involvement and empowerment;
* Management commitment; and
* Teamwork.
0
In Chapter Three, the research methodological approach to the

investigation of these issues relating to the implementation of TQM in the

construction industry will be discussed. This will include the development,

distribution and results of two separate surveys. The first survey was utilized to

identify the current usage of TQM in construction and the hindrances to






44


implementation further in the industry. The second survey was undertaken to establish a focus group of a dozen leading contractors to discuss methods that can be used to overcome the identified hindrances to TQM in construction.















CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY


Introduction

In social research surveys are one of the most frequently used methods (May, 1997). The survey protocol of random sampling procedures allows a relatively small number of people to represent a much larger population (Schuman and Presser, 1981; Sonquist and Dunkelberg, 1977; May, 1997; Ferber et al., 1980). The opinions and characteristics of a population can be explained through the use of a representative sample (May, 1997).

Surveys are an effective means to gain data on attitudes on issues and causal relationships. However, they can only show the strength of statistical association between variables. Surveys do not explain changes in attitudes and views over time. They also provide no basis to expect that the questions be correctly interpreted by the respondents (May, 1997).

It was decided that a questionnaire survey would be appropriate for achieving the objectives of this study.


Questionnaire Design

The development of the survey of TQM in the construction industry at the Field Supervisory Level began within this researcher's own company which was committed to implementing TQM successfully throughout its entire operations.








A review of the essential elements of TQM gained from attendance at several construction-related TQM related seminars revealed a lack of actual application of the processes that have made TQM successful in other industries. This included a lack of adequate budget, failure to plan adequately for quality, inadequate training at all levels except for top or senior management positions, and little recognition given to those who strive for quality improvement on their projects.

Once a project was awarded it seemed that all efforts focused on getting started with construction quickly, getting the subcontracts written on a timely basis, and then progressing the work in a manner that would produce the greatest revenue in the shortest amount of time. The literature review in the previous chapter supports this observation in construction. Quality was primarily achieved through the inspection process. It has been stated earlier that quality cannot be inspected into a product; it must be built into the product from the outset.

Several key members of the researcher's company were selected to "brainstorm" the issues, which, if implemented, could lead to more attention being given to improvement in the quality of site operations, From this meeting of managers, the initial draft of the questionnaire was developed. These included a cross-section of the organizational chart and included project executive, project manager, estimator and project superintendent.

Construction executives from 10 different companies reviewed the draft questionnaire and provided input. This review centered on development of questions relating to their companies' current use or level of implementation of TQM, and the obstacles or hindrances which kept TQM from being more









effectively implemented at the field level. This pilot study was conducted to validate and improve the questionnaire, in terms of its format and layout, the wording of statements and the overall content. The draft questionnaire was revised to include the suggestions of these participants. Finally, the members of the dissertation committee suggested modifications to the questionnaire that would allow the results to be meaningfully analyzed. In short the questionnaire was validated through this process and provided the researcher with improvement opportunities before launching the main survey.

The final draft of the TQM Survey (see Appendix A) incorporated

questions dealing with both the current usage of TQM, hindrances to its success in the field operations of a company, and methods that could be considered to improve implementation within the industry.

The survey was developed to study several key areas related to the utilization of TQM in the construction industry. These areas were:

* Current usage of TQM methods (Section A questions 1 through 7);
* Level of commitment to TQM principles (Section A questions 8 through
11);
* Hindrances to implementation of TQM to field operations (Section B
questions 1 through 4);
* Comments on TQM usage, including obstacles to, benefits of, and
suggestions for improvement (Section C questions 1 through 3);
* Company profile (Section D questions 1 through 5); and
* Optional section requesting contact information (Section E).

The progression of the questioning began with a basic inquiry into TQM usage b the firms in general. The questions then became increasingly more specific as the survey delved into the firm's actual implementation of recognized TQM tools and techniques. In this manner, it was intended to keep the respondent









from becoming disenchanted with the survey from the outset in the event that their company was not embracing the most important aspects of TQM implementation.

The first set of six questions required "yes" or "no" responses. These questions were designed to determine current usage of TQM methods by the respondents. For example, "Does your company utilize the principles of TQM in its field management operation?"

The next question was designed to establish the length of direct

involvement in the implementation of TQM. Respondents had a choice of 4 categories, namely, less than 1 year; I to 2 years; 3 to 4 years; and 5 or more years.

The next set of questions was included to determine the level of

commitment of respondents to TQM principles. In question 8, the respondents were asked to identify the employees in their company who had received special TQM training. In various job positions (such as Executive and Foreman), respondents had to indicate the total number of employees in that category and also the total number who had been trained. This question was excluded from the data analysis due to lack of response by respondents during the telephone follow up stage.

Respondents were asked to indicate the annual level of their TQM budgets by selecting from six categories, namely, less than $10,000; $10,000 to $25,000; $25,000 to $50,000; $50,000 to $100,000; $100,000 to $250,000; and greater than $250,000. In a follow up question respondents were asked to indicate what portion of this budget was spent on outside consultants. Question 10 was designed to establish the level of financial support for continuing education. The same job









position categories used in question 8 were used. The levels of support used were none; 1%-25%; 26%-50%; 51%-75%; and 76%-100%.

The final question in this section required responses using the five (5) point Likert's Profile of Organization Characteristics, which has been shown to have acceptable levels of reliability (Likert, 1967). The Likert scale was used to indicate the position of the companies with respect to nine TQM criteria. The scale of agreement ranged from 1= totally disagree to 5=totally agree. The central value was 3=somewhat agree and was not neutral. For example, "Top management is committed."

The next section was incorporated to determine the level of hindrances and obstacles to the implementation of TQM in field operations. The first two questions required responses on the same 5-point Likert scale used in question 11 to a series of 14 statements. The next question was designed to measure the opinions of the unions to various TQM issues on the 5-point Likert scale. For example, "Union leaders are supportive of the application of TQM principles." This particular question was excluded from the data analysis due to reluctance to respond to this question by respondents during the telephone follow up stage.

The final question in this section requested respondents to provide information on any other hindrances that they had encountered.

The following three questions requested respondents to provide

information on benefits of, obstacles to and possible improvements to TQM if respondents had a TQM program in place.

The next 5 questions were designed to provide a profile of the respondents. For example, "What is the size of your company in annual volume?" These









questions were excluded from the analysis due to an apparent reluctance to respond to these by respondents during the telephone follow up stage despite being willing to respond to the others.

The final section that was optional requested contact information such as company name, contact name, and title of person completing the survey.


Questionnaire Administration

Sample Selection

It was the intent of the survey to gather information relating to the

utilization of TQM from as broad a geographic area within the United States as possible. It was also the intent of the researcher to survey those companies that would be considered as likely candidates for being involved in the use of TQM methods in their companies. For this purpose, it was determined that two sources of potential companies would be used - one on a national level, and one within the state of Florida.

On a national level, one recognized standard for measuring the size of a construction company is the annual ranking of the 400 largest construction companies by the publication, Engineering News Record (ENR). This trade magazine each year sends out an extensive questionnaires to the industry, and even those firms which have not previously been ranked by this group are either contacted by the publication, or make direct contact to become included in the survey. The publication issues its ranking of the ENR 400just after the first quarter of every year. For the purposes of this survey, the mailing list for the year









1998 was obtained listing the name, address, and title of principal officer for each of the firms listed.

On the state level within Florida, one of the leading trade organizations is the Associated General Contractors (AGC), which is the oldest such organization in the country. The firms that are members of AGC tend to be professional firms, which join for reasons of developing their professional skills and to improve the performance of their firms through contact with other General Contracting companies. Due to the large number of firms within this organization, a random selection of 80 of these firms was made from each of the five (5) different geographical chapters throughout the State of Florida, with a total of sixteen (16) firms from each region selected to achieve a cross-section of the entire state.

Therefore, a total of 480 questionnaires were sent out. The principal officer of each firm listed by ENR or AGC was sent a complete survey packet consisting of a cover letter placed on University of Florida's, M. E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction letterhead (see Appendix A) and questionnaire (see Appendix B). The letter explained the rationale of the survey, invited their participation, assured them of anonymity of respondents, and outlined the procedure for the return of the completed questionnaires. The letter was addressed to the principal manager listed in both the Engineering News Record list and the directory of AGC members.

To encourage the completion of the survey, each firm was sent a returnaddressed postage-paid envelope for use in returning the completed questionnaire to the University of Florida. In addition, he final section of the survey provided an option for the respondents to profile of their company, along with their name and









address. The firms were assured they would be provided a copy of the survey results provided they completed this section.

The surveys were mailed in the second quarter of 1998. Approximately six weeks were allowed for the initial response. At that time a second mailing was made to all firms, except for those that had already responded and could be identified by completion of the final section of the survey.

Following another six-week period, an extensive phone calling effort was undertaken to each of the firms that had been sent a questionnaire to complete. To undertake this phone effort, the researcher utilized the services of a national survey research firm, Precision Response Corporation (PRC), which was given a copy of the survey packet. The survey firm assigned one person to solicit additional responses. This individual reviewed the entire survey with the researcher to assure the intent of each question. Over a one-month period, PRC made at least two attempts to contact each of the named principal individuals for the firms mailed a survey. The firms were initially asked if they had completed the survey, and if so, no further inquiry was made. During these calls it was decided due to difficulty in getting responses to the five questions in Section D dealing with the companies' corporate profile to exclude these from the data analysis. Respondents were uncomfortable with answering these questions because of their sensitive and in some cases what was perceived to be confidential nature of this information. By excluding these questions more respondents were willing to participate in the survey. It should be noted that a significant number of the return-mailed responses also neglected to provide this information, making the demographic profile of the respondents difficult to analyze.








Survey Response

As a result of the two mailings and the follow up phone survey, a total of 87 questionnaires were completed by the ENR 400 contractors, or a total of 21.75% of those surveyed. On the Florida level, there were a total of 23 completed questionnaires out of the 80 that were solicited, for a response rate of 28.75%. Overall, the response rate for the 480 questionnaires mailed was 110 completed questionnaires, or 22.92%. Of these 109 were incorporated into the analysis of the results. The one survey was eliminated due to the large number of incomplete responses to the key questions of the survey. The response rate of nearly one-fourth of the surveys mailed was deemed to be acceptable to identify the usage of TQM and the hindrances encountered by the responding firms. A review of the responses from both the national and statewide surveys indicated no measurable differences in the respondents' answers to the questions, therefore it was decided to combine the two groups for the analysis of this survey. Focus Group

Following completion of the analysis of the initial survey, it was

determined that a follow-up survey of a limited number of specifically selected contractors would be helpful to determine any actions which could be identified to improve implementation of TQM within the construction industry by overcoming some of the identified hindrances. Therefore, a focus group of twelve contractors that were known by the researcher to be committed to the implementation of TQM were invited to participate in a second questionnaire survey to that initially sent to the larger number of firms. In addition, they were asked to participate in a follow-up discussion of the responses, which they would









provide in the survey. These contractors represented varying sizes by annual contract volume, number of employees and geographical location. While the focus group firms had bases of operation in six (6) states, namely New York, Michigan, Kansas, Wisconsin, Alabama and Florida, they had branch offices in more than 20 other states throughout the United States. Construction contract award volumes ranged from $50 million to over $2 billion million annually for the participating firms. The contractors agreed to participate in providing further in-depth input to proposals drawn from the literature review. In addition, each firm was assured that the information provided would be utilized in a manner so as to not identify their specific company's specific program of TQM implementation.

Since the top management of each of the firms was recognized to be

interested in quality improvement in the industry, the format of the survey differed from that of the initial survey. This survey asked the respondents specific questions regarding the management style of their firm, the efforts undertaken to implement TQM, and efforts they had undertaken to overcome certain hindrances identified in the initial survey.

Each potential participant was contacted telephonically to invite them to

participate in the survey. Once they agreed to participate fully, a packet was sent to participants that included a cover letter on University of Florida, M. E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction letterhead (see Appendix C) and a questionnaire that contained a series of questions and statements (see Appendix D).

Approximately one week later each participant was called to clarify any questions they had with the survey. In these discussions, several of the respondents were interested to know how the issues relating to hindrances, and









their respective ranking had been responded to by the whole sample in the initial survey. Based upon this request by several of the firms, the ranking of the problem areas as shown in Table 4-18 was sent out to each respondent (see Appendix E) with a cover letter explaining the purpose of this follow-up mailing.

The focus group responses were cross-tabulated and actions that enjoyed the support of most of the participants were included in the final set of proposals.

In Chapter Four the results of the broad based initial questionnaire, and the statistical analysis of data collected will be reviewed and discussed. The results of the focus group survey will be discussed in Chapter 6 of this study.















CHAPTER 4
DATA ANALYSIS


Introduction

To draw conclusions from empirical data, a body of statistical evidence is necessary. Statistical methods of analysis are useful to establish the strength of the relationships between the variables that the data represent. The SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) statistical analysis computer software was used to analyze the data from each of the two survey questionnaires. This chapter summarizes the data obtained from the initial industry-wide survey, and deals with the descriptive statistical analysis itself The analysis and discussion of the focus group survey and its results will be discussed in Chapter 6 in its entirety.


Overview of Responses of All Respondents

Of the sample of 109 valid' responses, 46 of the respondents (68.2% ) to the survey indicated that their company utilized the principles of TQM in their management, while the remaining 64 contractors (41.8%) indicated that they did not utilize these principles. Only 40 of the 109 (36.7%) respondents had a formal plan in place for the implementation of TQM principles, while only slightly more than one-fourth (26.6%) had an annual budget for such a program. A larger percentage (62.4%) had published mission or purpose statements. Only 46.8% of









the respondents employed a Human Resources Manager. Even less, 28.4%

employed staff in positions that would normally be classified as TQM

appointments. The information relating to the responses of these first five

questions of the survey are shown in Figure 4-1.



Utilization of TQM Principles

Formal TQM Plan

L Established TQM Budget U Mission-Purpose Statement

Human Resources Manager

TQM Staff
m Yes
ENo 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Percentage


Figure 4-1. Overview of TQM usage by all respondents Contractor responses to the question of the length of time that their

companies had been involved directly in the implementation of TQM indicated that 29.6% of respondents were just starting to use TQM or had only been involved for a very short period of less than 1 year; 20.4% of the respondents had been involved between 1 and 2 years; 25.9% for 3 to 4 years; and the remaining 24.1% been engaged in TQM for more than 5 years.


1 SPSS labels those respondents "valid" that are included in the analysis after adjustment for non-responses











The length of time the various respondents had been involved in TQM

implementation is shown in Figure 4-2.




O324. 1% E*29.6%
2 Less than 1 year
g 1-2 years
E3-4 years
0 25.9% 20.4% 0 5 or more years Percentage by length of involvement
Figure 4-2. Length of direct TQM involvement stated as a percentage



With respect to annual budgetary allocations for TQM implementation,

only 26 of the 109 contractors responded to the question. The question asked that they respond "If Applicable" to the question. Therefore, one may imply that the non-respondents had no budget for TQM implementation. The majority of respondents (73.1%), which indicated some level of TQM funding, had annual budgets less than $10,000. The next two groups representing the budget amounts of $10,000 to $25,000 and $25,000 to $50,000 had positive responses from 3.8% of the firms. Equal numbers of firms had funding of 7.7% each for budgets of between $50,000 and $100,000 and between $100,000 and $250,000. Only one responding contractor (3.8%) stated that their budget for TQM implementation exceeded $250,000. Figure 4-3 shows graphically the lack of funding that is dedicated to TQM implementation.












0 7.7%
* 3.8% * Less than $10,000 0] 7.7%
] 3.8% - $ 510,000 -$25,000 jj $25,0004$50,000
0 $50,000 to $100,000
S3.8% $100,000- $250,000 a 73.2% M Greater than $250,000

Annual TQM Budget in Dollars by Percentage of Contractors Figure 4-3. Level of established TQM budgets for implementation


The majority of respondents (58.4%) allocated between 1% and 5% of this budget on the use of outside consultants in their TQM efforts. Another 16.6% spent between 6% and 10% of their annual budget on TQM consulting, while the remaining 25% of the responding contractors spent in excess of 10% of the established budget for implementing TQM on those considered TQM experts or consultants in the field.

When the focus of commitment to the principles of TQM centers on the level of financial support for training and education, companies reportedly invested significantly more in the education and training of executive level management than for superintendents, foremen and the general labor force.

The drop-off of training and educational support as the employee's position moves from the typical home office staff to the traditional field work force is dramatic, and emphasizes the lack of commitment on the part of a large number of









contractors to adequately train or provide continuing education for the average worker in the field operations.

When the funding of continuing education is measured at the funding level of greater than 75% of the cost of the training, the companies that paid this level remain above the one-half for the positions of management (executive, administrative, project management, and superintendents), with the levels being 62.5%, 52.5%, 57.5%, and 52.4% respectively. However, the two categories of field level operations (foremen and labor force), which are the individuals responsible for getting the work put into place, the percentage of firms willing to pay for more than 75% of their training dropped to below 40% of the companies, at 37.1% and 32.4%.

An even more dramatic demonstration of the lack of funding for continuous education of the field forces is shown when the companies are measured at the level of providing no support for training. While only 12.5% of the companies provided no continuing educational support for their executives, 41.2% responded that in the case of the field labor force that they provided no financial support for education or training whatsoever.

The number of companies that provided no financial support for

continuing education at the mid-management levels of foremen, superintendents, project managers, and administrative personnel were reported as 31.4%, 21.4%, 15.0%, and 20.0% respectively.

A side-by-side comparison of funding for "Greater than 75% Educational Support" and "No Educational Support" is shown in Figure 4-4.










S70%
60% Greater than 75%
50% Educational Funding
4Support
40%
0 E No Educational Funding
30%
Support
o 20%
S10%






Company Position

Figure 4-4. Funding Support for Continuing Education and Training

A more detailed analysis of the questionnaire responses provided the

contractors which were surveyed by this study is provided in the next sections of this chapter.


Analysis of Cases where Respondents had Formal TQM Plans in Place
Of the 109 valid respondents, 40 (36.7%) had formal plans for

implementation of TQM principles in their companies. One responding survey was

excluded due to the large number of non-valid responses provided by this firm.

This group was analyzed to determine:
* How many utilized TQM principles within their organizations;
* How many had an established budget for TQM implementation;
How many had a published mission/purpose statement;
* How many employed a Human Resource Manager;
SHow many employed dedicated TQM personnel; and
* The length of time that they had been implementing TQM principles in
their organizations.








Table 4-1. Analysis of group having formal TQM plan Yes No Total
Utilization of TQM principles 37 (92.5%) 3 (7.5%) 40 (100%) Established budget for TQM implementation 24 (60.0%) 16 (40.0%) 40 (100%) Published mission/purpose statement 33 (82.5%) 7 (17.5%) 40 (100%) Employ Human Resource Manager 25 (62.5%) 15 (37.5%) 40 (100%) Employ dedicated TQM personnel 28 (70.0%) 12 (30.0%) 40 (100%)


Table 4-1 and Figure 4-5 both show that:

* 37 (92.5%) respondents utilized TQM principles in their organizations;
* 24 (60%) respondents had established budgets for TQM implementation;
* 33 (82.5%) respondents had a published mission or purpose statement;
* 25 (62.5%) respondents employed a Human Resources Manager (HRM);
and
* 28 (70%) respondents employed dedicated TQM personnel implying that
while some did not employ a HRM, they employed other staff.


Utilization of TQM Principles

Established TQM Budget

Mission-Purpose Statement Human Resources Manager


E Yes
ENo


TQM Staff


0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%


Percentage


Figure 4-5. Criteria utilized by group having a formal TQM plan


As shown from the data in Table 4-2, of the firms responding to this

portion of the survey, 6 (25%) had only been involved with the implementation of the recognized TQM principles for construction in their companies for a period









between 1 and 2 years, 10 (41.7%) for between 3 and 4 years, and 8 (33.3%) for more than 5 years. Of the group with formal TQM plans, 16 (40%) respondents did not answer this question




Table 4-2. Involvement in TQM of group with Formal Plan <1 year 1-2 years 3-4. years + 5 years Total Length of direct involvement in 0 (0%) 6 (25%) 10(41.7%) 8 (33.3%) 24(100%) implementation of TQM


The data in Table 4-3 shows that of those respondents who had annual

TQM budgets, 3 (37.5%) had budgets of less than $10,000 and 2 (25.0%) budgets between $50,000 and $100,000.

The data in Table 4-4 provide information about the level of financial support provided by respondents for Continuing Education (CE).




Table 4-3. Distribution of Annual TQM budget of group with Formal Plan < than $25,000 - $50,000 - $100,000 - > than Total $10,000 $50,000 $100,000 $250,000 $250,000
3 1 2 1 1 8 37.5% 12.5% 25.0% 12.5% 12.5% 100.0%


Executives (55.6%) received the highest level of financial support for CE while the general labor force (43.0%) and foremen (28.6%) received the lowest level of financial support. This result suggests stronger support for those who acquire and plan the work to be done than for those who have the responsibility to complete the project on time, within budget and in compliance with the quality standards expected by clients. This result has implications for the successful implementation of TQM principles in the field.









Table 4-4. Level of financial support for Continuing Education - Formal Plan
None 1%-25% 26%-50% 51%-75% 76%-100% Total
Executives 4 (44.4%) 5 (55.6%) 9 (100%) Admin. Staff I (11.2%) 4(44.4%) 4(44.4%) 9(100%) Proj. Mgrs. 1(11.2%) 4(44.4%) 4(44.4%) 9(100%) Proj. Super. 1 (10.0%) 4 (40.0%) 5 (50.0%) 10 (100%) Foremen 2 (28.6%) 1 (14.2%) 2 (28.6%) 2 (28.6%) 7 (100%) Labor force 3 (43.0%) 1 (14.2%) 2 (28.6%) 1 (14.2%) 7 (100%)


The position of companies relative to various TQM criteria is shown in Table 4-5. All of the respondents reported positively about the commitment of their company's top management to TQM. The information noted in Table 4-5 shows that 57.5% totally agreed that the top management of their organizations was committed to TQM, 35.0% generally agreed and 7.5% somewhat agreed that this was the case.

Similarly, most respondents (95%) agreed that the top management of their organizations were personally involved in Tam's implementation efforts. Of these, 47.5% totally agreed that this was true for their companies and 40.0% generally agreed that this was the case.

Most respondents (87.5%) agreed that planning was well developed throughout their companies, with appropriate actions being taken to make improvements in each area of operation. While 40% totally agreed that this was the case, 30% generally agreed.

Almost all the respondents (95%) expressed agreement that in their companies the primary focus was on customers including customer feedback. While only 25.6% totally agreed, 46.3% generally agreed.








Table 4-5. Distribution of company position relative to TQM criteria - Formal Plan
1 2 3 4 5 Totally Generally Somewhat Generally Totally Total disagree disagree agree agree agree (100%) Top management 3 14 23 40 commitment (7.5%) (35.0%) (57.5%) Top management 1 1 3 16 19 40 involvement (2.5%) (2.5%) (7.5%) (40.0%) (47.5%) Well developed 1 4 7 12 16 40 planning (2.5%) (10.0%) (17.5%) (30.0%) (40.0%) Primary customer 1 1 9 18 10 40 focus (2.5%) (2.5%) (23.1%) (46.3%) (25.6%) Workers trained in 3 4 11 13 8 39 TQM (7.7%) (10.3%) (28.2%) (33.3%) (20.5%) Rewards for TQM 4 4 9 13 10 40 contributions (10.0%) (10.0%) (22.5%) (32.5%) (25.0%) Participative 2 2 15 10 11 40 management style (5.0%) (5.0%) (37.5%) (25.0%) (27.5%) Continuous 4 3 11 11 11 40 improvement (10.0%) (7.5%) (27.5%) (27.5%) (27.5%) measurements
TQM applied to all 5 6 8 14 7 40 field operations (12.5%) (15.0%) (20.0%) (35.0%) (17.5%)


Fewer respondents (82%) responded positively about each worker being

continually trained in TQM procedures. Of these, 20.5% totally agreed and 33.3%

generally agreed that this was true for their companies.

Even less respondents (80%) indicated that employees were rewarded for

specific contributions to the TQM efforts of their companies. In this instance, 25%

totally agreed and 32.5% were in general agreement.

Participative management styles were acknowledged to be evident in all

areas of the operations of their companies by ninety percent (90%) of the

respondents. Of this amount, the companies noted that employees were

enthusiastic about TQM and its potential to improve the performance of their









companies, of these, 27.5% totally agreed and 25% generally agreed that this was the position in their companies.

With respect to continuous improvement measurements being taken for all operations in their companies, and used consistently in areas of quality, service and efficiency, 27.5% each totally agreed, generally agreed or somewhat agreed that this was true for their companies.

Regarding TQM measures being applied to all field operations, including work done by company employees and subcontractors, 72.5% responded positively that this was the case in their companies. Of these 17.5% totally agreed and 35% generally agreed, with the remainder in somewhat of an agreement that the measures were being applied.

When the statistical means of the responses are compared, top management commitment, top management personal involvement, and well developed planning throughout the company ranked 1st, 2nd, and 3rd respectively. In addition, when the Coefficients of Variance (CV%) are tabulated, it is interesting to note that the above criteria plus the companies having a primary customer focus have a tighter dispersion than the remaining criteria.

From this comparison, it can be deduced that those items with a wider

dispersion of responses represent areas where the respondents vary significantly as to whether their companies' view the individual criteria as having been successfully implemented within their organization's management practices and principles.

The ranking of all the TQM criteria is shown in Table 4-6.









Table 4-6. Comparison of means of company relative to TQM criteria - Formal Plan
Rankin Criteria Mean Std. Dev. CV(%)I
g
1 Top management commitment 4.50 0.64 14.2% 2 Top management involvement 4.27 0.91 21.3% 3 Well developed planning 3.95 1.11 28.1% 4 Primary customer focus 3.90 0.91 23.3% 5 Rewards for TQM contributions 3.53 1.26 35.7% 6 Participative management style 3.65 1.10 30.1% 7 Continuous improvement measurements 3.55 1.26 35.5% 8 Workers trained in TQM 3.49 1.26 36.1% 9 TQM applied to all field operations 3.30 1.29 39.1%


The position of companies with respect to various problems with implementing TQM in construction field operations is shown in Table 4-7.

Most respondents (82.1%) agreed that there was too much paperwork to be completed for TQM to be implemented in field operations. Of these, 23.1% were in total agreement and 20.5% in general agreement that this was the position in their companies.

Similarly, 74.4% of respondents expressed that the education level of the

field forces was too low for TQM to be implemented in the field without difficulty. There were 10.3% in total agreement and 25.6% in general agreement with this assessment.

Less than half (40.5%) of respondents were either in total (13.5%) or general agreement (27.0%) that field employees considered TQM irrelevant to their performance. More than three-quarters (76.4%) agreed that measuring results




SCoefficient of Variation (CV%) is a quantity designed to give a relative measure of variability. The CV expresses the standard deviation as a percent of the mean (Devore and Pack).








was problematic. Of these 13.2% totally agreed and 31.6% generally agreed that

this was true in their companies.



Table 4-7. Problem areas relative to TQM in construction field operations Formal Plan
1 2 3 4 5 Totally Generally Somewhat Generally Totally Total disagree disagree agree agree agree (100%) Too much 3 4 15 8 9 39 paperwork (7.7%) (10.3%) (38.5%) (20.5%) (23.1%) Low education 3 7 15 10 4 39 level of field (7.7%) (17.9%) (38.5%) (25.6%) (10.3%) forces
Field employees 3 5 14 10 5 37 regard TQM as (8.1%) (13.5%) (37.8%) (27.0%) (13.5%) irrelevant
Difficulty in 4 5 12 12 5 38 measuring results (10.5%) (13.2%) (31.6%) (31.6%) (13.2%) Transient work 1 8 12 10 7 38 force (2.6%) (21.1%) (31.6%) (26.3%) (18.4%) Unique nature of 5 10 14 4 5 38 construction (13.2%) (26.3%) (36.8%) (10.5%) (13.2%) Too many 7 11 7 9 5 39 uncontrollable (17.9%) (28.2%) (17.9%) (23.1%) (12.8%) factors
Focus on short 5 10 9 7 6 37 term cost savings (13.5%) (27.0%) (24.3%) (18.9%) (16.2%) Low bid 3 8 12 11 5 39 subcontracting (7.7%) (20.5%) (30.8%) (28.2%) (12.8%) Too tight 8 5 12 3 11 39 scheduling (20.5%) (12.8%) (30.8%) (7.7%) (28.2%) Subcontractors and 2 10 14 5 8 39 suppliers not (5.1%) (25.6%) (35.9%) (12.8%) (20.5%) interested
TQM just a buzz 9 12 6 10 2 39 word (23.1%) (30.8%) (15.4%) (25.6%) (5.1%) No operations to 6 10 12 3 5 36 benchmark (16.7%) (27.8%) (33.3%) (8.3%) (13.9%) Transfer of TQM 1 1 5 4 5 16 from home office (6.3%) (6.3%) (31.2%) (25.0%) (31.2%) to field operations









Respondents agreed (76.3%) that the construction workforce was too transient to maintain a trained team for effective TQM implementation, with 18.4% being in total agreement and 26.3% in general agreement.

The unique nature of construction was considered problematic by 60.5% of respondents. While 23.7% were either in total or general agreement with this position, 39.5% were either in total disagreement or general disagreement. The existence of too many uncontrollable factors such as strikes, weather and material shortages was not considered to be a problem by 46.1% of respondents. However, 35.9% either totally or generally agreed that these factors were problematic. There was agreement among 59.4% of respondents that there was too much focus on short term savings for TQM to be successfully implemented in the field. A significant proportion (40.5%) disagreed that this was the case, namely 13.5% totally disagreed and 27.0% generally disagreed.

The predominant selection of subcontractors on the basis of low bid was considered a problem by 71.8% of the respondents. Further, 12.8% were in total and 28.2% in general agreement with this view.

With respect to project scheduling being too tight to allow sufficient time for in-depth TQM implementation, 28.2% totally agreed that tight scheduling was a problem. Interestingly, 20.5% totally disagreed. While 30.7% of respondents disagreed to varying degrees that subcontractors and suppliers were not interested in TQM, 20.5% totally and 12.8% generally agreed that this lack of interest was a problem.

Most respondents (53.9%) disagreed that TQM was just a "buzz" word that did not really have any meaning. Only 5.1% totally agreed that it was. There was









sizable disagreement (44.5%) with the view that there were no construction

operations that could be benchmarked for TQM implementation. On the other

hand, 22.2% either totally agreed or generally agreed that there were such

operations.

There was agreement by most respondents (87.4%) that the transfer of the

application of TQM from the home office to operations in the field had not kept

pace with other industries. In fact, 31.3% totally agreed and 25.0% generally

agreed that this was the case.

When the means of the responses are compared, transfer of TQM from

home office to field operations, too much paperwork, the transient nature of the

work force, field employees regarding TQM as irrelevant, and the difficulty in

measuring results rank as the five most problematic areas respectively perceived

by respondents. The ranking of all the TQM problem areas is shown in Table 4-8.




Table 4-8. Comparison of means of relative to TQM problem areas - Formal Plan Rankin Criteria Mean Std. Dev. CV (%)
g
1 Transfer of TQM from home office to field 3.69 1.20 32.5%
operations
2 Too much paperwork 3.41 1.19 34.9% 3 Transient work force 3.37 1.10 32.6% 4 Field employees regard TQM as irrelevant 3.24 1.12 34.6% 5 Difficulty in measuring results 3.24 1.17 36.1% 6 Low bid subcontracting 3.18 1.14 35.8% 7 Subcontractors and suppliers not interested 3.18 1.19 37.4% 8 Low education level of field forces 3.13 1.08 34.5% 9 Too tight scheduling 3.10 1.48 47.7% 10 Focus on short term cost savings 2.97 1.30 43.8% 11 Too many uncontrollable factors 2.85 1.33 46.7% 12 Unique nature of construction 2.84 1.20 42.3% 13 No operations to benchmark 2.75 1.25 45.5% 14 TQM just abuzz word 2.59 1.25 48.3%












Analysis of Cases where Respondents had No Formal TQM Plans in Place

The group of 69 respondents who reported that they had no formal plans

for implementation of TQM principles in their companies was analyzed to

determine:

* How many utilized TQM principles within their organizations;
* How many had an established budget for TQM implementation;
* How many had a published mission/purpose statement;
* How many employed a Human Resource Manager;
* How many employed dedicated TQM personnel; and
* The length of time that they had been implementing TQM principles in
their organizations.



Table 4-9. Analysis of group having No formal TQM plan Yes No Total
Utilization of TQM principles 26 (37.7%) 43 (62.3%) 69 (100%) Established budget for TQM implementation 5 (7.2%) 64 (92.8%) 69 (100%) Published mission/purpose statement 35 (50.7%) 34 (49.3%) 69 (100%) Employ Human Resource Manager 26 (37.7%) 43 (62.3%) 69 (100%) Employ dedicated TQM personnel 4 (5.8%) 65 (94.2%) 69 (100%)

The data in Table 4-9 and Figure 4-6 show that a significant number of

firms, despite not having a formal TQM plan in place did have the following in

their organizations:

* 26 (37.7%) respondents utilized TQM principles in their organizations;
* 5 (7.2%) respondents had established budgets for TQM implementation;
* 35 (50.7%) respondents had a published mission or purpose statement;
* 26 (37.7%) respondents employed a Human Resources Manager (HRM);
and
* 4 (5.8%) respondents employed dedicated TQM personnel implying that
while some did not employ a HRM, they employed other staff.










Utilization of TQM Principles

Established TQM Budget
. EYes 8 Mission-Purpose Statement ENo
o
Human Resources Manager

TQM Staff

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% Percentage


Figure 4-6. Criteria utilized by group having no formal TQM plan

The data in Table 4-10 show that 16 (23.3%) respondents had been

involved with the implementation of TQM principles in their companies for less than 1 year, 5 (7.2%) for had been implementing TQM between 1 and 2 years, 3 (4.3%) for between 3 and 4 years, and 5 (7.2%) for more than 5 years. Of the group with no formal TQM plans, 40 (48%) of the respondents did not answer this question.




Table 4-10. Involvement in TQM of group with No formal TQM plan < 1 year 1-2 years 3-4. years + 5 years Total Length of direct involvement 16 (23.3%) 5 (7.2%) 3 (4.3%) 5 (7.2%) 31 (100%) in implementation of TQM

Table 4-11 shows that of those respondents who had established annual TQM budgets for implementation, an additional 16 (88.8%) had budgets of less than $10,000 and 1 firm each representing (5.6%) of the respondents had provided TQM budgets between $25,000 and $50,000 and between $50,000 and $100,000 respectively.









Table 4-11. Distribution of Annual TQM budget of group - No Formal Plan

The data in Table 4-12 provides information about the level of financial support provided by respondents for Continuing Education (CE). Executives (66.7%) received the highest level of financial support for CE while the general labor force (44.4%) received the lowest level of financial support. This result that is similar to the group with formal TQM plans suggests stronger support for those who acquire and plan the work to be done than for those who have the responsibility to complete the project on time, within budget and in compliance with the quality standards expected by clients.



Table 4-12. Financial support level for Continuing Education - No Formal Plan
None 1%-25% 26%-50% 51%-75% 76%-100% Total
Executives 5 (16.7%) 1 (3.2%) 2 (6.7%) 2 (6.7%) 20 (66.7%) 30 (100%) Admin. 7 (23.3%) 4 (13.3%) 2 (6.7%) 17 (56.7%) 30 (100%) Staff
Project 5 (16.7%) 4 (13.3%) 2 (6.7%) 19 (63.3%) 30 (100%) Mgrs.
Project 8 (25.8%) 1 (3.2%) 3 (9.7%) 2 (6.5%) 17 (54.8%) 31 (100%) Supers.
Foremen 9 (33.3%) 2 (7.4%) 2 (7.4%) 3 (11.1%) 11(40.7%) 27 (100%) Labor force 12 (44.4%) 2 (7.4%) 2 (7.4%) 1 (3.7%) 10 (37.0%) 27 (100%)


The position of the companies with no formal TQM plan relative to several of the identified TQM criteria is shown in Table 4-13. Most respondents (81.9%) stated positively about the commitment of top management to TQM. The data in the table shows that 32.8% totally agreed that the top management of their organizations was committed to TQM, 31.1% generally agreed and 18.0%








somewhat agreed that this was the case. No respondents that had formal TQM plans responded negatively about this issue.


Table 4-13. Company position relative to TQM criteria - No Formal Plan
1 2 3 4 5 Totally Generally Somewhat Generally Totally Total disagree disagree agree agree agree (100%) Top management 9 2 11 19 20 61 commitment (14.8%) (3.3%) (18.0%) (31.1%) (32.8%) Top management 10 5 10 18 18 61 involvement (16.4%) (8.2%) (16.4%) (29.5%) (29.5%) Well developed 10 9 19 13 9 60 planning (16.7%) (15.0%) (31.7%) (21.7%) (15.0%) Primary customer 6 1 15 24 15 61 focus (9.8%) (1.6%) (24.6%) (39.3%) (24.6%) Workers trained in 25 12 12 10 2 61 TQM (41.0%) (19.7%) (19.7%) (16.4%) (3.2%) Rewards for TQM 20 9 12 10 9 60 contributions (33.3%) (15.0%) (20.0%) (16.7%) (15.0%) Participative 12 9 17 14 8 60 management style (20.0%) (15.0%) (28.3%) (23.3%) (13.4%) Continuous 17 7 16 17 3 60 improvement (28.3%) (11.7%) (26.7%) (28.3%) (5.0%) measurements
TQM applied to all 15 9 16 10 10 60 field operations (25.0%) (15.0%) (26.6%) (16.7%) (16.7%)


Similarly, the over three-fourths of the respondents (75.4%) responded

positively about the personal involvement of top management in TQM. Of these,

29.5% each either totally or generally agreed that this was true for their companies.

This response was less for both categories than for those with formal plans.

Fewer respondents (68.4%) than those with TQM plans (87.5%) agreed

that planning was well developed throughout their companies, with appropriate

actions to make improvements in each area of operation. While 15% totally agreed









that this was the case, 21.7% generally agreed. On the other hand, 16.7% totally and 15.0% generally disagreed that this was the case in their companies.

Although fewer than the group with plans, most respondents (88.5%) agreed that in the companies the primary focus was on customers including customer feedback. While only 24.6% totally agreed, 39.3% generally agreed.

Most respondents (60.7%) responded negatively about each worker being continually trained in TQM procedures. Of these, 41.0% totally disagreed and 19.7% generally disagreed that this was true for their companies. This result contrasts starkly with the views of the group with TQM plans in place.

Fewer respondents (51.7%) agreed that employees were rewarded for

specific contributions to the TQM efforts of their companies. In this instance, only 15% totally agreed and 16.7% were in general agreement. On the other hand, 33.3% totally disagreed and 15.0% generally disagreed that this was true for their companies. This result differs from the group with plans in that only 20.0% of them believed this not to be true for their companies.

Of those who stated positively (65%) that participative management styles were evident in all areas of the operations of their companies, and that employees were enthusiastic about TQM and its potential to improve the performance of their companies, 13.4% totally agreed and 23.3% generally agreed that this was the position in their companies. While 10% of the group with TQM plans disagreed that this was the position within their companies, 35% of the group with no plans disagreed.

With respect to continuous improvement measurements being taken for all operations in their companies, and used consistently in areas of quality, service









and efficiency, 5% totally agreed, 28.3% generally agreed 26.7% somewhat agreed

that this was true for their companies. This result also differed from the group with

plans. While 17.5% of respondents in that group had some disagreement, 40% of

the group without plans disagreed.

Regarding TQM measures being applied to all field operations, including

work done by company employees and subcontractors, 60% designated positively

that this was the case in their companies. Of these only 16.7% each totally and

generally agreed. These proportions were less than their counterparts who had

TQM plans.




Table 4-14. Statistical means comparison of company position relative to TQM criteria
Rankin Criteria Mean2 Std. Dev. CV (%)
g
I (4)* Primary customer focus 3.67 1.17 31.9% 2(1) Top management commitment 3.64 1.37 37.6% 3 (2) Top management involvement 3.48 1.42 40.8% 4(3) Well developed planning 3.03 1.29 42.6% 5 (6) Participative management style 2.95 1.32 44.7% 6(9) TQM applied to all field operations 2.85 1.41 49.5% 7 (7) Continuous improvement measurements 2.70 1.29 47.8% 8 (5) Rewards for TQM contributions 2.65 1.47 55.5% 9(8) Workers trained in TQM 2.21 1.24 56.1%
* Ranking of groups with Formal TQM Plans are shown in parentheses



When the means of the responses are compared, primary customer focus,

top management commitment, and top management personal involvement ranked




2 On the scale used, 1= totally disagree, 2= generally disagree, 3= somewhat agree, 4= generally agree, 5= totally agree








1st, 2nd, and 3rd respectively. The ranking of all the TQM criteria is shown in Table

4-14. The ranking for the group with TQM plans is shown in parenthesis.

When the means for the entire sample of the company position relative to

various TQM criteria are compared, top management commitment, top

management involvement, and primary customer focus ranked 1st, 2nd, and 3rd

respectively. The ranking of all TQM criteria are shown in Table 4-15 and Figure

4-3.

Table 4-15. Ranking of responses of All Respondents to TQM criteria Rank Rank Criteria Mean Std. CV (%) Full Dev.
No Plan
Sample Plan
_______ Plan ___1 2 1 Top management commitment 3.98 1.20 30.2% 2 3 2 Top management involvement 3.78 1.29 34.1% 3 1 4 Primary customer focus 3.76 1.07 28.5% 4 4 3 Well developed planning 3.40 1.29 37.9% 5 5 6 Participative management style 3.22 1.28 39.8%
6 7 7 Continuous improvement 3.04 1.33 measurements 43.8% 7 8 5 Rewards for TQM contributions 2.99 1.45 48.5%
8 6 9 TQM applied to all field 2.85 1.41 operations 49.5% 9 9 8 Workers trained in TQM 2.71 1.35 49.8%


The response of the two groups (companies with formal TQM

implementation plans and those without such plans) is very consistent. A review of Table 4-15 indicates that both groups identified the same the top four criteria categories as their top responses to the survey.

* Top management commitment
* Top management personally involved in TQM implementation


3 On the scale used, 1= totally disagree, 2= generally disagree, 3= somewhat agree, 4= generally agree, 5= totally agree









* The focus is primary on the customer, including customer feedback, and
* Well developed planning throughout the company, including actions for
improvement.


The rankings of criteria by both groups and overall is shown in Figure 4-7.


Workers trained in TQM

TQM applied to all field operations

Rewards for TQM contributions Continuous improvement measurements


Participative management style


Well developed planning


Primary customer focus

Top management involvement

Top management commitment
[] Formal Plan
aNoPlan 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
* Full Sample Criteria Rank Figure 4-7. Ranking of all responses to TQM Criteria


The only disparity in these two groups to the first four criteria is that the group of companies with formal TQM plans listed customer focus with feedback as the fourth highest means rank, while those without formal TQM plans listed customer focus as the highest rank. The histogram of the response frequency for customer focus is shown in Figure 4-8 and 4-9.












/ ItI


= 10







0


Std. Dev = .91 Mean = 3.9 N = 39.00


1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0


Scale of Measure



Figure 4-8. Primary Customer Focus with Feedback - Formal TQM


i 1 ,


Std. Dev = 1.17 Mean = 3.7 N = 61.00


1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0


Scale of Measure


Figure 4-9. Primary Customer Focus with Feedback - No Formal TQM Plan








The position of companies with respect to various problems with

implementing TQM in construction field operations is shown in Table 4-16.

Table 4-16. Problem areas relative to TQM in field operations - No Formal Plan
1 2 3 4 5 Totally Generally Somewhat Generally Totally Total disagree disagree agree agree agree (100%) Too much 5 11 17 10 20 63 paperwork (7.9%) (17.5%) (27.0%) (15.9%) (31.7%) Low education 12 9 15 14 13 63 level of field (19.0%) (14.3%) (23.8%) (22.2%) (20.6%) forces
Field employees 7 6 21 14 14 62 regard TQM as (11.3%) (9.7%) (33.9%) (22.6%) (22.6%) irrelevant
Difficulty in 9 7 14 12 20 62 measuring results (14.5%) (11.3%) (22.6%) (19.4%) (32.3%) Transient work 7 10 19 12 13 61 force (11.5%) (16.4%) (31.1%) (19.7%) (21.3%) Unique nature of 15 11 17 9 10 62 construction (24.2%) (17.7%) (27.4%) (14.5%) (16.1%) Too many 13 15 13 13 8 62 uncontrollable (21.0%) (24.2%) (21.0%) (21.0%) (12.9%) factors
Focus on short 9 11 18 13 11 62 term cost savings (14.5%) (17.7% (29.0%) (21.0%) (17.7% Low bid 8 6 11 18 19 62 subcontracting (12.9%) (9.7%) (17.7% (29.0%) (30.6%) Too tight 10 13 17 13 18 62 scheduling (16.1%) (21.0%) (27.4%) (21.0%) (29.0%) Subcontractors and 5 8 17 14 8 62 suppliers not (8.1%) (12.9%) (27.4%) (22.6%) (20.5%) interested
TQM just a buzz 12 14 15 6 16 63 word (19.0%) (22.2%) (23.8%) (9.5%) (25.4%) No operations to 13 10 13 12 12 60 benchmark (21.7%) (16.6%) (21.7%) (20.0%) (20.0%) Transfer of TQM 3 6 8 12 29 from home office (10.3%) (20.7%) (27.6%) (41.4%) to field operations


Most respondents (74.6%) agreed that there was too much paperwork to be

completed for TQM to be implemented in field operations. Of these, 31.7% were









in total agreement and 15.9% in general agreement that this was the position in their companies.

Similarly, 66.6% of respondents expressed responses that the education level of the field forces was too low for TQM to be implemented in the field without difficulty. This is about 8% less than the group with formal TQM plans. There were 20.6% in total agreement and 22.2% in general agreement with this assessment. Less than half (45.2%) of respondents were either in total (22.6%) or general agreement (22.6%) that field employees considered TQM irrelevant to their performance.

Almost three-quarters (74.3%) agreed that measuring results was

problematic. Of these 32.3% totally agreed and 19.4% generally agreed that this was true in their companies. Of their counterparts with TQM plans, 13.2% totally agreed and 31.6% generally agreed that measuring the results of quality were problematic.

Respondents agreed (72.1%) that the construction workforce was too transient to maintain a trained team for effective TQM implementation, 21.3% being in total agreement and 19.7% in general agreement. This distribution differed from the group with plans.

The unique nature of construction was considered problematic by 58% of respondents. While 30.6% were either in total or general agreement with this position, 41.9% were either in total disagreement or general disagreement. The existence of too many uncontrollable factors such as poor management was not considered to be a problem by 45.2% of respondents. However, 33.9% either totally or generally agreed that these factors were problematic. There was









agreement among 67.7% of respondents that there was too much focus placed by the industry on short term savings for TQM to be successfully implemented in the field.

The construction industry's predominant selection of subcontractors and suppliers on the basis of low bid was considered a problem by more than three quarters of the respondents, namely 77.3%. In fact 30.6% were in total and 29.0% in general agreement with this view. This result differs from the views of the group with TQM plans by almost 20%, which may imply that those with TQM plans in place have implemented some of the elements of TQM proposed by Deming and Juran.

With respect to project scheduling being too tight to allow sufficient time for in-depth TQM implementation, 29.0% totally agreed that tight scheduling was a problem. Interestingly, 16.1% totally disagreed. While 21% of respondents disagreed to varying degrees that subcontractors and suppliers were not interested in TQM, 20.5% totally and 22.6% generally agreed that this lack of interest was a problem.

More than half of respondents (58.7%) agreed that TQM was just a "buzz" word that did not really have any meaning. Of these, 25.4% totally agreed that it was. There was sizable disagreement (38.3%) with the view that there were no construction operations that could be benchmarked for TQM implementation. On the other hand, 40% either totally agreed or generally agreed that there were such operations.









Table 4-17. Comparing means of company position relative to TQM problem areas Rankin Criteria Mean4 Std. CV (%) g Devf.
1 (1)* Transfer of TQM from home office to field 4.00 1.04
operations 26.0% 2 (6) Low bid subcontracting 3.55 1.36 38.3% 3 (7) Subcontractors and suppliers not interested 3.52 1.26 35.8% 4 (2) Too much paperwork 3.46 1.32 38.2% 5 (5) Difficulty in measuring results 3.44 1.42 41.3% 6(3) Transient work force 3.37 1.10 32.6% 7 (4) Field employees regard TQM as irrelevant 3.35 1.26 37.6% 8 (8) Low education level of field forces 3.11 1.40 45.0% 9(10) Focus on short term cost savings 3.10 1.30 41.9% 10(14) TQMjust abuzz word 3.00 1.46 48.7% 11 (9) Too tight scheduling 2.97 1.29 43.4% 12(11) Too many uncontrollable factors 2.81 1.34 47.7% 13 (12) Unique nature of construction 2.81 1.39 49.5% 14(13) No operations to benchmark 2.75 1.25 45.5%
4) * Ranking of groups with Formal TQM Plans are shown in parentheses

There was agreement by most respondents (89.7%) that the transfer of the

application of TQM from the home office to operations in the field had not kept

pace with other industries. In fact, 41.4% totally agreed and 27.6% generally

agreed that this was the case. Both these proportions were larger than those for the

group with plans in place.

When the means of the responses are compared, transfer of TQM from

home office to field operations, low bid subcontracting, lack of interest in TQM of

subcontractors and suppliers, too much paperwork, and the difficulty in measuring

results rank as the five most problematic areas respectively perceived by

respondents with no formal TQM plans.


4 On the scale used, 1= totally disagree, 2= generally disagree, 3= somewhat agree, 4= generally agree, 5= totally agree

5 The smaller the standard deviation the smaller the spread of values about the mean









The ranking of all the TQM problem areas is shown in Table 4-17 with the ranking for the group with plans in parenthesis.

Ranking the means of the responses of the entire sample with respect to

their company position relative to various TQM problem areas showed transfer of TQM from home office to field operations, too much paperwork, subcontractors and suppliers not interested, low bid subcontracting, and difficulty in measuring results rank as the five most problematic areas respectively. The ranking of all the TQM problem areas is shown in Table 4-18 and in Figure 4-10.


Table 4-18. Ranking of entire sample relative to TQM problem areas Rank Rank Criteria Mean" Std. CV Dev. (%)
Full No Plan
Sample plan
1 1 1 Transfer of TQM from home office to field 3.85 1.11 operations 28.8% 2 4 2 Too much paperwork 3.44 1.26 36.6% 3 3 7 Subcontractors and suppliers not interested 3.39 1.24 36.6% 4 2 6 Low bid subcontracting 3.39 1.29 38.1% 5 5 5 Difficulty in measuring results 3.35 1.33 39.7% 6 7 4 Field employees regard TQM as irrelevant 3.31 1.20 36.3% 7 6 3 Transient work force 3.28 1.21 36.9% 8 8 8 Low education level of field forces 3.13 1.28 40.9% 9 9 10 Focus on short term cost savings 3.05 1.29 42.3% 10 11 9 Too tight scheduling 3.02 1.36 45.0% 11 14 13 No operations to benchmark 2.90 1.37 47.2% 12 10 14 TQM just a buzz word 2.83 1.39 49.1% 13 12 11 Too many uncontrollable factors 2.81 1.33 47.3% 14 13 12 Unique nature of construction 2.81 1.31 46.6%


6 On the scale used, I= totally disagree, 2= generally disagree, 3= somewhat agree, 4= generally agree, 5= totally agree
















Unique nature of construction


Too many uncontrollable factors


TQM is just a buzzword


No operations to benchmark


in Too tight scheduling

E
.2 Focus on short term cost savings


Low education level of field forces Transient workforce Field employees consider TQM irrelevant Difficulty in measuring results


Low bid subcontracting Subcontractors and suppliers not interested Too much paperwork Transfer of TQM from home office to field
operations

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12131415
0 Formal Plan Problem Rank HNo Formal Plan M Full Sample


Figure 4-10. Ranking of entire sample relative to TQM Problem Area









Unlike the ranking of the criteria by which to measure TQM usage, which was very consistent, there are some notable differences between the two groups (companies with formal TQM plans and those without such plans) when it comes to the identification of the problem areas in implementing TQM in their operations.

The most noteworthy of these are as follows:



Subcontractors and Suppliers not interested in TQM: Those firms with formal TQM plans ranked this as their 7th problem area, and the firms with no formal plan stated that this was their 3rd largest problem area. This may well be due to the fact that those with a formal plan have identified that one of their key resources for successful TQM implementation is the proper integration of their subcontractors and suppliers into the process

16

14 12

10

8

" 6

4 / Std. Dev = 1.19
2 Mean = 3.2
0 N = 39.00
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

Scale of Measure

Figure 4-11. Subcontractors and suppliers not interested - Formal TQM Plan









. This disparity in ranking is graphically demonstrated in the histograms of the responses of the two groups in Figures 4-11 and 4-12.





20






10



Std. Dev = 1.26
Mean = 3.5
0 N = 62.00
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 Scale of Measurement

Figure 4-12. Subcontractors and suppliers not interested - No Formal TQM Plan



Low bid subcontracting: Firms with formal TQM plans in place again ranked the problem of low bid subcontracting measurably lower than their counterparts with no formal TQM plans, with this category being ranked 6th by those firms with plans, and 2nd by those organizations that are without such a plan. Again, this may be attributable to the proper use of TQM by those firms with plans.

The difference between the groups on this question is shown in Figures 413 and 4-14.









14 12 10 8 6 4
Std. Dev = 1.14
2 Mean = 3.2

0 N = 39.00
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 Scale of Measurement Figure 4-13. Low bid subcontracting - Formal TQM Plan


20






0
8 10



Std. Dev = 1.36 Mean = 3.5
0 N = 62.00
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

Scale of Measurement

Figure 4-14. Low bid subcontracting - No Formal TQM Plan









Too much paperwork: Those firms with formal TQM plans identified this as their 2nd highest ranked problem, whereas those with no formal TQM plan ranked this as their 4th most significant problem area.

Field employees regard TQM as irrelevant: The firms with TQM plans found this category to be their 4' highest problem, and those without TQM plans ranked this as 7th. This is notable in that those with plans seem to have realized the problems associated with training of employees, and have focused on this as an area to be improved upon.

Transient workforce: Again, the firms with formal plans ranked this very high compared to those without TQM plans, ranking them 3rd and 6th respectively. This again may be due to the focus that is put on keeping and training employees by firms with TQM plans that is not addressed by those with no plans.

These differences will be discussed further within Chapter 6 with the focus group contractors, each of whom have dealt to some degree with these problems.


Cross-tabulation and Measures of Association

In order to determine the relationship between having a formal TQM plan in place and the utilization of the TQM principles, this study utilized the statistical program SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) to establish the measures of association between various TQM Criteria to review a number of key questions. Cross-tabulation is one of the simplest and most frequently used ways of demonstrating the presence or absence of a relationship between a variables (Bryman and Cramer 2001).




Full Text

PAGE 1

THE APPLICATION OF TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN CONSTRUCTION FIELD OPERATIONS By DANIEL E. WHITEMAN A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2002

PAGE 2

Copyright 2002 by Daniel E. Whiteman

PAGE 3

This dissertation is dedicated to Diana, my wife of 32 years, and to my two children, Donald and Debra, the three of whom along with this writer represent the Phour D's of the Whiteman family. Without their support and encouragement over the past 10 years, this dissertation would not have been possible.

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost I want to acknowledge the Lord Jesus Christ. It was by his grace I was bom in the United States, where individuals have the freedom to reach for whatever dreams they may have for their life. I wish to acknowledge each of the chairmen and directors of the University of Florida's M. E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction. This writer has had to privilege to learn from, to be mentored by, and to be encouraged to complete this dissertation over the past 35 years by these gentlemen. These individuals include the following: Loys Johnson, who first gave this writer the opportunity to serve as one of his student assistants in 1967, and who regularly until his passing in 1999 encouraged me to one day apply the experience gained in the industry to preparing young people for a career in construction. Don Halperin, who as my professor for concrete and industrialized building taught me that there is much to be learned from even the most tedious of class subjects. Brisbane Brown, who from the time he joined the faculty regularly kept contact with me and other members of industry to assure that the School of Building Construction was continually developing the course curriculum to meet the needs of the employers for whom the students were expected to produce results once they completed their studies. iv

PAGE 5

Bill Eppes, who as a professor and interim director of the Rinker School was the most influential person in encouraging this writer to return to Gainesville, to complete my dissertation, and to devote my time to teaching and consulting. Weilin Chang, who believed that the topic of Total Quality Management and its lack of success in the construction industry needed to be studied from the perspective of one who had spent years working in the field operations of an organization. Charles Kibert, who politely but firmly encouraged me to keep working on completion of this dissertation following my return to full-time employment in the construction industry. In addition, I wish to acknowledge the chair of my committee, R. Raymond Issa for his constant challenge to me not to give up, even when the pressure and time restraints of managing a construction firm seemed to make fmalization of this dissertation an insurmountable task. I also wish to recognize each member of my committee for assuring that my dissertation remained focused on the topic, and not drifting away from its intended purpose. Those members include Drs. Robert Cox, Ian Flood, Kwaku Tenah, and Diane Schaub. Finally, this dissertation would not have been completed were it not for the support and encouragement from Diana Whiteman, my wife of 32 years, and that of my children, Donald and Debra, who said that I would make a great teacher one day. They are the best example I could have of whether that effort can be a success. V

PAGE 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iv ABSTRACT x CHAPTERS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 Background to Total Quality Management 1 Statement of the Problem 5 Study Objectives 11 Structure of the Study 11 Limitations of the Study 12 2 LITERATURE SEARCH OF TQM IN CONSTRUCTION 14 Introduction 14 Development of TQM 14 Defining the TQM Concept 20 Features and Principles of TQM 23 TQM Implementation Issues 30 TQM Problem Solving Steps 35 Suggested Solutions for TQM Implementation in Construction fi-om Literature 36 Summary of Literature Search 41 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 45 Introduction 45 Questionnaire Design 45 Questionnaire Administration 50 Sample Selection 50 Survey Response 53 Focus Group 53 vi

PAGE 7

4 DATA ANALYSIS 56 Introduction 56 Overview of Responses of All Respondents 56 Analysis of Cases where Respondents had Formal TQM Plans in Place 61 Analysis of Cases where Respondents had No Formal TQM Plans in Place 71 Cross-tabulation and Measures of Association 89 Does Having a TQM Plan Vary According to the Utilization of TQM Principles? 90 Does Having a TQM Plan Vary According to Length of Involvement in TQM? 92 Does Having a TQM Plan Vary According to Having an Established TQM Budget? 93 Does Having a TQM Budget Vary According to Utihzation of TQM Principles? 95 Does Having a Mission Statement Vary According to Utilization of TQM Principles? 97 Does Having a Mission Statement Vary According to Having a TQM Plan? 98 Does Employing a HR Manager Vary According to Having a TQM Plan? 100 Does Employing TQM Personnel Vary According to Having a TQM Plan? 101 Does Employing a HR Manager Vary According to Utilizing TQM Principles? 103 Does Employing TQM Personnel Vary According to Utilizing TQM Principles? 105 Correlation and Regression Analysis 106 Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of Having a Formal TQM Plan? 107 Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of Having a TQM Budget? 108 Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of Having a Human Resources Manager? 109 Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of Having a TQM Staff? 110 Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of Having a TQM Budget? Ill Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of Having a Mission Statement? 112 Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of Having a Human Resources Manager? 113 Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of Having a TQM Staff? 1 14 Is Having a TQM Budget a Predictor of Having a Human Resources Manager? 115 Is Having a TQM Budget a Predictor of Having a TQM Staff? 116 Is Having a Mission Statement a Predictor of TQM Staff? 118 Is Having a Mission Statement a Predictor of Having a Human Resources Manager? 119 Is Having a Human Resources Manager a Predictor of Having a TQM Staff? 120 Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of TQM Criteria? 121 Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of TQM Criteria? 125 Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of TQM problems? 128 Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of TQM problems? 130 Regression Modeling 131 Hypotheses to Be Tested 132 H 1 : Utilization of TQM Principles with Respect to Criteria 132 H2: Having a Formal TQM Plan with Respect to Criteria 135 H3: Having an Established Budget for TQM Implementation 138 H4: Having a Published Mission Statement 140 H5: Employing TQM Personnel and Criteria 143 H6: Length of Direct Involvement in Implementation of TQM 146 H7: Employing TQM Personnel and Problems 149 H8: Direct Involvement in Implementation of TQM 152 vii

PAGE 8

Key Predictors of TQM Criteria and TQM Problems 155 Stepwise Regression Model for CRITERIA 156 Stepwise Regression Model for PROBLEMS 159 5 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS OF TQM SURVEY DATA ANALYSIS 163 Introduction 163 Formal TQM Plans v. Utilization of TQM Principles 163 Key Predictors 165 Establishment of an Aimual TQM Budget 165 Management Involvement and Commitment 166 Customer Focus 168 Participative Management Style 168 Transfer of TQM from the Home Office to Field Operations 169 Too Much Paperwork 170 Transient Nature of Workforce 171 Field Employees Regard TQM as Irrelevant 171 Difficulty in Measuring Results 172 Low Bid Subcontracting 172 Subcontractors and Suppliers Not Interested in TQM 173 6 IMPROVING TQM IN FIELD OPERATIONS 174 Introduction 175 Management Commitment 175 Focus on Customer Needs and Expectations 180 Worker Participation and Empowement 181 Transfer of TQM to Construction Sites 184 Paperwork 185 Transient Nature of Construction Workforce 186 Relevance of TQM to Construction Workers 187 Measurement of Quality Improvements 188 Subcontractor and Supplier Interest in TQM 191 Other Focus Group Comments 194 Company A I94 Company B ^95 Company C ^95 Company D 1 95 Company E ^95 Company F 296 Company G 1 95 7 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 197 Introduction ^gj Review of Study Objectives j 97 viii

PAGE 9

Review of Study Objectives 197 Hindrances to TQM Implementation on Construction Sites 197 Recommendations to Improve TQM Implementation on Construction Sites 201 Establishment of an Annual TQM budget 201 Management Involvement and Commitment 201 Focus on Customer Needs and Expectations 202 Worker Participation 202 Transfer TQM to Construction Sites 202 Paperwork 202 Transient Nature of Workers 202 Relevance of TQM to Workers 203 Measurement of Quality Improvements 203 Subcontractor and Supplier Interest in TQM 203 Additional Considerations 203 Recommendations for Future Research 205 General Contractor TQM studies 206 Customer TQM Studies 208 Design Team TQM Studies 208 Subcontractor and Supplier TQM studies 209 APPENDIX A COVER LETTER USED IN TQM SURVEY OF GENERAL CONTRACTORS 210 B TQM SURVEY OF GENERAL CONTRAC TORS •. 212 C COVER LETTER USED IN TQM SURVEY OF FOCUS GROUP 218 D TQM FOCUS GROUP SURVEY 219 E TOP TEN ITEMS MENTIONED AS AREAS TO OVERCOME IF TQM IS TO BE SUCCESSFUL: 224 LIST OF REFERENCES 225 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 233 ix

PAGE 10

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy THE APPLICATION OF TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN CONSTRUCTION FIELD OPERATIONS By Daniel E. Whiteman May 2002 Chairman: R. Raymond Issa Cochair: Robert F. Cox Major Department: College of Design, Construction and Planning Total Quality Management (TQM) is a term that has found widespread usage in most manufacturing and industrial operations in the United States. However, its adoption within the construction industry has been slowed for many reasons. In many cases, firms that start enthusiastically to incorporate TQM soon cease their efforts believing it to be too difficult an undertaking. This study seeks to examine the reasons for the lack of implementation of TQM at the field operations level of a construction company. The primary objectives of the study include idenfifying the primary obstacles to TQM, establishing why these obstacles become hindrances to implementation, and finally reviewing possible solutions to overcome these roadblocks to success. X

PAGE 11

All initial review of the literature on TQM both throughout all industries and specifically within construction is used to comprehend the keys to TQM success. The literature search also identifies the hindrances found in similar research studies. A survey of leading General contractors throughout the country was undertaken to determine the current level of TQM usage, and to further develop the hindrances found or perceived to exist in implementation. This study then utilized a focus group comprised of twelve mid-Size to large commercial general contractors known to have made concerted efforts in the development of the concept of total quality within their firms. The purpose of this focus group was to review each of the areas identified as elements essential to successful implementation of TQM, and to develop concepts to encourage others to make TQM a cornerstone of their operations. The primary keys to success in the implementation of TQM in the construction industry were found to include top management commitment and involvement, a customer focused organization, a participative management style, and the transfer of TQM to the field operations. To succeed in transferring TQM to the field, the most important obstacles to overcome were found to be too much paperwork, the transient nature of the workforce, field employees regarding TQM as irrelevant, the system of awarding subcontracts based primarily upon low bids, and the lack of interest in TQM by the subcontracting industry. xi

PAGE 12

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Background to Total Ouality Management Quality is the degree to which a product or service conforms to a set of predetermined standards related to the characteristics that determine its value in the marketplace and its performance of the function for which it was designed (Chung, 1999). The quest for quality is a journey during which the destination is never reached. It is a constant pursuit, with there always being room for continuous improvement (Chung, 1999). According to Hayes (1981), quality is a way of thinking. Quality cannot be inspected into a product; it has to be built in. Before quality can be built in, it has to be thought in. And, it must be recognized that the customer is the ultimate source of the definition of quality. Quality, in turn, creates customer satisfaction that leads to an improved competitive position (Reed et al., 2000). Quality systems entail having the organizational structure, responsibilities, procedures, processes and resources for implementing quality management such that there is a guiding framework to ensure that every time a process is performed the same information, methods, skills and controls are used and practiced in a consistent manner (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001). These systems require companies to document all their procedures, work instructions, specifications and methods for all functions and aspects of the organization. In this way employees are provided with a reference system to assess their work and work improvements. 1

PAGE 13

2 During the past decade or so. the total quality movement has seized virtually all sectors of the economy. It has become a ubiquitous organizational phenomenon in manufacturing, service, health care, education, and government (Korkonda et al., 1999). The term Total Quality Management (TQM) has been used increasingly to refer to any and all quality improvement activities (Dahlgaard, 1 999). Consequently it has become difficult to explain precisely what TQM is. It is accomplished through a set of practices that supports the TQM philosophy (Dean and Bowden, 1 994). These practices should function as an independent system (Hackman and Wagerman, 1995) that combines with other organizational assets to generate competitive advantage. The concept of Total Quality Management (TQM) has been defined as a comprehensive company-wide effort dedicated to customer satisfaction through continuous improvement. Total Quality Management is concerned with product quality, customer and human resource satisfaction and organizational quality performance (Yusof and Aspinwall, 1999; Zhang, 2000). With its primary focus being the involvement of everyone in the continuous improvement of quality, it is believed that TQM will produce improved business results, greater customer orientation and satisfaction, employee involvement and ftilfillment, teamworking, and better management of employees within the company (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001 ; Shea and Howell, 1998; Zhang, 2000). Common critical factors that affect the implementation of TQM principles include management leadership, commitment and support; supplier quality management; employee relations and human resource management; and training and education (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001). The general lack of financial, human and

PAGE 14

3 technical resources is a major problem that smaller enterprises face even if they want to implement TQM in their operations. A literature review undertaken by Dahlgaard (1999) in attempting to identify the main principles and concepts in a TQM approach, identified the following keys to success: • Strong management commitment; • Continuous improvement as a result of a focus on quality; • Focus on customers; • Total involvement, commitment and responsibility; • Focus on processes to make them work better; • Actions based on facts and use of performance measurements; • Focus on employees, teamwork, motivation and empowerment;' • Learning, training and education; • Building a TQM culture^ and implementing organizational change; • Partnerships with suppliers, customers, and society; • Total and holistic approach; and • Scientific approach. As the concept of TQM developed, quality was adapted as a management tool. The entire system of an organization as well as the external environment became the fields of quality. Quality management became the tool for all people involved in a company both vertically and horizontally. Vertically, it involved all people from top to bottom and from bottom to top. Horizontally it involved all related departments as well as external organizations. TQM is applicable to any organization, regardless of the type of industry (Love and Heng, 2000). Quality became everybody's job and everybody's responsibility. It stresses a systematic, integrated, consistent. ' Empowerment is the voluntary transfer of ownership of a task or situation to an individual or a group having the ability and willingness appropriate to that situation, in an enabling environment.

PAGE 15

4 organization-wide perspective involving all employees (Love and Heng, 2000). TQM develops and adapts to new circumstances continuously. It has been able to integrate new ideas, tools and methods. It is this dynamism of TQM that holds out the prospect that it can be applied albeit in an altered form to construction field operations involving personnel at levels traditionally regarded as below middle management. In construction, quality has a three-fold meaning (Hart, 1994). Quality in this context means getting the job done on time, ensuring the basic characteristics of the final project fall within the required specifications, and getting it done within budget. However several authors believe that getting the job done without any loss of life or limb should also be included in the definition (Hinze, 1997; Levitt and Samuelson, 1993; Construction Industry Institute. 1999). Utilizing TQM principles offers the promise of fewer accidents, which improves working conditions and produces satisfied employees, who in turn create greater quality (Weinstein, 1 996). According to Davis (2000), treating safety as a subset of TQM is a step in the right direction. Manzella (1997) supports this viewpoint. Safety can exhibit the other core principles of TQM such as continuous improvement, employee empowerment, and the effective use of statistical techniques (Weinstein, 1998; Smallwood, 2000). Jonas (1996) suggests that without the "S" of safety any program designed to implement a TQM program into a construction operation is incomplete, and can be expected to fail in its complete objective. Culture is the values, beliefs, and norms that guide behavior in organizations. It is the set of shared, taken-for-granted implicit assumptions that a group holds and that determines how it perceives, thinks about and reacts to its various environments.

PAGE 16

5 Statement of the Problem Total Quality Management has been successfully utilized in manufacturing and industrial applications for a number of years. These industries have developed techniques by which personnel at every level of the organization from the president dovm to the workers on the assembly line are trained in their level of responsibility for TQM in its truest form. However, the construction industry has been slow to embrace the concept of TQM (Shriener, Angelo and McManamy, 1995; Love and Heng, 2000). Construction firms have been continually struggling with the implementation of TQM. The absence of TQM practices in construction has seemingly inhibited continuous improvement and innovation from taking place (Love and Heng, 2000). Historically construction has been an industry reluctant to implement change, and consequently it is has remained behind where it should be on the implementation of total quality management (Sommerville, 1994). While a number of companies are marketing TQM as an integral part of their organization's strengths, few have found it to be a real tool for the improvement of a quality construction project at the jobsite, particularly in the field operations. Those firms that have most successfully developed their TQM programs have done so at the upper and middle management levels. Where this has occurred, TQM is being utilized more as a management tool in the same way that organizations implemented Management By Objectives (MBO) in the early 1970's. In terms of the MBO philosophy a business has many objectives. While all businesses do not have the same objectives, they have one that is common, namely to satisfy customers. Peter Drucker, who is credited with the conceptualization of MBO to the world, expected management to focus on goals (output) rather than processes

PAGE 17

6 (input) (Romani, 1997). Managers should be accountable for results, not merely activities. The performance expected of management had to be directed toward the performance goals of the business. These business performance objectives were driven by customer satisfaction. Preliminary discussions by the researcher with various contractors, trade association representatives, and TQM consultants within the industry confirmed that the principles of TQM were not applied beyond management levels within general contractors. At the present time, it appears that there are few contractors that have fully implemented TQM at every level within their own field organization, and even fewer at the field level of their subcontractors and suppliers. In a study of the Greek construction industry it was found that only 20% of the firms who participated stated that they had clearly defined and documented quality policies in place (Zantanidis and Tsiotras, 1998). In the same study, 61.22% of the firms recognized that quality provided them with their most important competitive advantage, followed by price at 16.33%. The primary criterion when assessing suppliers was price at 25.63% with quality next at 24.37% of the respondents. While this study focused on the construction industry only in the Greek economy, these findings suggested that, in practice, construction firms were not optimizing the competitive advantage provided by TQM. Douglas and Judge (2001) echo this view with regard to the construction industry lagging behind in the area of quality improvement. There are several possible reasons for this reluctance to completely implement TQM. The first of these areas of hindrance appears to be the unique nature of construction itself Almost every project is unique in its design, location, materials and production techniques. (Wells, 1986; Sommerville, 1994). Further, the standards of the

PAGE 18

7 finished product vary widely regarding space, quality, durability, and aesthetic consideration. Every construction project is located on a unique piece of property. In addition, with the exception of chain type operations that are repetitive in design, every project is original design concept. Each building or facility may, therefore, be described as being custom-made (Berger, 2000). It is less well recognized that they vary from each other, even when built to identical plans and specifications (Porteous, 1999). For example, ground conditions may require different foundation depths or systems for two otherwise apparently identical buildings. This is radically different than the typical TQM operation within a manufacturing plant, where the product is produced at a singular site location and is of a design that is produced in mass quantities. Because of this lack of a repetitive production process, led to early perceptions that TQM was for manufacturing only (Chase, 1993). In the United States, the early leaders of TQM implementation were those in the manufacturing industry, who in large part relied upon the Japanese model developed through Deming and Juran. Ford Motor Company retained Deming in 1981 to consult with them on their "Quality is Job One" plan. In her book on Deming's methods, Walton wrote on Deming's commitment to Ford (Walton (1986): Dr. Deming, for his part told Bakken that he 'would be delighted to work with Ford Motor Company,' and that his vision was to take a few large companies, who by the strength of their work with their supply base, "create a prairie bonfire that would consume all America and turn it around'. If Dr. Deming could work wonders with Ford, ... he could do it anywhere. Success at Ford with their quality initiative, along with other early proponents of quality improvement, led to the Chief Executive Officers of Ford, American

PAGE 19

8 Express, IBM, Motorola, Procter & Gamble and Xerox, sponsors of the Total Quality Forum to write in an open letter to Harvard Business Review (Robinson, 1991): TQM is a fundamentally better way to conduct business and is necessary for the economic well-being of America. TQM results in higher-quality, lower-cost products and services that respond to the needs of the customer. Quality results are continually improved through understanding and perfecting the systems by which organizations operate. These leaders went on to state: Results from TQM in our companies range from halving productdevelopment cycle time to a 75% improvement in "things gone wrong" in shipped products to a $1 .5 billion savings in scrap and rework over a five-year period. Such top management commitment to TQM has been an essential ingredient in TQM's success in manufacturing. Likewise, service industries such as healthcare and hospitality; have likewise taken a lead in the area of quality improvement in functions that are not as repetitive as manufacturing. One factor in this success may be attributable to the fact that in these industries, their leadership has taken a pivotal role in establishing a stable workforce in their respective firms. This has led to a cultural environment where the employees are empowered to become involved in the TQM or Confinuous Quality Improvement (CQI) programs within their facilities (Huq, Z. and Martin T., 2000). Similar findings were identified by Saunders and Graham (1992) in the hospitality industries. In addition, both the manufacturing and service industries are able to maintain a relafively consistent level of staff, which can be continually trained in their specific operations. Such is typically not the case in the construction industry.

PAGE 20

9 The construction industry does not enjoy continuous demand for its products and services. This scenario implies that the demand for people with the appropriate construction skills also fluctuates. Qualified and trained workers, needing employment of some kind, leave the industry when demand for their services disappears (Krizan and Winston, 1998). The industry experiences an unacceptably high drop-out rate among new entrant trainees (Cjou, 1999). The impact of this occurrence is evident in the lack of investment in, and lack of commitment to, worker training that is an important component of any plan to implement TQM principles. Once construction activity increases, the shortage of skilled and trained people is even more acute (Krizan and Winston, 1 998). To make up for this shortage, the labor force may be augmented with, or even consist of, workers who lack the appropriate training and experience needed to properly execute the essential processes of construction assembly to the expected quality standards. Frequently, these workers are expected to acquire totally new skills 'on the job' but without any structured instruction or training program (Porteous, 1999). The practice of competitive bidding results in contractors undertaking construction projects on a "one-off basis (Kanji and Wong, 1998). By implication each project is, therefore, treated as being unique, without the prospect of either the physical structure being reproduced, or the project team, including subcontractors and suppliers working together again on the next project. The risks associated with this uncertainty lead to limited investment in fixed capital, minimum employment of permanent staff, and the increased use of subcontractors and casual labor (Schneider, 1 993).

PAGE 21

10 The importance of the General Contractor, Subcontractor and Supplier relationships being developed and improved upon from project to project cannot be overstated in construction. (Kale and Arditi, 2001). The subcontractor and supplier team on each project is therefore made up of a different group of members for each project undertaken by the general contractor. There are few opportunities to learn from mistakes on one building when the next one to be constructed is an entirely different one. Likewise, within each company, the labor pool of superintendents, foremen, and craftsmen is in most cases completely different from one project to the next making any continuity of TQM training efforts difficult (Kanji and Wong, 1998). This problem of the labor pool is even more exacerbated in areas of significant multi-ethnic labor groups, such as South Florida. In Dade County, it is likely that the labor force on the majority of construction jobsites will include white Americans, black Americans, Cuban, Mexican, Haitian, and French Canadian workers. It is not uncommon to have four different languages being spoken by the foremen to the various workers in the field operations. TQM involves changing the way people interact and work in organizations (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001). As such it is contextdependent and influenced by cultural and structural factors (Tata and Prasad, 1 998). Organizational culture is holistic, historically determined, and socially constructed. It involves beliefs and behavior, exists at a variety of levels, and manifests itself in a wide range of features of organizational life (Detert, 2000). Management behavior and organizational culture need to change to fully embrace the TQM approach (Moon and Swaffin-Smith, 1998). TQM requires an organizational culture where all individuals are concerned with quality; want to produce quality products, and where they can

PAGE 22

11 freely question practices that do not produce quality (Reed et al., 2000). Both the physical working environment and cultural issues such as management values, attitudes and behaviors are important factors for the successful implementation of TQM. Only by having a working environment conducive to excellence will there be a positive attitude to it (Yusof and Aspinwall, 1999). Tata and Prasad (1998) argue also that the national culture or the shared values of a society or country influences TQM implementation. The key cultural dimension is social hierarchy of which power distance^ can be used as a measure (Lilrank et al., 2001). Study Objectives This study has two primary objectives. The first of these objectives will be to identity those factors that hinder the implementation of the principles of Total Quality Management (TQM) in the actual field operations of a construction jobsite. These inhibitive factors will be identified through a review of the literature on TQM and a survey of a sample of contractors in the United States. The second objective of this study will be to formulate proposals for implementation of the principles of TQM in field operations at the level of the Field Superintendent and below. These proposals will be drawn from the literature review and the contributions of a focus group of contractors. Structure of the Studv This introductory chapter outlines the research problem addressed by this study. This chapter also introduces the two primary objectives of the study, and Power distance indicates the ease with which people from different hierarchy and seniority levels can interact with each other. Small power distance correlates with a

PAGE 23

12 defines the limitations of the study. Chapter 2 consists of a review of the literature on Total Quality Management. This review includes classical TQM writings, multidisciplinary sources and construction-related literature. The next chapter. Chapter 3, discusses the basis for the methodology used in the study, including the design of the research instruments and their administration. In Chapter 4 the data collected are analyzed and the relationships between variables identified and examined. Chapter 5 discusses the research findings in comparison with the literature reviewed. The penultimate chapter. Chapter 6, discusses the results of the focus group survey with a view to the design of an action plan to implement TQM in the field more effectively. The final chapter outlines conclusions and makes recommendations for future study. Limitations of the Study This study sought to identify the hindrances to the implementation of TQM in the general contracting industry among mid-size to larger commercial contractors. It did not seek to review those sectors of the industry that are represented by either smaller organizations, or the single family housing industry. Secondly, this study makes no effort to redefine TQM as it has been developed in other industries such as manufacturing or industrial operations. Rather it sought to use the application of TQM in those industries as a basis from which to redefine its applicability to the construction industry and then particularly on construction sites. The limited budget and time frame directly influenced the research methodology that was followed to gather the data used to meet the study objectives. The sample size and selection process were similarly affected by these factors. Despite low level of formalities in communication and decision-making. The U.S. has a power

PAGE 24

13 these limitations an appropriate methodology was followed, a representative sample was selected and a useful sample size was achieved. In order to investigate the problems associated with implementing TQM on construction sites the number of participants in the focus group was restricted to a representative sample of those companies who had considerable experience with TQM in their site operations, had annual total contract values ranging between $50 million and $2 billion, and were active across the United States. In Chapter Two a literature search will be conducted to outline an understanding of the development of TQM historically, to define the current application of TQM in the construction industry, and to ascertain the hindrances that have been identified by other research studies on this subject. distance rating of 40 on a scale of 0 to 100 while Japan has a rating of 54.

PAGE 25

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE SEARCH OF TQM IN CONSTRUCTION Introduction Total Quality Management has been identified as an approach to management that has evolved from a narrow focus on statistical control to one that encompasses a variety of technical and behavioral methods for improving organizational performance (Dean and Bowen, 1 994). It is widely recognized that the origins of TQM lie with quality management specialists like Deming and Juran (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001). Each is known for his 14 and 10 steps respectively to be followed in the quahty improvement process. These are listed in Table 2-1. Development of TQM As a result of the variety of techniques, tools and behavioral methods Total Quality is an ambiguous concept. The concept reflects three basic principles, namely customer focus, continuous improvement and teamwork (Dean and Bowen, 1994; Stashevsky and Elizur, 2000). People are the key element in achieving these principles. Yong and Wilkinson (2001), however, see TQM as a company-wide effort that emphasizes the principles of customer orientation or focus, process orientation, and continuous improvement. TQM is an enabler that can be used to cultivate continuous change and learning (Love and Heng, 2000). Establishing linkages between these and managerial work practices and desired 14

PAGE 26

15 performance outcomes in field operations is a major challenge. Douglas and Judge (2001) found that there was a positive relationship between the degree of TQM implementation and organizational performance. As firms increase their organizational performance in business operations, their organizational performance in terms of financial performance and productivity improved. TQM, therefore, has the potential to produce competitive advantage to organizations undertaking to incorporate its principles (Reed et al., 2000. Table 2-1. Steps in the quality improvement according to Deming and Juran Step Deming Juran Create constancy of purpose for improvement of product and service Build awareness of the need and opportunity for improvement Adopt the new philosophy Set goals for improvement Cease dependence on mass inspection Organize to reach the goals End the practice of awarding business on price tag alone Provide training throughout the organization Improve constantly and forever the system of production and service Carry out projects to solve problems Institute training on the job Report progress Institute leadership Give recognition Drive out fear Communicate results Break down barriers between staff areas Keep score 10 Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for the workforce Maintain momentum by making annual improvement part of the processes of the company 11 12 13 14 Eliminate numerical quotas and goals for the workforce in management Remove barriers to pride of workmanship Encourage education and self-improvement for everyone Take action to accomplish the transformation Adapted from Landesberg (1999)

PAGE 27

16 In a study conducted by Zhang (2000) the extent to which TQM affected quality costs and sales turnover was investigated. On average, the 1 0 companies who participated in the study had reduced quaUty costs by approximately 7.6% since the introduction of TQM and approximately 10% of turnover change was due to TQM. The study confirmed that TQM can lead not only to improvement in product quality, but also to improvement in strategic business performance, process quality, supplier quality management, customer focus and human resource management. The long-term performance of firms that implement TQM is improved (Easton and Jarrell, 1998). Field operation' management practices include the following: • A. Relationship oriented practices; • B. Participative leadership and delegation practices; and • C. Work oriented practices. Definitions for each of these management practices are listed in Table 2-2 and are drawn from the taxonomy of Yukl (1994:68-69). In a study conducted by Kathuria and Davis (1999), relationship-oriented practices were found to play important roles in manufacturing settings characterized by a high emphasis on quality. Practices such as team building, supporting, mentoring, inspiring and recognizing were found to motivate workers to manufacture products that were accurate, consistent, durable, and reliable. In the same study it was found that managers who perceived a high management ' The comparable term used in management literature is work force management practices. These practices have been listed in Yukl's taxonomy (1994) and are likely to occur when a manager interacts with subordinates, superiors, peers, or

PAGE 28

17 emphasis on quality demonstrated these practices more strongly than those who perceived a low emphasis on quality. This observation confirms the pivotal role of management in the success of any quality improvement program. It follows, therefore, that where the emphasis on quality is high, construction supervisors will strongly demonstrate appropriate field operation management practices to manage and implement quahty. Table 2-2. Definitions of field operation management practices Practice Definition A. Relationship oriented practice: Motivating and inspiring Using influence techniques that appeal to emotion or logic to generate enthusiasm for the work, commitment to task objectives, and compliance with requests for cooperation, assistance, support, or resources, setting an example of appropriate behavior Supporting Acting friendly and considerate, being patient and helpful, showing sympathy, and support when someone is upset or anxious, listening to complaints and problems, looking out for someone's interest Developing and mentoring Providing coaching and helpful career advice and doing things to facilitate a person's skill acquisition, professional development, and career advancement Managing conflict and teambuilding Facilitating the constructive resolution of conflict and encouraging cooperation, teamwork, and identification with the work unit even outsiders. We have used the term "field operations" to indicate those activities involving workers on construction sites.

PAGE 29

18 Table 2-2. continued Networking Socializing informally, developing contacts with people who are a source of information and support and maintaining contacts through periodic interaction including visits, telephone calls, correspondence, and attendance at meetings and social events Recognizing Providing praise and recognition for effective performance, significant achievements and special contributions, expressing appreciation for someone's contributions and special efforts Rewarding Providing or recommending tangible rewards such as pay increases or promotion for effective performance, significant achievements, and demonstrated competence B. Participative leadership and delegation: Delegating Allowing subordinates to have substantial responsibility and discretion in carrying out work activities, handling problems, and making important decisions Consulting Checking with people before making changes that affect them, encouraging suggestions for improvement, inviting participation in decision making, incorporating the ideas and suggestions of others in decisions C. Work oriented: Planning/organizing Determining long-term objectives and strategies, allocating resources according to priorities, deterring how to use personnel and resources to accomplish a task efficiently, and determining how to improve coordination, productivity, and effectiveness of the organizational unit

PAGE 30

19 Table 2-2. continued Problem solving Identifying work-related problems, analyzing problems in a timely but systematic manner to identify causes and find solutions and acting decisively to implement solutions to resolve important problems or crises /^l ' C ' 1 J 1_ • 4.' Clanfying roles and objectives A'' J.1 'J* J* J.' ' Assignmg tasks, providmg direction in how to do the work, and communicating a clear understanding of job responsibilities, task objectives deadlines, and performance expectations. Iniorming Disseminating relevant information about decisions, plans, and activities to people that need it to do their work, providing written materials and documents, and answering requests for technical information Monitoring Gathering information about work activities and external conditions affecting the work, checking on progress, and quality of work, evaluating the performance of individuals and the organizational unit, analyzing trends, and forecasting external events The ability of top management to create a vision and promote change is at the heart of successful TQM implementation (Reed et al., 2000). Top management needs transformational leadership that is demonstrated with both directive and supportive behavior. Management commitment arises from the tension created by the desire to satisfy a personal need, from the fi-eedom and opportunity to take action, and from making investments and sacrifices that will ultimately produce a profit. This critical and important role for top or senior management is echoed unequivocally throughout the literature on TQM.

PAGE 31

20 Defining the TQM Concept There are as many definitions and descriptions of total quahty as there are authors who have written on the subject (Korukonda et al., 1999). There is little consensus on what TQM means or how it works (Marler, 1998; Yong and Wilkinson, 2001 ; Ho et al., 2000). It has come to mean different things to different people (Kelemen, 2000). For example, Kelemen (2000) cites examples of various descriptions of TQM whereby it has been described as a management practice and philosophy of management aimed at satisfying the customer; a new way of thinking about the management of organizations; a comprehensive way to improve total organizational performance and quality; a systematic approach to the practice of management; and an alternative to management by control. It is a business philosophy towards change, continuous improvement, learning and transformation (Mohanty, 1998). Different commentators have come out with their own meanings and formalizations of TQM, making a generally accepted definition of the concept rather elusive (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001). Some authors regard philosophies and techniques such as Total Quality Management, Continuous Improvement, Total Quality, Lean Construction, Process Improvement, Concurrent Engineering, and Just In Time (JIT) Management collectively as TQM (Shammas-Toma et al., 1998; Allen and Kilmann, 2001). Total Quality Management is a management philosophy embracing all activities through which the needs and expectations of the customer and the community and the objectives of the organization are satisfied in the most efficient

PAGE 32

21 and cost effective way by maximizing the potential of all employees in a continuing drive for improvement^ (BS 4778: Part 2, 1991). Wruck and Jensen (1998:402) define TQM as a science-based, non-hierarchical, and non-market oriented organizing technology that has the potential to increase efficiency and quality. TQM was defined by Manser (1998:1 1) as knowing what needs to be done, having the tools to do it, then doing it right the first time, every time.^ This definition suggests that TQM has the potential to reduce costs and increase profits within the organization. According to Richbell and Ratsiatou (1999), the real purpose of TQM is to change the attitudes and skills of an organization so that the culture of the organization becomes one of preventing failure and the norm is operating right the first time. Organizations need to adopt a quality culture, not just a quality process or set of quality techniques (Kanji and Wong, 1998). This quality will be reflected in the basic values, general orientation toward work, takenfor-granted assumptions and expectations, and ideology of the organization (Cameron and Smart, 2001). Anfuso (1994:73) defines TQM as managing an enterprise to maximize customer satisfaction in the most efficient and effective way possible by totally involving people in improving the way work is done. TQM advocates the involvement of all employees in the decision making process of organizafions (Yong and Wilkinson, 2001; Ho et al., 2000). ^ Improvement is the continuous voluntary exertion by a person to accomplish tasks in the best possible way.

PAGE 33

22 Participation in decision making (PDM) is the mutual influence of supervisors and subordinates in organizations. Employees view PDM as the major motive for participating in TQM (Stashevsky and Elizur, 2000). Anfuso suggests that total quality should be looked at by management as the way to involve people and the way to improve processes. Another definition by Slockbower and Brown (1993:1 1) suggests that TQM is the achievement of substantial, measurable quality improvements at least cost that are customer driven. According to The Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) . (1992:3), total quality management is a continuous improvement process to meet customer requirements and corporate expectations a philosophy of doing the right thing the first time. Quality is defined by the customer. Conforming to the customer's expectations is the measure of quality. TQM, according to Hackman and Wageman (1995), involves a set of assumptions, change principles, and intervention strategies that focus on customer, process, and system. Oakland (1993:22-23) suggests TQM is essentially a way of planning, organizing and understanding each activity of the organization and depends on each individual at each level. For an organization to be truly effective, each part of it must work together towards the same goals, recognizing that each person and each activity affects and in turn is affected by others. TQM is also a way of ridding people's lives of wasted effort by bringing everyone into the processes of improvement, so that results are achieved in less time. The methods and techniques used in TQM can be applied throughout any organization. ^ Doing it right the first time means less waste, less rework, and lower costs.

PAGE 34

23 This definition highlights the potential of TQM to be applied to any type of organization, whether it be manufacturing, service, or construction. Miller (1996:157) proposed the following working definition of TQM: an ongoing process whereby top management takes whatever steps necessary to enable everyone in the organization in the course of performing all duties to establish and achieve standards which meet or exceed the needs and expectation of their customers, both internal and external. This definition outlines the important role played by the executive and senior management of any organization in the implementation and empowerment of the employees to initiate quality standards which meet or exceed the quality demanded by their customers. By adapting the elements of the various definitions, the following working definition would be appropriate for construction firms, and for the purpose of this study: TQM is a continuous"* process whereby the top management of construction firms take whatever steps are necessary to enable everyone in the organization, especially construction field supervisors and construction workers in the course of executing all their activities on construction sites to establish and achieve standards, which include completion on time, within budget, to optimum quality standards, and without loss of life or limb, and exceed the needs and expectations of their clients, both internal and external." Features and Principles of TQM There is no universal set of features and principles underlying the implementation of TQM. Rather as TQM has developed over time the list has "Continuous" refers to an improvement activity that is explicitly designed and organized for continuity (Lilrank et al., 2001). Improvement is a planned change in the state of affairs of an organization that is perceived as positive in relation to the

PAGE 35

24 grown to include a wide array of features that have evolved from its implementation in different types of organizations each with its own unique characteristics. TQM is to be considered as a dynamic continually improving concept, ready to test and accept new techniques as they are developed. The following seven defining concepts were synthesized from the 14-point Deming management method (see Table 2.1) by Anderson et al. (1994) in their study of building blocks to their theory of quality management: • Visionary leadership; • Internal and external cooperation; • Learning; • Process management; • Continuous improvement; • Employee fulfillment; and • Customer satisfaction. While visionary leadership normally refers to top management, leading by informing, inspiring, and through participative consulting would be appropriate for construction supervisors responsible for implementing and managing quality at the construcfion site or field level. Since employee participation is a fundamental principle behind TQM, communicating task-relevant information to employees is an important aspect of the "informing" behavior of construction supervisors to enable work to be done effectively. This informing behavior involves disseminating relevant information about decisions, plans, and activities to people that need it to do their work, providing written materials and documents, and answering requests for technical information organization's goals, policies or vision. The magnitude of improvements may be described as a continuum ranging from incremental to radical changes.

PAGE 36

25 Shammas-Toma et al. (1998) suggest the following six key features of TQM: • Customer/supplier relationships; • Prevention of defects; • Leadership; • Change in organizational culture; • Emphasis on teamwork; and • Use of statistical tools. In their study on cultural and structural constraints on TQM implementation, Tata and Prasad (1998) examined the influence of a company's culture and structure through the following seven building blocks of TQM: • Management leadership where management's role is to create overall guidelines and parameters for workers; • Employee involvement through empowerment/ teamwork and coordination across functional areas; • Responsibility for quality at source with decentralized decision-making, employee empowerment and training in quality control techniques; • Effective teamwork and coordination using existing horizontal coordination and communication networks; • Focus on customer through obtaining customer feedback, meeting and exceeding the needs of external and internal customers; • Benchmarking^ due to companies considering themselves interdependent with others; and • Continuous improvement through the "kaizen" philosophy of small and continuous improvements. Where it exists empowerment is most likely to be something that top or senior management creates for other managers, but is often not extended to lower order workers. Those most needing empowerment are the ones who are excluded from it (Moon and Swaffm-Smith, 1998). ^ Benchmarking is the process of improving performance by continuously identifying, understanding, and adapting outstanding practices and processes found inside and outside the organization. This practice is widely used in manufacturing but needs to be used in construction on a broader scale than at present (Fisher, Miertschin and Pollock, 1995)

PAGE 37

26 In the paper entitled "Principles of Quality Management," of Population Reports published by John Hopkins University (Kols and Sherman, 1998), the following list of basic management principles was provided: • Strengthen systems and processes; • Encourage staff participation and teamwork; • Base decisions on reliable information; • Improve communication and coordination; and • Demonstrate leadership commitment. Douglas and Judge (2001) identified from the TQM literature that they reviewed seven key or common practices that combine to support the TQM philosophy. These were the following: • Top management team involvement; • Adoption of a quality philosophy; Emphasis on TQM oriented training; • Focus on the customer; Continuous improvement of processes Management by fact; and Use of TQM methods. In their 1988 study of 162 general managers and quahty managers of 89 divisions of 20 companies Saraph et al. (1989) determined that the TQM critical factors were the following: Top management leadership; Role of the quality department; Training; Product design; Supplier quality management; Process management; Quality data reporting; and Employee relations. In a study conducted in Europe, Black and Porter (1996) found the following to be the TQM critical success factors from 204 responses:

PAGE 38

27 • People and customer management (Employee involvement and focus on customer); • Supplier partnerships (Internal and external cooperation/supplier management); • Communication of improvement information (Use of statistical tools/data reporting); • Customer satisfaction orientation (Focus on customer); • External interface management (Internal and external cooperation/supplier management); • Strategic quality management (Management leadership); • Teamwork structures for improvement {Teamwork and coordination); • Operational quality planning (Role of quality department); • Quality improvement measurement systems (Use of statistical tools/data reporting); and • Corporate quality culture (Adoption of a quality philosophy and Change in organizational culture). The italicized factors are the equivalents drawn from Table 2-3. They found the most important TQM critical success factor to be strategic quality management that emphasized the visible commitment and support of top management. This finding is consistent with that of the other authors. Table 2-3 shows that the only TQM feature commonly identified by all the authors was management leadership. This is not surprising since, as noted in the literature, any initiative that is not supported by top management is doomed to fail. The features identified by four of the author groups were the following: • Customer focus; • Employee involvement; • Process management; and • Continuous improvement. There was some agreement between three groups of authors on a further three features, namely: • Teamwork and coordination, • Learning and training, and • Use of stafistical tools and data reporting.

PAGE 39

28 Table 2-3. Matrix of TQM features Saraph et al. (1988) Management leadership Dougla s and Judge, (2001) Anderso n et al., (1994) Shammas -Toma et al. (1998) Tata and Prasad (1998) Populatio n Reports (1998) Employee involvement Responsibility for quality at source Teamwork and coordination Focus on customer Benchmarking Continuous improvement Change in organizational culture Use of statistical tools/data reporting Process management Learning/training Adoption of a quality philosophy Management by fact Product design Role of quality department Use of TQM methods Internal and external cooperation/supplie r management Total Criteria Listed

PAGE 40

29 The classical TQM literature stresses employee involvement and satisfaction as the most important drivers of continuous improvement and customer satisfaction (Eskildsen, 2000). Similarly, in a study of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Western Australia conducted by Rahman (2001) leadership of top management was found to play a significant role in stimulating quality consciousness among SMEs. People aspects such as teamwork, skills, and creativity were found to be critical to being competitive. There was a need for increased sensitivity to customer needs that could be improved through data collection, analysis and communication. Rahman's ranking of the quality management criteria is shown in Table 2-4. Table 2-4. Rahman's Ranking of TQM criteria Rank TQM criteria 1 Leadership 2 People 3 Processes, products and services 4 Strategy and planning 5 Information and analysis 6 Customer focus 7 Organizational performance Adapted from Rahman (2001) These factors are similar to the categories needed for TQM adoption as determined by the Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Award (MBNQA) in the United States. The Baldridge Award was established to recognize those firms in America that typify the finest in quality improvement within their industries. These are the following with the ranking from Table 2-4. included in parenthesis: • Management leadership (1); • Information and analysis (5); • Strategic quality planning (4);

PAGE 41

30 • Human resource development and management (2); • Management of process quality (3); • Quality and operational results (7); and • Customer focus and satisfaction (6). Reed et al. (2000) in their study confirmed that there was a well-established link between training and the performance of firms. High performing organizations were found to invest a larger percentage of payroll costs in training compared to the recommended industry norm. Other studies have also shown that training improves quality (Davis, 2000). Mohanty (1998) argues that the ultimate objective of TQM is to minimize total cost. Increased profitability due to reduced unit cost and production of more outputs helps reduce the price of the product. Consequently better quality and lower prices keep customers satisfied. In turn, customer satisfaction helps to sustain market share and improve the ability to penetrate new markets. Therefore, a sustainable position in the market provides value to stakeholders on a continuous basis and induces motivation for evolving innovative strategies. TQM Implementation Issues The implementation of TQM is one of the most complex activities that any company can attempt due to the fact that it involves a change in working culture and impacts people (Yusof and Aspinwall, 2000). Although there are many corporate success stories, there is also considerable testimony to the difficulty of establishing and maintaining an effective TQM program (Wruck and Jensen, 1998; Shea and Howell, 1998; Yusof and Aspinwall, 2000). Precisely why problems in implementing TQM should arise so often is not always clear. It has been suggested that the absence of information regarding the different components of TQM and

PAGE 42

31 how to implement them might be possible reasons (Shea and Howell, 1998). Consequently, organizations operating in the construction industry must be willing to learn (Love and Heng, 2000). Successful implementation of TQM requires that all critical factors for success be addressed effectively (Kassicieh and Yourstone, 1998). Many construction companies, as with firms in other industries, are very enthusiastic about their TQM programs in the initial stages. However, over time they either do not apply those programs properly or the TQM principles conflict with their policies. In these instances TQM is doomed to failure. TQM caimot remedy all organizational shortcomings. It does not generate value for all firms. This is most evident in Brown's study of the failure of TQM in over two-thirds of companies, which begin implementation (Brown, 1993). Employees often experience divergence between espoused and operational policies (Brewster and Richbell, 1983). This implementation gap between what management says and how they act or expect employees to act is a crucial barrier to the successful implementation of TQM (MacDonald, 1993). Transforming vision to reality requires a complete change in prevailing attitudes and culture. Careful attention must be given to the establishment of both corporate and departmental quality goals, the identification of the potential conflicting goals, the evolutionary process of developing the quality goals and their measurements, and the top management commitment to quality (Shani and Mitki, 1994). This process must flow from management through to the shop floor or field operations. There needs to be a shift in the focus of power away from management to field operations for successfiil implementation of TQM. The shift must be permanent, consistent and visible (Richbell and Ratsiatou, 1999). Top management must be

PAGE 43

32 seen to be practicing what they preach. Employees should not only be involved in quality improvement but also in making decisions relating to quality improvement (Richbell and Ratsiatou, 1999; Chandler, 2000). Problems may arise in attempting to move the organization in a change such as applying TQM that may be hard to discern. Reasons for these problems are the ingrained ideas of employees about the nature of the business and their reluctance to adapt to the new principles. Unless management recognizes that employees need continuous development to expand their skills, the organization will experience implementation problems. Schriener et al., (1995) suggest the following list of stumbling blocks to making TQM work: • Lack of commitment from upper management; • Authoritarian behavior, hierarchical thinking; • Fuzzy vision or mission; • Unattainable goals; • Goals that do not solve core problems; • Not listening to customers; • Press of current business; • Too many inefficient meetings; • Skepticism, fear, resistance to change; • Lack of meaningful measurements; • Impatience, looking for a quick fix; and • Obsession with the bottom line, seeing quality as overhead. Glover (2000) list the following as being barriers to achieving fiill-blown TQM: • Lack of support and commitment from both senior and middle management; • Business short-termism; • Lack of integration between TQM and Human Resource practices; and • Lack of contextual application.

PAGE 44

33 In the same study, Glover (2000) found that TQM was welcomed as being associated with increased involvement of workers. There was an expectation that TQM would lead to a softening of management authoritarianism and closer and cooperative working relationships and improved communication. The study showed that the failure of TQM in many areas had nothing to do with the workers' basic orientation to work, but was related to the failure of management to implement and maintain it effectively. It was also established that businesses could accrue benefits from encouraging involvement, communication and consultation. Several other factors have been cited in TQM literature that impede or impinge upon the effective implementation of TQM programs. These include the following: • Creation of a cumbersome bureaucracy due to increases in paperwork and other requirements to track benefits of programs (Harari, 1993a; 1993b); • Unnecessary creation of dual structures to create a total quality organization when TQM should rather be integrated into the way business was already done on a daily basis (Brown, 1993); • Feeling that because TQM has been adopted in some form in other organizations managers have to use it (Harari, 1993a; 1993b); • Ignoring the uniqueness of each organization that implements TQM programs such as type of firm, industry conditions, maturity of firm, and general readiness for change (Whalen and Rahim, 1994; Dooley and Flor, 1998; Wruck and Jensen, 1998); • Lack of effective measurement of quality improvement (Whalen and Rahim, 1994); • Lack of proper training (Katz, 1 995; Wruck and Jensen, 1 998); • Lack of effective communication and coordination due to projects being dominated by uncertainty and unpredictability with problems dealt with as and when they arose (Shammas-Toma et al., 1998); • Incorrect perceptions of the success or failure of TQM programs based on expectations and outcomes (meeting of expectations) of the TQM effort as shown in Figure 2-1 (Dooley and Flor, 1998); • Lack of carefully developed plans (Dooley and Flor, 1998); • Complexity of transfer of training due to factors such as personality, motivation, ability, work-related attitudes, and work environment; and

PAGE 45

34 training generalization where there are ample opportunities to apply what has been taught (Marler, 1998); • Lack of experience in implementing quality management systems (Zantanidis and Tsioris, 1998); Expectations i High Expectations Low Outcomes High Expectations High Outcomes Low Expectations Low Outcomes Low Expectations High Outcomes Outcomes Figure 2-1. Perceptions of outcomes of TQM efforts • Too much rhetoric and reliance on the presence of a TQM program (Douglas and Judge, 2001); • Excessive paperwork, overemphasis on customer satisfaction, and mistaken strategic alignment (Lilrank et al., 2001); and • Implementation of only selected parts of TQM programs (Zbaracki, 1 998; Wruck and Jensen, 1998; Douglas and Judge, 2001). Allen and Kilmann (2001) found that companies making more extensive use of the core TQM practices were more apt to report higher levels of performance than those that stopped at the rhetoric stage. Hackman and Wageman (1995:339) argue that total quality as articulated by Deming, Ishikawa, and Juran is a set of powerful interventions wrapped in a highly attractive package. When implemented well, TQM can help an organization improve itself and, in the process, better serve its community and its members. If TQM is to prosper, however, rhetorical excesses will have to be kept in better check than they are at present, and researchers will have to do a better job illuminating the mechanisms through which TQM practices realize their effects. Shammas-Toma et al. (1998) suggest the use of design-build, one subcontractor and computer-aided design (CAD) at first glance seemed to be

PAGE 46

35 logical practices to improve coordination and communication problems within organizations practicing TQM. However they found in their study of the UK construction industry that these practices had created further fragmentation and have been driven by firms seeking to allay contractual risk and only taking on those elements of a construction project contract where profits could be made. TQM was not a major consideration. They found that clients expected to be protected through contractual provisions and selected designers and contractors on price. There was inadequate training of the work force to control quality and identify sources of problems. The prevailing organizational culture reflected uncooperative and suspicious relationships. Teamwork was commonly hindered by accusations, recriminations and blame. Measurable quality criteria were absent. However, it is possible with the necessary will and commitment that TQM implementation problems can be addressed. TQM Problem Solving Steps According to Wruck and Jensen (1998), similar sequences of problem solving steps are suggested by the leading figures of the quality movement. Table 2-5. Problem solving steps Step Juran Mizuno 1 Analyze the symptoms Seek out the problem points 2 Theorize as to causes List possible causes 3 Test the theories Identify the primary causes of the problem 4 Establish the cause(s) Devise measures to correct the problem 5 Simulate a remedy Implement the corrective measures 6 Test the remedy under operating conditions Check the result 7 Establish controls to hold the gain Institutionalize the new measures Adapted from Wruck and Jensen (1998)

PAGE 47

36 Those problem solving steps suggested by Juran and Mizuno are illustrated in Table 2-5. Suggested Solutions for TQM Implementation in Construction from Literature If the construction industry is to improve its performance and competitiveness, there needs to be a cultural and behavioral shift in the mind-set of all participants in the construction process (Love and Heng, 2000; Kanji and Wong, 1998) especially top or senior management. Traditional practices will have to be unlearnt so that innovation and continuous improvement can be encouraged and become a norm. The findings of a study conducted by Marler (1998) suggest that continuous improvement is positively related to TQM training, flexible work, and flexible technologies. Further, training employees in problem-solving and statistical process control will promote continuous quality improvement. Employer-provided training was found to increase productivity and performance by as much as 16% if the training could be specifically applied to the work that the worker was engaged in. What was taught in the training programs must be carried over to the job setting (Leavitt, 1988). Adequate opportunities to use what is learned must be provided to workers. These views are echoed by Kassicieh and Yourstone (1998). They argue that training that is not immediately applied has little chance of achieving a significant impact on the TQM efforts of an organization. They further suggest that the effectiveness of training processes rests heavily on the opportunities that individuals and teams have to apply their new knowledge.

PAGE 48

37 Extensive and broad-based the training that includes management supervisors, and hourly paid workers greatly enhances the chances of success in implementing a TQM strategy (Kassicieh and Yourstone, 1998; Chandler, 2000). Training both managers and workers is an essential component for prevention of errors in both design and delivery of products and services in TQM organizations. Training provides a forum for communicating new organizational strategies, new values, and new ways of performing work. It indicates to those being trained that the company values educated and trained workers. People have to be educated about quality concepts and trained in the use of quality tools and techniques (Reed et al., 2000). In the absence of training for organizational change initiatives such as TQM implementation, management will have to rely on other methods to communicate the nature and the why of change. The lack of communication is a significant barrier to improvement. Training is an effective means to overcome this barrier by communicating the tools and strategy for change (Kassicieh and Yourstone, 1998). Further, training in TQM principles, implementation and evaluation is a key to successful implementation of TQM along the dimensions of cost reduction and profit increase (Reed et al., 2000). While rewards for quality ideas increase morale they do not have a significant effect on cost or profit. Dooley and Flor (1998) suggest that TQM implementation plans need to be carefully developed taking into account factors such as type of firm, industry conditions, maturity of the firm, and general readiness of the firm to be receptive to change. They also argue that expectations need to be managed by being realistic about what can be achieved with TQM concepts and methods. Further, firms should benchmark other organizations to determine what type of quality rates can

PAGE 49

38 reasonably be expected. There is presently a lack of benchmarking standards for the construction industry. However, construction can follow the lead of manufacturing (Fisher, Miertschin and Pollock, 1995) Hackman and Wageman (1995) found that TQM interventions worked at the individual level when there was logical organization of work, incentive schemes, and training. They contended that jobs needed to be designed to motivate workers to want to improve their work. Since TQM is a management strategy intended to produce continuous improvement in work processes, workers should be empowered to stop work operations if quality problems arose (Marler, 1998). They should be able to fix problems themselves that affect the quality of their work. In this way problems are resolved at the point at which they occur (Tata and Prasad, 1998). In order to improve communication of TQM objectives, performance measurement systems have to be introduced. For construction these could include construction cycle time, late delivery rates, order lead times, client complaints and dissatisfaction indices, and waste and scrap rates (Wruck and Jensen, 1998). TQM performance measures should be customer oriented, operations oriented to track day-to-day progress, and function or task specific to allow isolation of the contribution of particular tasks to performance. According to the findings of a study by Douglas and Judge (2001), management needs to invest in the time and resources necessary to implement comprehensive TQM programs and not just selected aspects of TQM. The seven features of TQM they identified had to appear to operate as an integrated system. When TQM is seen as a parallel activity to a business operation, it leads to failure.

PAGE 50

39 Further, there should be a supportive organizational structure in place to allow TQM techniques to be woven into the firm's fabric. According to Reed et al. (2000), TQM will not work without the demonstrated long-term commitment of top management. Allen and Kilmann (2001) propose the following practices as effective to achieve successful TQM implementation: • Use of quality councils within the existing management structure but also includes construction field supervisors who meet regularly to link the firm's operational activities with the strategic quality plan developed by senior management; • Use of teams of trained workers to simplify work and reengineer processes; • Measure internal and external customer satisfaction. Reed et al., (2000) suggest that cross-functional communication at various levels through organizations is necessary to solve quality problems. This communication means establishing and using teams. Major quality improvement projects are multifunctional in nature, thus requiring multifunctional teams. Sommerville (1994) argues that the lack of teamwork and management behavior may be the more determinate factor in the success of TQM within the construction industry. The execution of contractual obligations contained within the construction project demands that human resources be brought together into some form of coherent team. Since the majority of the work performed by most general contractors is outsourced to subcontractors it is essential that are included in the team, strategy, structure and tasks of TQM (Wong and Fung, 1999). Shammas-Toma et al. (1998) suggest that variation is a distinctive feature of construction making it different from manufacturing needs to be managed by site managers. Construction field supervisors need to have the flexibility to

PAGE 51

40 stabilize the "upstream" conditions in which packages of work are carried out. These packages of work should not be commenced until they have been fully planned, resourced and realistically targeted with respect to their performance. They also argue that new forms of contract could lead to confusion, ambiguity and conflict as conventional roles are redefined and redistributed. They suggest that effective teamwork will only be achieved if all parties are bound together by mutually set, internalized goals rather than by contractual arrangements alone. The attitudes of the parties to each other in their work relationships are more important than the provisions that formally bind them. The concern with contractual obligations would direct focus more on contractual responsibility to deliver a package of work, impeding in the process flexibility, coordination and effective management of flows. With respect to the management of flows it is necessary to understand the nature of variation, diagnose errors correctly and authorize people to act on the diagnoses. In a study undertaken by the Chartered Institute of Building (1995) in the Japanese construction industry the following features of the empowering and holistic problem solving approach characteristic of successful TQM were identified: • Participatory everybody feels part of the process; • Fundamental it aims for deep seated and continuous transformation; • Incremental improvement is brought about gradually by small step changes; • Continuous it consists of a permanent search for improvement; • Holistic improvement is achieved by looking at the whole system, not parts of it in isolafion; and • Reflective learning fi-om what is already known to be done well and from what others could do better.

PAGE 52

41 A system of TQM reward and punishment could be introduced to create lasting improvements in efficiency. These could include considerations such as the following: • Participation and job improvement in terms of which workers participate in the TQM process and apply their specific knowledge to solve problems; • Public recognition where outstanding quality efforts by individuals and teams are recognized during awards ceremonies; • Pay-for-knowledge systems where employees are rewarded with increases in wage rates for achieving a number of milestones subsequent to training and learning such as memorizing the steps of an activity, performing it under supervision, performing it unsupervised, and then teaching the activity to another employee; • Monetary pay-for-performance in terms of which individuals are encouraged to change their behavior (Wruck and Jensen, 1998). The effectiveness of a TQM approach is likely to be enhanced with increases in the use of group-based compensation and rewards (Chandler, 2000). In their study Allen and Kilmann (2001) found that firms making more extensive use of non-monetary rewards reported higher performance levels than those that used monetary rewards extensively. They suggested that non-monetary rewards were appropriate for firms just getting started with TQM. The importance of project teams was identified in a study by Ahmad and Sein (1997), which concluded that for TQM to succeed, project teams needed to be developed and empowered to make plans, set priorities, designate resources, evaluate their progress and communicate recommended changes. Summary of Literature Search In this chapter the literature on TQM has been extensively discussed. This process included a review of the available resources for the following subject matter:

PAGE 53

42 • Classical TQM literature based on the work of the TQM guru's Juran, Deming and Ishikawa; • Recent literature drawn from a wide range of industries and disciplines; and • Recent literature that covered TQM implementation in construction specifically. • This review indicated that there is a small body of literature on TQM in construction as it relates to construction in comparison with other industries. The review was undertaken for the following reasons: • To define the concept and practice of TQM; • To formulate a definifion of TQM as it relates to construcfion field operations; • To identify and highlight the characteristic and defining principles and features of TQM; • To identify the critical issues that affect implementafion of TQM in other industries; and • To examine possible solufions to these issues as they apply to construction. • It was found that over time TQM as a concept and practice has evolved fi"om a narrow focus on statistical control to one that encompasses a large and diverse range of technical and behavioral methods for improving organizational performance. Consequently, TQM is an ambiguous concept that reflects three basic principles, namely customer focus, continuous improvement and teamwork. It was established that people are the key element in achieving these principles. There was little if any agreement in the literature on a definition for TQM. However, by drawing on the wide range of attempted definitions, it was possible to formulate a working definition for TQM as it related to construction field operations, namely that: TQM is a continuous process whereby the top management of construction firms take whatever steps are necessary to enable everyone in the organization, especially construction field supervisors and construction workers in the course of executing all

PAGE 54

43 their activities on construction sites to establish and achieve standards, which include completion on time, within budget, to optimum quality standards, and without loss of life or limb, and exceed the needs and expectations of their clients, both internal and external. There was very little agreement on the characteristic and defining features of TQM. However, the most common revolved around the issues of leadership, continuous improvement, customer satisfaction and worker involvement. Several implementation issues were highlighted. These included the following: • Management support; • Measurement of quality improvements; • Training; • Communication; • Planning; • Paperwork; and • Selective implementation. • Finally, some solutions drawn from the literature were examined. These addressed some of the problems with the following: • Need for cultural and behavioral shift; • Relationship between continuous improvement and training; • Need for broad based training involving all workers; • Company wide and comprehensive application of TQM principles; • Worker involvement and empowerment; • Management commitment; and • Teamwork. • In Chapter Three, the research methodological approach to the investigation of these issues relating to the implementation of TQM in the construction industry will be discussed. This will include the development, distribution and results of two separate surveys. The first survey was utilized to identify the current usage of TQM in construction and the hindrances to

PAGE 55

44 implementation further in the industry. The second survey was undertaken to estabhsh a focus group of a dozen leading contractors to discuss methods that be used to overcome the identified hindrances to TQM in construction.

PAGE 56

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Introduction In social research surveys are one of the most frequently used methods (May, 1997). The survey protocol of random sampling procedures allows a relatively small number of people to represent a much larger population (Schuman and Presser, 1981; Sonquist and Dunkelberg, 1977; May, 1997; Ferber et al., 1980). The opinions and characteristics of a population can be explained through the use of a representative sample (May, 1997). Surveys are an effective means to gain data on attitudes on issues and causal relationships. However, they can only show the strength of statistical association between variables. Surveys do not explain changes in attitudes and views over time. They also provide no basis to expect that the questions be correctly interpreted by the respondents (May, 1 997). It was decided that a questionnaire survey would be appropriate for achieving the objectives of this study. Questionnaire Design The development of the survey of TQM in the construction industry at the Field Supervisory Level began within this researcher's own company which was committed to implementing TQM successfully throughout its entire operations. 45

PAGE 57

46 A review of the essential elements of TQM gained from attendance at several construction-related TQM related seminars revealed a lack of actual application of the processes that have made TQM successful in other industries. This included a lack of adequate budget, failure to plan adequately for quality, inadequate training at all levels except for top or senior management positions, and little recognition given to those who strive for quality improvement on their projects. Once a project was awarded it seemed that all efforts focused on getting started with construction quickly, getting the subcontracts written on a timely basis, and then progressing the work in a manner that would produce the greatest revenue in the shortest amount of time. The literature review in the previous chapter supports this observation in construction. Quality was primarily achieved through the inspection process. It has been stated earlier that quality cannot be inspected into a product; it must be built into the product from the outset. Several key members of the researcher's company were selected to "brainstorm" the issues, which, if implemented, could lead to more attention being given to improvement in the quality of site operations^ From this meeting of managers, the initial draft of the questionnaire was developed. These included a cross-section of the organizational chart and included project executive, project manager, estimator and project superintendent. Construction executives from 10 different companies reviewed the draft questionnaire and provided input. This review centered on development of questions relating to their companies' current use or level of implementation of TQM, and the obstacles or hindrances which kept TQM from being more

PAGE 58

47 effectively implemented at the field level. This pilot study was conducted to validate and improve the questionnaire, in terms of its format and layout, the wording of statements and the overall content. The draft questionnaire was revised to include the suggestions of these participants. Finally, the members of the dissertation committee suggested modifications to the questionnaire that would allow the results to be meaningfully analyzed. In short the questionnaire was validated through this process and provided the researcher with improvement opportunities before launching the main survey. The final draft of the TQM Survey (see Appendix A) incorporated questions dealing with both the current usage of TQM, hindrances to its success in the field operations of a company, and methods that could be considered to improve implementation within the industry. The survey was developed to study several key areas related to the utilization of TQM in the construction industry. These areas were: • Current usage of TQM methods (Section A questions 1 through 7); • Level of commitment to TQM principles (Section A questions 8 through 11); • Hindrances to implementation of TQM to field operations (Secfion B questions 1 through 4); • Comments on TQM usage, including obstacles to, benefits of, and suggestions for improvement (Section C questions 1 through 3); • Company profile (Section D questions 1 through 5); and • Optional section requesting contact information (Section E). The progression of the questioning began with a basic inquiry into TQM usage b the firms in general. The questions then became increasingly more specific as the survey delved into the firm's actual implementation of recognized TQM tools and techniques. In this manner, it was intended to keep the respondent

PAGE 59

48 from becoming disenchanted with the survey from the outset in the event that their company was not embracing the most important aspects of TQM implementation. The first set of six questions required "yes" or "no" responses. These questions were designed to determine current usage of TQM methods by the respondents. For example, "Does your company utilize the principles of TQM in its field management operation?" The next question was designed to establish the length of direct involvement in the implementation of TQM. Respondents had a choice of 4 categories, namely, less than 1 year; 1 to 2 years; 3 to 4 years; and 5 or more years. The next set of questions was included to determine the level of commitment of respondents to TQM principles. In question 8, the respondents were asked to identity the employees in their company who had received special TQM training. In various job positions (such as Executive and Foreman), respondents had to indicate the total number of employees in that category and also the total number who had been trained. This question was excluded from the data analysis due to lack of response by respondents during the telephone follow up stage. Respondents were asked to indicate the annual level of their TQM budgets by selecting from six categories, namely, less than $10,000; $10,000 to $25,000; $25,000 to $50,000; $50,000 to $100,000; $100,000 to $250,000; and greater than $250,000. In a follow up question respondents were asked to indicate what portion of this budget was spent on outside consultants. Question 10 was designed to establish the level of financial support for continuing education. The same job

PAGE 60

49 position categories used in question 8 were used. The levels of support used were none; l%-25%; 26%-50%; 51%-75%; and 76%100%. The final question in this section required responses using the five (5) point Likert's Profile of Organization Characteristics, which has been shown to have acceptable levels of reliability (Likert. 1 967). The Likert scale was used to indicate the position of the companies with respect to nine TQM criteria. The scale of agreement ranged from 1 = totally disagree to 5=totally agree. The central value was 3=somewhat agree and was not neutral. For example, "Top management is committed." The next section was incorporated to determine the level of hindrances and obstacles to the implementation of TQM in field operations. The first two questions required responses on the same 5-point Likert scale used in question 1 1 to a series of 14 statements. The next question was designed to measure the opinions of the unions to various TQM issues on the 5-point Likert scale. For example, "Union leaders are supportive of the application of TQM principles." This particular question was excluded from the data analysis due to reluctance to respond to this question by respondents during the telephone follow up stage. The final question in this section requested respondents to provide information on any other hindrances that they had encountered. The following three questions requested respondents to provide information on benefits of, obstacles to and possible improvements to TQM if respondents had a TQM program in place. The next 5 questions were designed to provide a profile of the respondents. For example, "What is the size of your company in annual volume?" These

PAGE 61

50 questions were excluded from the analysis due to an apparent reluctance to respond to these by respondents during the telephone follow up stage despite being willing to respond to the others. The final section that was optional requested contact information such as company name, contact name, and title of person completing the survey. Questionnaire Administration Sample Selection It was the intent of the survey to gather information relating to the utilization of TQM from as broad a geographic area within the United States as possible. It was also the intent of the researcher to survey those companies that would be considered as likely candidates for being involved in the use of TQM methods in their companies. For this purpose, it was determined that two sources of potential companies would be used one on a national level, and one within the state of Florida. On a national level, one recognized standard for measuring the size of a construction company is the annual ranking of the 400 largest construction companies by the publication, Engineering News Record (ENR). This trade magazine each year sends out an extensive questionnaires to the industry, and even those firms which have not previously been ranked by this group are either contacted by the publication, or make direct contact to become included in the survey. The publication issues its ranking of the ENR -/OO just after the first quarter of every year. For the purposes of this survey, the mailing list for the year

PAGE 62

51 1998 was obtained listing the name, address, and title of principal officer for each of the firms listed. On the state level within Florida, one of the leading trade organizations is the Associated General Contractors (AGC), which is the oldest such organization in the country. The firms that are members of AGC tend to be professional firms, which join for reasons of developing their professional skills and to improve the performance of their firms through contact with other General Contracting companies. Due to the large number of firms within this organization, a random selection of 80 of these firms was made from each of the five (5) different geographical chapters throughout the State of Florida, with a total of sixteen (16) firms from each region selected to achieve a cross-section of the entire state. Therefore, a total of 480 questionnaires were sent out. The principal officer of each firm listed by ENR or AGC was sent a complete survey packet consisting of a cover letter placed on University of Florida's, M. E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction letterhead (see Appendix A) and questionnaire (see Appendix B). The letter explained the rationale of the survey, invited their participation, assured them of anonymity of respondents, and outlined the procedure for the return of the completed questionnaires. The letter was addressed to the principal manager listed in both the Engineering News Record list and the directory of AGC members. To encourage the completion of the survey, each firm was sent a returnaddressed postage-paid envelope for use in returning the completed questionnaire to the University of Florida. In addition, he final section of the survey provided an option for the respondents to profile of their company, along with their name and

PAGE 63

52 address. The firms were assured they would be provided a copy of the survey resuks provided they completed this section. The surveys were mailed in the second quarter of 1998. Approximately six weeks were allowed for the initial response. At that time a second mailing was made to all firms, except for those that had already responded and could be identified by completion of the final section of the survey. Following another six-week period, an extensive phone calling effort was undertaken to each of the firms that had been sent a questionnaire to complete. To undertake this phone effort, the researcher utilized the services of a national survey research firm. Precision Response Corporation (PRC), which was given a copy of the survey packet. The survey firm assigned one person to solicit additional responses. This individual reviewed the entire survey with the researcher to assure the intent of each question. Over a one-month period, PRC made at least two attempts to contact each of the named principal individuals for the firms mailed a survey. The firms were inifially asked if they had completed the survey, and if so, no further inquiry was made. During these calls it was decided due to difficulty in getting responses to the five questions in Section D dealing with the companies' corporate profile to exclude these from the data analysis. Respondents were uncomfortable with answering these questions because of their sensitive and in some cases what was perceived to be confidential nature of this information. By excluding these questions more respondents were willing to participate in the survey. It should be noted that a significant number of the return-mailed responses also neglected to provide this information, making the demographic profile of the respondents difficult to analyze.

PAGE 64

53 Survey Response As a result of the two mailings and the follow up phone survey, a total of 87 questionnaires were completed by the ENR 400 contractors, or a total of 21.75% of those surveyed. On the Florida level, there were a total of 23 completed questionnaires out of the 80 that were solicited, for a response rate of 28.75%. Overall, the response rate for the 480 questionnaires mailed was 1 10 completed questionnaires, or 22.92%. Of these 109 were incorporated into the analysis of the results. The one survey was eliminated due to the large number of incomplete responses to the key questions of the survey. The response rate of nearly one-fourth of the surveys mailed was deemed to be acceptable to identify the usage of TQM and the hindrances encountered by the responding firms. A review of the responses from both the national and statewide surveys indicated no measurable differences in the respondents' answers to the questions, therefore it was decided to combine the two groups for the analysis of this survey. Focus Group Following completion of the analysis of the initial survey, it was determined that a follow-up survey of a limited number of specifically selected contractors would be helpful to determine any actions which could be identified to improve implementation of TQM within the construction industry by overcoming some of the identified hindrances. Therefore, a focus group of twelve contractors that were known by the researcher to be committed to the implementation of TQM were invited to participate in a second questionnaire survey to that initially sent to the larger number of firms. In addition, they were asked to participate in a follow-up discussion of the responses, which they would

PAGE 65

54 provide in the survey. These contractors represented varying sizes by annual contract volume, number of employees and geographical location. While the focus group firms had bases of operation in six (6) states, namely New York, Michigan, Kansas, Wisconsin, Alabama and Florida, they had branch offices in more than 20 other states throughout the United States. Construction contract award volumes ranged from $50 million to over $2 billion million annually for the participating firms. The contractors agreed to participate in providing further in-depth input to proposals drawn from the literature review. In addition, each firm was assured that the information provided would be utilized in a manner so as to not identify their specific company's specific program of TQM implementation. Since the top management of each of the firms was recognized to be interested in quality improvement in the industry, the format of the survey differed fi-om that of the initial survey. This survey asked the respondents specific questions regarding the management style of their firm, the efforts undertaken to implement TQM, and efforts they had undertaken to overcome certain hindrances identified in the initial survey. Each potential participant was contacted telephonically to invite them to participate in the survey. Once they agreed to participate fully, a packet was sent to participants that included a cover letter on University of Florida, M. E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction letterhead (see Appendix C) and a questionnaire that contained a series of questions and statements (see Appendix D). Approximately one week later each participant was called to clarify any questions they had with the survey. In these discussions, several of the respondents were interested to know how the issues relating to hindrances, and

PAGE 66

55 their respective ranking had been responded to by the whole sample in the initial survey. Based upon this request by several of the firms, the ranking of the problem areas as shown in Table 4-18 was sent out to each respondent (see Appendix E) with a cover letter explaining the purpose of this follow-up mailing. The focus group responses were cross-tabulated and actions that enjoyed the support of most of the participants were included in the final set of proposals. In Chapter Four the results of the broad based initial questionnaire, and the statistical analysis of data collected will be reviewed and discussed. The results of the focus group survey will be discussed in Chapter 6 of this study.

PAGE 67

CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS Introduction To draw conclusions from empirical data, a body of statistical evidence is necessary. Statistical methods of analysis are useful to establish the strength of the relationships between the variables that the data represent. The SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) statistical analysis computer software was used to analyze the data from each of the two survey questionnaires. This chapter summarizes the data obtained from the initial industry-wide survey, and deals with the descriptive statistical analysis itself The analysis and discussion of the focus group survey and its results will be discussed in Chapter 6 in its entirety. Overview of Responses of All Respondents Of the sample of 109 valid' responses, 46 of the respondents (68.2% ) to the survey indicated that their company utilized the principles of TQM in their management, while the remaining 64 contractors (41.8%) indicated that they did not utilize these principles. Only 40 of the 109 (36.7%) respondents had a formal plan in place for the implementation of TQM principles, while only slightly more than one-fourth (26.6%) had an annual budget for such a program. A larger percentage (62.4%) had published mission or purpose statements. Only 46.8% of 56

PAGE 68

57 the respondents employed a Human Resources Manager. Even less, 28.4% employed staff in positions that would normally be classified as TQM appointments. The information relating to the responses of these first five questions of the survey are shown in Figure 4-1. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Percentage Figure 4-1. Overview of TQM usage by all respondents Contractor responses to the question of the length of time that their companies had been involved directly in the implementation of TQM indicated that 29.6% of respondents were just starting to use TQM or had only been involved for a very short period of less than 1 year; 20.4% of the respondents had been involved between 1 and 2 years; 25.9% for 3 to 4 years; and the remaining 24.1% been engaged in TQM for more than 5 years. ' SPSS labels those respondents "valid" that are included in the analysis after adjustment for non-responses

PAGE 69

58 The length of time the various respondents had been involved in TQM implementation is shown in Figure 4-2. g Less than 1 year g 1-2 years 3-4 years 5 or more years Percentage by length of involvement Figure 4-2. Length of direct TQM involvement stated as a percentage With respect to annual budgetary allocations for TQM implementation, only 26 of the 109 contractors responded to the question. The question asked that they respond "If Applicable" to the question. Therefore, one may imply that the non-respondents had no budget for TQM implementation. The majority of respondents (73.1%), which indicated some level of TQM funding, had annual budgets less than $10,000. The next two groups representing the budget amounts of $10,000 to $25,000 and $25,000 to $50,000 had positive responses from 3.8% of the firms. Equal numbers of firms had funding of 7.7% each for budgets of between $50,000 and $100,000 and between $100,000 and $250,000. Only one responding contractor (3.8%) stated that their budget for TQM implementation exceeded $250,000. Figure 4-3 shows graphically the lack of fiinding that is dedicated to TQM implementation.

PAGE 70

59 ^Less than $10,000 B $10,000 -$25,000 $25,000-550,000 $50,000 to $100,000 B $100,000 -$250,000 E Greater than $250,000 Annual TQM Budget in Dollars by Percentage of Contractors Figure 4-3 . Level of established TQM budgets for implementation The majority of respondents (58.4%) allocated between 1% and 5% of this budget on the use of outside consultants in their TQM efforts. Another 16.6% spent between 6% and 10% of their annual budget on TQM consulting, while the remaining 25% of the responding contractors spent in excess of 10% of the established budget for implementing TQM on those considered TQM experts or consultants in the field. When the focus of commitment to the principles of TQM centers on the level of financial support for training and education, companies reportedly invested significantly more in the education and training of executive level management than for superintendents, foremen and the general labor force. The drop-off of training and educational support as the employee's posifion moves fi-om the typical home office staff to the traditional field work force is dramatic, and emphasizes the lack of commitment on the part of a large number of

PAGE 71

60 contractors to adequately train or provide continuing education for the average worker in the field operations. When the funding of continuing education is measured at the funding level of greater than 75% of the cost of the training, the companies that paid this level remain above the one-half for the positions of management (executive, administrative, project management, and superintendents), with the levels being 62.5%, 52.5%, 57.5%, and 52.4% respectively. However, the two categories of field level operations (foremen and labor force), which are the individuals responsible for getting the work put into place, the percentage of firms willing to pay for more than 75% of their training dropped to below 40% of the companies, at 37.1% and 32.4%. An even more dramatic demonstration of the lack of funding for continuous education of the field forces is shown when the companies are measured at the level of providing no support for training. While only 12.5% of the companies provided no continuing educational support for their executives, 41.2% responded that in the case of the field labor force that they provided no financial support for education or training whatsoever. The number of companies that provided no financial support for continuing education at the mid-management levels of foremen, superintendents, project managers, and administrative personnel were reported as 31.4%, 21.4%, 15.0%, and 20.0% respecfively. A side-by-side comparison of funding for "Greater than 75% Educational Support" and "No Educational Support" is shown in Figure 4-4.

PAGE 72

61 00 ing Company Position Figure 4-4. Funding Support for Continuing Education and Training A more detailed analysis of the questionnaire responses provided the contractors which were surveyed by this study is provided in the next sections of this chapter. Analysis of Cases where Respondents had Formal TQM Plans in Place Of the 109 valid respondents, 40 (36.7%) had formal plans for implementation of TQM principles in their companies. One responding survey was excluded due to the large number of non-valid responses provided by this firm. This group was analyzed to determine: • How many utilized TQM principles within their organizations; • How many had an established budget for TQM implementation; • How many had a published mission/purpose statement; • How many employed a Human Resource Manager; • How many employed dedicated TQM personnel; and • The length of time that they had been implementing TQM principles in their organizations.

PAGE 73

62 Table 4-1. Analysis of group having formal TQM plan 1 es i>o 1 Oldl Utilization of TQM principles 37 (92.5%) 3 (7.5%) 40(100%) Established budget for TQM implementation 24 (60.0%) 16 (40.0%) 40(100%) Published mission/purpose statement 33 (82.5%) 7(17.5%) 40(100%) Employ Human Resource Manager 25 (62.5%) 15 (37.5%) 40(100%) Employ dedicated TQM personnel 28 (70.0%) 12 (30.0%) 40(100%) Table 4-1 and Figure 4-5 both show that: • 37 (92.5%) respondents utilized TQM principles in their organizations; • 24 (60%) respondents had established budgets for TQM implementation; • 33 (82.5%) respondents had a published mission or purpose statement; • 25 (62.5%) respondents employed a Human Resources Manager (HRM); and • 28 (70%) respondents employed dedicated TQM personnel implying that while some did not employ a HRM, they employed other staff. U Utilization of TQM Principles Established TQM Budget Mission-Purpose Statement Human Resources Manager I Yes I No TQM Staff 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% Percentage Figure 4-5. Criteria utilized by group having a formal TQM plan As shown from the data in Table 4-2, of the firms responding to this portion of the survey, 6 (25%) had only been involved with the implementation of the recognized TQM principles for construction in their companies for a period

PAGE 74

63 between 1 and 2 years, 10 (41.7%) for between 3 and 4 years, and 8 (33.3%) for more than 5 years. Of the group with formal TQM plans, 1 6 (40%) respondents did not answer this question Table 4-2. Involvement in TQM o ^ group wil h Formal Plan <1 year 1 -2 years 3-4. years + 5 years Total Length of direct involvement in implementation of TQM 0 (0%) 6 (25%) 10(41.7%) 8 (33.3%) 24(100%) The data in Table 4-3 shows that of those respondents who had annual TQM budgets, 3 (37.5%) had budgets of less than $10,000 and 2 (25.0%) budgets between $50,000 and $100,000. The data in Table 4-4 provide information about the level of financial support provided by respondents for Continuing Education (CE). Table 4-3. Distribution of Annual TQM budget of group wit 1 Formal Plan than $250,000 Total 3 1 2 1 1 8 37.5% 12.5% 25.0% 12.5% 12.5% 100.0% Executives (55.6%) received the highest level of financial support for CE while the general labor force (43.0%.) and foremen (28.6%) received the lowest level of financial support. This result suggests stronger support for those who acquire and plan the work to be done than for those who have the responsibility to complete the project on time, within budget and in compliance with the quality standards expected by clients. This resuh has implications for the successftil implementation of TQM principles in the field.

PAGE 75

64 Table 4-4. Level of financial support i or Continuing Education "ormal Plan None l%-25% 26%-50% 51%-75% 76%100% Total Executives 4 (44.4%) 5 (55.6%) 9(100%) Admin. Staff 1 (11.2%) 4 (44.4%) 4 (44.4%) 9(100%) Proj. Mgrs. 1 (11.2%) 4 (44.4%) 4 (44.4%) 9(100%) Proj. Super. 1 (10.0%) 4 (40.0%) 5 (50.0%) 10(100%) Foremen 2 (28.6%) 1 (14.2%) 2 (28.6%) 2 (28.6%) 7(100%)) Labor force 3 (43.0%) 1 (14.2%) 2 (28.6%) 1 (14.2%) 7(100%) The position of companies relative to various TQM criteria is shown in Table 4-5. All of the respondents reported positively about the commitment of their company's top management to TQM. The information noted in Table 4-5 shows that 57.5% totally agreed that the top management of their organizations was committed to TQM, 35.0%> generally agreed and 7.5%) somewhat agreed that this was the case. Similarly, most respondents (95%)) agreed that the top management of their organizations were personally involved in Tam's implementation efforts. Of these, 47.5%) totally agreed that this was true for their companies and 40.0%o generally agreed that this was the case. Most respondents (87.5%)) agreed that planning was well developed throughout their companies, with appropriate actions being taken to make improvements in each area of operation. While 40% totally agreed that this was the case, 30% generally agreed. Almost all the respondents (95%) expressed agreement that in their companies the primary focus was on customers including customer feedback. While only 25.6% totally agreed, 46.3% generally agreed.

PAGE 76

65 Table 4-5. Distribution of company position relative to TQM criteria Formal Plan 1 2 3 4 5 Totally disagree Generally disagree Somewhat agree Generally agree Totally agree Total (100%) Top management 3 14 23 40 commitment (7.5%) (35.0%) (57.5%) Top management 1 1 3 16 19 40 involvement (2.5%) (2.5%) (7.5%) (40.0%) (47.5%) Well developed planning 1 (2.5%) 4 (10.0%) 7 (17.5%) 12 (30.0%) 16 (40.0%) 40 Primary customer 1 1 9 18 10 40 focus (2.5%) (2.5%) (23.1%) (46.3%) (25.6%) Workers trained in 3 4 11 13 8 39 TQM (7.7%) (10.3%) (28.2%) (33.3%) (20.5%) Rewards for TQM 4 4 9 13 10 40 contributions (10.0%) (10.0%) (22.5%) (32.5%) (25.0%) Participative 2 2 15 10 11 40 management style (5.0%) (5.0%) (37.5%) (25.0%) (27.5%) Continuous 4 3 11 11 11 40 improvement (10.0%) (7.5%) (27.5%) (27.5%) (27.5%) measurements TQM applied to all 5 6 8 14 7 40 field operations (12.5%) (15.0%) (20.0%) (35.0%) (17.5%) Fewer respondents (82%) responded positively about each worker being continually trained in TQM procedures. Of these, 20.5% totally agreed and 33.3% generally agreed that this was true for their companies. Even less respondents (80%) indicated that employees were rewarded for specific contributions to the TQM efforts of their companies. In this instance, 25% totally agreed and 32.5% were in general agreement. Participative management styles were acknowledged to be evident in all areas of the operations of their companies by ninety percent (90%) of the respondents. Of this amount, the companies noted that employees were enthusiastic about TQM and its potential to improve the performance of their

PAGE 77

66 companies, of these, 27.5% totally agreed and 25% generally agreed that this was the position in their companies. With respect to continuous improvement measurements being taken for all operations in their companies, and used consistently in areas of quality, service and efficiency, 27.5% each totally agreed, generally agreed or somewhat agreed that this was true for their companies. Regarding TQM measures being applied to all field operations, including work done by company employees and subcontractors, 72.5% responded positively that this was the case in their companies. Of these 17.5% totally agreed and 35% generally agreed, with the remainder in somewhat of an agreement that the measures were being applied. When the statistical means of the responses are compared, top management commitment, top management personal involvement, and well developed planning throughout the company ranked 1^', 2"^*, and 3'^'' respectively. In addition, when the Coefficients of Variance (CY%) are tabulated, it is interesting to note that the above criteria plus the companies having a primary customer focus have a tighter dispersion than the remaining criteria. From this comparison, it can be deduced that those items with a wider dispersion of responses represent areas where the respondents vary significantly as to whether their companies' view the individual criteria as having been successfully implemented within their organization's management practices and principles. The ranking of all the TQM criteria is shown in Table 4-6.

PAGE 78

67 Table 4-6. Comparison of means of company relative to TQM criteria Formal Plan Rankin g Criteria Mean Std. Dev. CV(%)' 1 Top management commitment 4.50 0.64 14.2% 2 Top management involvement 4.27 0.91 21.3% 3 Well developed planning 3.95 1.11 28.1% 4 Primary customer focus 3.90 0.91 23.3% 5 Rewards for TQM contributions 3.53 1.26 35.7% 6 Participative management style 3.65 1.10 30.1% 7 Continuous improvement measurements 3.55 1.26 35.5% 8 Workers trained in TQM 3.49 1.26 36.1% 9 TQM applied to all field operations 3.30 1.29 39.1% The position of companies with respect to various problems with implementing TQM in construction field operations is shown in Table 4-7. Most respondents (82.1%) agreed that there was too much paperwork to be completed for TQM to be implemented in field operations. Of these, 23.1% were in total agreement and 20.5% in general agreement that this was the position in their companies. Similarly, 74.4% of respondents expressed that the education level of the field forces was too low for TQM to be implemented in the field without difficulty. There were 10.3% in total agreement and 25.6% in general agreement with this assessment. Less than half (40.5%) of respondents were either in total (13.5%) or general agreement (27.0%) that field employees considered TQM irrelevant to their performance. More than three-quarters (76.4%) agreed that measuring results ' Coefficient of Variation (CV%) is a quantity designed to give a relative measure of variability. The CV expresses the standard deviation as a percent of the mean (Devore and Pack).

PAGE 79

68 was problematic. Of these 13.2% totally agreed and 31 .6% generally agreed that this was true in their companies. Table 4-7. Problem areas relative to TQM in construction field operations Formal Plan 1 disagree 2 i^f*X\f>VC\ \ \\! \jciici diiy disagree 3 OUiiiC vviia.1 agree 4 agree 5 agree Total (100%) 1 UU lliUL'll paperwork (7.7%) 4 (10.3%) 1 ^ 1 J (38.5%) 8 O (20.5%) Q (23.1%) 39 Low education icvci yji liciu forces 3 (7 1%\ V ' • ' 7 ( 1 7 0%^ 15 ns 5%'> 10 .\) /O) 4 no ^ 1 V/. J) /O ) 39 regard TQM as 11 1 V d-llL (8.1%) <; (13.5%) 14 1 *T (37.8%) 1 0 (27.0%) J (13.5%) Difficulty in measiirinp results 4 no 5%'! 5 n 3 2%'> 11 ^ ' ^ } 12 ni 6%'> 12 ni 6%'> 5 38 Transient work force 1 (2.6%) 8 (21.1%) 12 (31.6%) 10 (26.3%) 7 (18.4%) 38 T Imniip natnrp construction (13.2%) 1 0 (26.3%) 14 (36.8%) 4 (10.5%) (13.2%) Jo 1 iiiciiiy uncontrollable factors 7 (17.9%) 1 1 1 1 (28.2%) 7 (17.9%) Q (23.1%) (12.8%) jy Focus on short term cost savings 5 (13.5%) 10 (27.0%) 9 (24.3%) 7 (18.9%) 6 (16.2%) 37 Low bid subcontracting 3 (7.7%) 8 (20.5%) 12 (30.8%) 11 (28.2%) 5 (12.8%) 39 Too fight scheduling 8 (20.5%) 5 (12.8%) 12 (30.8%) 3 (7.7%) 11 (28.2%) 39 Subcontractors and suppliers not interested 2 (5.1%) 10 (25.6%) 14 (35.9%) 5 (12.8%) 8 (20.5%) 39 TQM just a buzz word 9 (23.1%) 12 (30.8%) 6 (15.4%) 10 (25.6%) 2 (5.1%) 39 No operations to benchmark 6 (16.7%) 10 (27.8%) 12 (33.3%) 3 (8.3%) 5 (13.9%) 36 Transfer of TQM from home office to field operations 1 (6.3%) 1 (6.3%) 5 (31.2%) 4 (25.0%) 5 (31.2%) 16

PAGE 80

69 Respondents agreed (76.3%) that the construction workforce was too transient to maintain a trained team for effective TQM implementation, with 18.4% being in total agreement and 26.3% in general agreement. The unique nature of construction was considered problematic by 60.5% of respondents. While 23.7% were either in total or general agreement with this position, 39.5% were either in total disagreement or general disagreement. The existence of too many uncontrollable factors such as strikes, weather and material shortages was not considered to be a problem by 46.1% of respondents. However, 35.9% either totally or generally agreed that these factors were problematic. There was agreement among 59.4% of respondents that there was too much focus on short term savings for TQM to be successfully implemented in the field. A significant proportion (40.5%) disagreed that this was the case, namely 13.5% totally disagreed and 27.0% generally disagreed. The predominant selection of subcontractors on the basis of low bid was considered a problem by 71 .8% of the respondents. Further, 12.8% were in total and 28.2% in general agreement with this view. With respect to project scheduling being too tight to allow sufficient time for in-depth TQM implementation, 28.2% totally agreed that tight scheduling was a problem. Interestingly, 20.5% totally disagreed. While 30.7% of respondents disagreed to varying degrees that subcontractors and suppliers were not interested in TQM, 20.5% totally and 12.8% generally agreed that this lack of interest was a problem. Most respondents (53.9%) disagreed that TQM was just a "buzz" word that did not really have any meaning. Only 5.1% totally agreed that it was. There was

PAGE 81

.1* 70 sizable disagreement (44.5%) with the view that there were no construction operations that could be benchmarked for TQM implementation. On the other hand, 22.2% either totally agreed or generally agreed that there were such operations. There was agreement by most respondents (87.4%) that the transfer of the application of TQM from the home office to operations in the field had not kept pace with other industries. In fact, 31.3% totally agreed and 25.0% generally agreed that this was the case. When the means of the responses are compared, transfer of TQM from home office to field operations, too much paperwork, the transient nature of the work force, field employees regarding TQM as irrelevant, and the difficulty in measuring results rank as the five most problematic areas respectively perceived by respondents. The ranking of all the TQM problem areas is shown in Table 4-8. Table 4-8. Comparison of means of relative to TQM problem areas Formal PI an Rankin g Criteria Mean Std. Dev. CV (%) 1 Transfer of TQM from home office to field operations 3.69 1.20 32.5% 2 Too much paperwork 3.41 1.19 34.9% 3 Transient work force 3.37 1.10 32.6% 4 Field employees regard TQM as irrelevant 3.24 1.12 34.6% 5 Difficulty in measuring results 3.24 1.17 36.1% 6 Low bid subcontracting 3.18 1.14 35.8% 7 Subcontractors and suppliers not interested 3.18 1.19 37.4% 8 Low education level of field forces 3.13 1.08 34.5% 9 Too tight scheduling 3.10 1.48 47.7% 10 Focus on short term cost savings 2.97 1.30 43.8% 11 Too many uncontrollable factors 2.85 1.33 46.7% 12 Unique nature of construction 2.84 1.20 42.3% 13 No operations to benchmark 2.75 1.25 45.5% 14 TQM just a buzz word 2.59 1.25 48.3%

PAGE 82

71 Analysis of Cases where Respondents had No Formal TQM Plans in Place The group of 69 respondents who reported that they had no formal plans for implementation of TQM principles in their companies was analyzed to determine: • How many utilized TQM principles within their organizations; • How many had an established budget for TQM implementation; • How many had a published mission/purpose statement; • How many employed a Human Resource Manager; • How many employed dedicated TQM personnel; and • The length of time that they had been implementing TQM principles in their organizations. Table 4-9. Analysis of group having No formal TQM plan Yes No Total Utilization of TQM principles 26 (37.7%) 43 (62.3%) 69(100%) Established budget for TQM implementation 5 (7.2%) 64 (92.8%) 69(100%) Published mission/purpose statement 35 (50.7%) 34 (49.3%) 69(100%) Employ Human Resource Manager 26 (37.7%) 43 (62.3%) 69(100%) Employ dedicated TQM personnel 4 (5.8%) 65 (94.2%) 69(100%) The data in Table 4-9 and Figure 4-6 show that a significant number of firms, despite not having a formal TQM plan in place did have the following in their organizations: • 26 (37.7%) respondents utilized TQM principles in their organizations; • 5 (7.2%) respondents had established budgets for TQM implementation; • 35 (50.7%) respondents had a published mission or purpose statement; • 26 (37.7%) respondents employed a Human Resources Manager (HRM); and • 4 (5.8%) respondents employed dedicated TQM personnel implying that while some did not employ a HRM, they employed other staff

PAGE 83

72 Utilization of TQM Principles Established TQM Budget c _3 Mission-Purpose Statement U Human Resources Manager TQM Staff 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% Percentage Figure 4-6. Criteria utilized by group having no formal TQM plan The data in Table 4-10 show that 16 (23.3%) respondents had been involved with the implementation of TQM principles in their companies for less than 1 year, 5 (7.2%) for had been implementing TQM between 1 and 2 years, 3 (4.3%) for between 3 and 4 years, and 5 (7.2%) for more than 5 years. Of the group with no formal TQM plans, 40 (48%) of the respondents did not answer this question. Table 4-10. Involvement in TQM of group with No formal TQM plan < 1 year 1 -2 years 3-4. years + 5 years Total Length of direct involvement in implementation of TQM 16 (23.3%) 5 (7.2%) 3 (4.3%) 5 (7.2%) 31 (100%) Table 4-1 1 shows that of those respondents who had established annual TQM budgets for implementation, an additional 16 (88.8%) had budgets of less than $10,000 and 1 firm each representing (5.6%) of the respondents had provided TQM budgets between $25,000 and $50,000 and between $50,000 and $100,000 respectively. Yes No

PAGE 84

73 Table 4-11. Distribution of Annual TQM budget of group No Formal Plan < than $10,000 $25,000 $50,000 $50,000 -$100,000 Total 16(88.8%) 1 (5.6%) 1 (5.6%) 18(100.0%) The data in Table 4-12 provides information about the level of financial support provided by respondents for Continuing Education (CE). Executives (66.7%) received the highest level of financial support for CE while the general labor force (44.4%)) received the lowest level of financial support. This resuh that is similar to the group with formal TQM plans suggests stronger support for those who acquire and plan the work to be done than for those who have the responsibility to complete the project on time, within budget and in compliance with the quality standards expected by clients. Table 4-12. Financial support level for Continuing Education No Formal Plan None l%-25% 26%-50% 51%-75% 76%100% Total Executives 5 (16.7%) 1 (3.2%) 2 (6.7%) 2 (6.7%) 20 (66.7%) 30(100%) Admin. Staff 7 (23.3%) 4(13.3%) 2 (6.7%) 17(56.7%) 30(100%) Project Mgrs. 5 (16.7%) 4(13.3%) 2 (6.7%) 19(63.3%) 30(100%) Project Supers. 8 (25.8%) 1 (3.2%) 3 (9.7%) 2 (6.5%) 17(54.8%) 31 (100%) Foremen 9 (33.3%) 2 (7.4%) 2 (7.4%) 3 (11.1%) 1 1 (40.7%) 27(100%) Labor force 12(44.4%) 2 (7.4%) 2 (7.4%) 1 (3.7%) 10(37.0%) 27(100%) The position of the companies with no formal TQM plan relative to several of the identified TQM criteria is shown in Table 4-13. Most respondents (81.9%) stated positively about the commitment of top management to TQM. The data in the table shows that 32.8% totally agreed that the top management of their organizations was committed to TQM, 31.1% generally agreed and 18.0%

PAGE 85

74 somewhat agreed that this was the case. No respondents that had formal TQM plans responded negatively about this issue. Table 4-13. Company position relative to TQM criteria No Formal Plan 1 1 Totally uisagree L Generally disagree 1 J Somewhat agree 4 4 Generally agree c J Totally agree Total /• 1 AAO/ \ ( 1 UUto ) Top management commumeni 9 (^1 '+.0 /o ) 2 yj.j /o) 11 / 1 g no/ \ V 1 o.Uto) 19 /"J 1 ^o/ \ ( J 1 . 1 to) 20 /-JO 00/ \ 61 Top management involvement 10 (16.4%) 5 (8.2%) 10 (16.4%) 18 (29.5%) 18 (29.5%) 61 Well developed planning 1 A (16.7%) A y (15.0%) 1 n (31.7%) 13 (21.7%) 9 (15.0%) 60 Pnmarv rn^jtompr focus (9.8%) 1 1 (1.6%) 1 i J (24.6%) 94 (39.3%) (24.6%) D 1 Workers trained in TQM 25 (41.0%) 12 (19.7%) 12 (19.7%) 10 (16.4%) 2 (3.2%) 61 Rewards for TQM contributions 20 (33.3%) 9 (15.0%) 12 (20.0%) 10 (16.7%) 9 (15.0%) 60 Participative management style 12 (20.0%) 9 (15.0%) 17 (28.3%) 14 (23.3%) 8 (13.4%) 60 Continuous improvement measurements 17 (28.3%) 7 (11.7%) 16 (26.7%) 17 (28.3%) 3 (5.0%) 60 TQM applied to all field operations 15 (25.0%) 9 (15.0%) 16 (26.6%) 10 (16.7%) 10 (16.7%) 60 Similarly, the over three-fourths of the respondents (75.4%) responded positively about the personal involvement of top management in TQM. Of these, 29.5% each either totally or generally agreed that this was true for their companies. This response was less for both categories than for those with formal plans. Fewer respondents (68.4%) than those with TQM plans (87.5%) agreed that planning was well developed throughout their companies, with appropriate actions to make improvements in each area of operation. While 15% totally agreed

PAGE 86

75 that this was the case, 21.7% generally agreed. On the other hand, 16.7% totally and 15.0% generally disagreed that this was the case in their companies. Although fewer than the group with plans, most respondents (88.5%o) agreed that in the companies the primary focus was on customers including customer feedback. While only 24.6% totally agreed, 39.3% generally agreed. Most respondents (60.7%) responded negatively about each worker being continually trained in TQM procedures. Of these, 41 .0% totally disagreed and 19.7% generally disagreed that this was true for their companies. This result contrasts starkly with the views of the group with TQM plans in place. Fewer respondents (51.7%) agreed that employees were rewarded for specific contributions to the TQM efforts of their companies. In this instance, only 15% totally agreed and 16.7% were in general agreement. On the other hand, 33.3% totally disagreed and 15.0% generally disagreed that this was true for their companies. This result differs from the group with plans in that only 20.0% of them believed this not to be true for their companies. Of those who stated positively (65%) that participative management styles were evident in all areas of the operations of their companies, and that employees were enthusiastic about TQM and its potential to improve the performance of their companies, 13.4% totally agreed and 23.3% generally agreed that this was the position in their companies. While 10% of the group with TQM plans disagreed that this was the position within their companies, 35% of the group with no plans disagreed. With respect to continuous improvement measurements being taken for all operations in their companies, and used consistently in areas of quality, service

PAGE 87

76 and efficiency, 5% totally agreed, 28.3% generally agreed 26.7% somewhat agreed that this was true for their companies. This result also differed from the group with plans. While 17.5% of respondents in that group had some disagreement, 40% of the group without plans disagreed. Regarding TQM measures being applied to all field operations, including work done by company employees and subcontractors, 60% designated positively that this was the case in their companies. Of these only 16.7% each totally and generally agreed. These proportions were less than their counterparts who had TQM plans. Table 4-14. Statistical means comparison of company position relative to TQM criteria Rankin g Criteria Mean^ Std. Dev. CV (%) 1 (4)* Primary customer focus 3.67 1.17 31.9% 2(1) Top management commitment 3.64 1.37 37.6% 3(2) Top management involvement 3.48 1.42 40.8% 4(3) Well developed planning 3.03 1.29 42.6% 5(6) Participative management style 2.95 1.32 44.7% 6(9) TQM applied to all field operations 2.85 1.41 49.5% 7(7) Continuous improvement measurements 2.70 1.29 47.8% 8(5) Rewards for TQM contributions 2.65 1.47 55.5% 9(8) Workers trained in TQM 2.21 1.24 56.1% * Ranking of groups with Formal TQM Plans are shown in parentheses When the means of the responses are compared, primary customer focus, top management commitment, and top management personal involvement ranked On the scale used, 1= totally disagree, 2= generally disagree, 3= somewhat agree, 4= generally agree, 5= totally agree

PAGE 88

77 1^', 2"*^, and 3^'^ respectively. The ranking of all the TQM criteria is shown in Table 4-14. The ranking for the group with TQM plans is shown in parenthesis. When the means for the entire sample of the company position relative to various TQM criteria are compared, top management commitment, top management involvement, and primary customer focus ranked 1^', 2"'', and 3^^ respectively. The ranking of all TQM criteria are shown in Table 4-15 and Figure 4-3. Table 4-15. Ranking of responses of All Respondents to TQM criteria Rank Full Sample Rank Criteria Mean^ Std. Dev. CV (%) No Plan Plan 1 2 1 Top management commitment 3.98 1.20 30.2% 2 3 2 Top management involvement 3.78 1.29 34.1% 3 1 4 Primary customer focus 3.76 1.07 28.5% 4 4 3 Well developed planning 3.40 1.29 37.9% 5 5 6 Participative management style 3.22 1.28 39.8% 6 7 7 Continuous improvement measurements 3.04 1.33 43.8% 7 8 5 Rewards for TQM contributions 2.99 1.45 48.5% 8 6 9 TQM applied to all field operations 2.85 1.41 49.5% 9 9 8 Workers trained in TQM 2.71 1.35 49.8% The response of the two groups (companies with formal TQM implementation plans and those without such plans) is very consistent. A review of Table 4-15 indicates that both groups identified the same the top four criteria categories as their top responses to the survey. • Top management commitment • Top management personally involved in TQM implementation ^ On the scale used, 1= totally disagree, 2= generally disagree, 3= somewhat agree, 4= generally agree, 5= totally agree

PAGE 89

78 • The focus is primary on the customer, including customer feedback, and • Well developed planning throughout the company, including actions for improvement. The rankings of criteria by both groups and overall is shown in Figure 4-7. u Workers trained in TQM TQM applied to all field operations Rewards for TQM contributions Continuous improvement measurements Participative management style Well developed planning Primary customer focus Top management involvement Top management commitment Formal Plan B No Plan Full Sample 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Criteria Rank Figure 4-7. Ranking of all responses to TQM Criteria 9 10 The only disparity in these two groups to the first four criteria is that the group of companies with formal TQM plans listed customer focus with feedback as the fourth highest means rank, while those without formal TQM plans listed customer focus as the highest rank. The histogram of the response frequency for customer focus is shown in Figure 4-8 and 4-9.

PAGE 90

79 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 Scale of Measure Figure 4-8. Primary Customer Focus with Feedback Formal TQM Scale of Measure Figure 4-9. Primary Customer Focus with Feedback No Formal TQM Plan

PAGE 91

80 The position of companies with respect to various problems with implementing TQM in construction field operations is shown in Table 4-16. Table 4-16. Problem areas relative to TQM in field operations No Formal Plan 1 Totally disagree 2 Generally disagree 3 Somewhat agree 4 Generally agree 5 Totally agree Total (100%) Too much paperwork 5 (7.9%) 11 (17.5%) 17 (27.0%) 10 (15.9%) 20 (31.7%) 63 Low education level of field forces 12 (19.0%) 9 (14.3%) 15 (23.8%) 14 (22.2%) 13 (20.6%) 63 Field employees regard TQM as irrelevant 7 (11.3%) 6 (9.7%) 21 (33.9%) 14 (22.6%) 14 (22.6%) 62 Difficulty in measuring results 9 (14.5%) 7 (11.3%) 14 (22.6%) 12 (19.4%) 20 (32.3%) 62 Transient work force 7 (11.5%) 10 (16.4%) 19 (31.1%) 12 (19.7%) 13 (21.3%) 61 Unique nature of construction 15 (24.2%) 11 (17.7%) 17 (27.4%) 9 (14.5%) 10 (16.1%) 62 Too many uncontrollable factors 13 (21.0%) 15 (24.2%) 13 (21.0%) 13 (21.0%) 8 (12.9%) 62 Focus on short term cost savings 9 (14.5%) 11 (17.7% 18 (29.0%) 13 (21.0%) 11 (17.7% 62 Low bid subcontracting 8 (12.9%) 6 (9.7%) 11 (17.7% 18 (29.0%) 19 (30.6%) 62 Too tight scheduling 10 (16.1%) 13 (21.0%) 17 (27.4%) 13 (21.0%) 18 (29.0%) 62 Subcontractors and suppliers not interested 5 (8.1%) 8 (12.9%) 17 (27.4%) 14 (22.6%) 8 (20.5%) 62 TQM just a buzz word 12 (19.0%) 14 (22.2%) 15 (23.8%) 6 (9.5%) 16 (25.4%) 63 No operations to benchmark 13 (21.7%) 10 (16.6%) 13 (21.7%) 12 (20.0%) 12 (20.0%) 60 Transfer of TQM from home office to field operations 3 (10.3%) 6 (20.7%) 8 (27.6%) 12 (41.4%) 29 Most respondents (74.6%) agreed that there was too much paperwork to be completed for TQM to be implemented in field operations. Of these, 31.7% were

PAGE 92

81 in total agreement and 15.9% in general agreement that this was the position in their companies. Similarly, 66.6% of respondents expressed responses that the education level of the field forces was too low for TQM to be implemented in the field without difficulty. This is about 8% less than the group with formal TQM plans. There were 20.6% in total agreement and 22.2% in general agreement with this assessment. Less than half (45.2%) of respondents were either in total (22.6%) or general agreement (22.6%) that field employees considered TQM irrelevant to their performance. Almost three-quarters (74.3%) agreed that measuring results was problematic. Of these 32.3% totally agreed and 19.4% generally agreed that this was true in their companies. Of their counterparts with TQM plans, 13.2% totally agreed and 3 1 .6% generally agreed that measuring the results of quality were problematic. Respondents agreed (72.1%) that the construction workforce was too transient to maintain a trained team for effective TQM implementation, 21 .3% being in total agreement and 19.7% in general agreement. This distribution differed from the group with plans. The unique nature of construction was considered problematic by 58% of respondents. While 30.6% were either in total or general agreement with this position, 41 .9% were either in total disagreement or general disagreement. The existence of too many uncontrollable factors such as poor management was not considered to be a problem by 45.2% of respondents. However, 33.9% either totally or generally agreed that these factors were problematic. There was

PAGE 93

82 agreement among 67.7% of respondents that there was too much focus placed by the industry on short term savings for TQM to be successfully implemented in the field. The construction industry's predominant selection of subcontractors and suppliers on the basis of low bid was considered a problem by more than three quarters of the respondents, namely 77.3%. In fact 30.6% were in total and 29.0% in general agreement with this view. This result differs from the views of the group with TQM plans by almost 20%, which may imply that those with TQM plans in place have implemented some of the elements of TQM proposed by Deming and Juran. With respect to project scheduling being too tight to allow sufficient time for in-depth TQM implementation, 29.0% totally agreed that fight scheduling was a problem. Interestingly, 16.1% totally disagreed. While 21% of respondents disagreed to varying degrees that subcontractors and suppliers were not interested in TQM, 20.5% totally and 22.6% generally agreed that this lack of interest was a problem. More than half of respondents (58.7%) agreed that TQM was just a "buzz" word that did not really have any meaning. Of these, 25.4% totally agreed that it was. There was sizable disagreement (38.3%)) with the view that there were no construction operations that could be benchmarked for TQM implementation. On the other hand, 40%) either totally agreed or generally agreed that there were such operations.

PAGE 94

83 Table 4-17. Comparing means of company position relative to TQM problem areas Rankin g Criteria Mean'* Std. Dev.-' CV (%) 1(1)* Transfer of TQM from home office to field operations 4.00 1.04 26.0% 2(6) Low bid subcontracting 3.55 1.36 38.3% 3(7) Subcontractors and suppliers not interested 3.52 1.26 35.8% 4(2) Too much paperwork 3.46 1.32 38.2% 5(5) Difficulty in measuring results 3.44 1.42 41.3% 6(3) Transient work force 3.37 1.10 32.6% 7(4) Field employees regard TQM as irrelevant 3.35 1.26 37.6% 8(8) Low education level of field forces 3.11 1.40 45.0% 9(10) Focus on short term cost savings 3.10 1.30 41.9% 10(14) TQM just a buzz word 3.00 1.46 48.7% 11(9) Too tight scheduling 2.97 1.29 43.4% 12(11) Too many uncontrollable factors 2.81 1.34 47.7% 13 (12) Unique nature of construction 2.81 1.39 49.5% 14(13) No operations to benchmark 2.75 1.25 45.5% 4) * Ranking of groups with Formal TQM Plans are shown in parentheses There was agreement by most respondents (89.7%)) that the transfer of the application of TQM from the home office to operations in the field had not kept pace with other industries. In fact, 41.4%) totally agreed and 27.6%) generally agreed that this was the case. Both these proportions were larger than those for the group with plans in place. When the means of the responses are compared, transfer of TQM from home office to field operations, low bid subcontracfing, lack of interest in TQM of subcontractors and suppliers, too much paperwork, and the difficulty in measuring results rank as the five most problematic areas respectively perceived by respondents with no formal TQM plans. On the scale used, 1= totally disagree, 2= generally disagree, 3= somewhat agree, 4= generally agree, 5= totally agree -' The smaller the standard deviation the smaller the spread of values about the mean

PAGE 95

84 The ranking of all the TQM problem areas is shown in Table 4-17 with the ranking for the group with plans in parenthesis. Ranking the means of the responses of the entire sample with respect to their company position relative to various TQM problem areas showed transfer of TQM from home office to field operations, too much paperwork, subcontractors and suppliers not interested, low bid subcontracting, and difficulty in measuring results rank as the five most problematic areas respectively. The ranking of all the TQM problem areas is shown in Table 4-18 and in Figure 4-10. Table 4-18. Ranking of entire sample relative to TQM problem areas Rank Rank Criteria Mean' Std. Dev. CV (%) Full Sample No plan Plan 1 1 1 Transfer of TQM from home office to field operations 3.85 1.11 28.8% 2 4 2 Too much paperwork 3.44 1.26 36.6% 3 3 7 Subcontractors and suppliers not interested 3.39 1.24 36.6% 4 2 6 Low bid subcontracting 3.39 1.29 38.1% 5 5 5 Difficulty in measuring results 3.35 1.33 39.7% 6 7 4 Field employees regard TQM as irrelevant 3.31 1.20 36.3% 7 6 3 Transient work force 3.28 1.21 36.9% 8 8 8 Low education level of field forces 3.13 1.28 40.9% 9 9 10 Focus on short term cost savings 3.05 1.29 42.3% 10 11 9 Too tight scheduling 3.02 1.36 45.0% 11 14 13 No operations to benchmark 2.90 1.37 47.2% 12 10 14 TQM just a buzz word 2.83 1.39 49.1% 13 12 11 Too many uncontrollable factors 2.81 1.33 47.3% 14 13 12 Unique nature of construction 2.81 1.31 46.6% On the scale used, 1= totally disagree, 2= generally disagree, 3= somewhat agree, 4= generally agree, 5= totally agree

PAGE 96

85 < Unique nature of construction Too many uncontrollable factors TQM is just a buzzword No operations to benchmark Too tight scheduling ii Focus on short term cost savings Low education level of field forces Transient workforce Field employees consider TQM irrelevant Difficulty in measuring results Low bid subcontracting Subcontractors and suppliers not interested Too much paperwork Transfer of TQM from home office to field operations Formal Plan No Formal Plan I'ull Sample 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Problem Rank Figure 4-10. Ranking of entire sample relative to TQM Problem Area

PAGE 97

86 Unlike the ranking of the criteria by which to measure TQM usage, which was very consistent, there are some notable differences between the two groups (companies with formal TQM plans and those without such plans) when it comes to the identification of the problem areas in implementing TQM in their operations. The most noteworthy of these are as follows: Subcontractors and Suppliers not interested in TQM: Those firms with formal TQM plans ranked this as their 7"^ problem area, and the firms with no formal plan stated that this was their 3'^'' largest problem area. This may well be due to the fact that those with a formal plan have identified that one of their key resources for successful TQM implementation is the proper integration of their subcontractors and suppliers into the process Scale of Measure Figure 4-11. Subcontractors and suppliers not interested Formal TQM Plan

PAGE 98

87 . This disparity in ranking is graphically demonstrated in the histograms of the responses of the two groups in Figures 4-1 1 and 4-12. 20 Scale of Measurement Figure 4-12. Subcontractors and suppliers not interested No Formal TQM Plan Low bid subcontracting: Firms with formal TQM plans in place again ranked the problem of low bid subcontracting measurably lower than their counterparts with no formal TQM plans, with this category being ranked 6"" by those firms with plans, and 2"'' by those organizations that are without such a plan. Again, this may be attributable to the proper use of TQM by those firms with plans. The difference between the groups on this question is shown in Figures 413 and 4-14.

PAGE 99

88 14 Scale of Measurement Figure 4-13. Low bid subcontracting Formal TQM Plan 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 Scale of Measurement Figure 4-14. Low bid subcontracting No Formal TQM Plan

PAGE 100

89 Too much paperwork: Those firms with formal TQM plans identified this as their 2"'' highest ranked problem, whereas those with no formal TQM plan ranked this as their 4"^ most significant problem area. Field employees regard TQM as irrelevant: The firms with TQM plans found this category to be their 4"^ highest problem, and those without TQM plans ranked this as 1^^. This is notable in that those with plans seem to have realized the problems associated with training of employees, and have focused on this as an area to be improved upon. Transient workforce: Again, the firms with formal plans ranked this very high compared to those without TQM plans, ranking them S^** and 6"^ respectively. This again may be due to the focus that is put on keeping and training employees by firms with TQM plans that is not addressed by those with no plans. These differences will be discussed further within Chapter 6 with the focus group contractors, each of whom have dealt to some degree with these problems. Cross-tabulation and Measures of Association In order to determine the relationship between having a formal TQM plan in place and the utilization of the TQM principles, this study utilized the statistical program SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) to establish the measures of association between various TQM Criteria to review a number of key questions. Cross-tabulation is one of the simplest and most frequently used ways of demonstrating the presence or absence of a relationship between a variables (Bryman and Cramer 2001).

PAGE 101

90 Does Having a TQM Plan Vary According to the Utilization of TQM Principles? To answer this question, the responses to questions Al and A2 (See Appendix B) were cross-tabulated. These two questions asked the respondents the following: • Does your company utilize the principles of TQM in its management operations? • Does your company have a formal plan of implementation of TQM principles? The null hypothesis^ to be tested is that having a formal TQM plan and utilizing TQM principles are independent of each other. The Pearson chi-square test was used to test the independence of the utilization of TQM principles (PRINCIPL) and having a formal TQM plan (FORMPLAN). The total number of cases for each of these variables was 110. However, the valid number of cases for each was calculated at 109 responses (99.1%) due to the large number of missing answers from one respondent (0.9%). Of the 109 respondents, 63 responded affirmatively to utilizing TQM principles (58%). Of these 37 (58.7%) had formal plans of TQM implementation and 26 (41.3%) did not. This result suggests that those who utilized TQM principles did not see the need for a formal TQM plan or had stopped using one if they had before. The expected values shown in parenthesis were different, namely 23.1 for those with a plan and 39.9 for those without any plan. Interestingly, 6.5% of those who did not utilize TQM principles in their companies had a formal plan to implement TQM. These results are shown in Table 4-19. ^ The null hypothesis is a statement that suggests that a result that is different from it is not expected.

PAGE 102

91 Table 4-19. Cross-tabulation of PRINCIPL and FORMPLAN FORMPLAN PRINCIPL Yes No Yes 37 26 (23.1)* (39.9) No 3 43 (16.9) (29.1) * Expected count shown in parentheses The computed chi-square statistic for this table is 31.196 with 1 degree of Q freedom and has an associated probability (p value) or significance level of < 0.0005. The null hypothesis that PRINCIPL and FORMPLAN are independent is rejected. There is statistically significant association between having a formal TQM plan and the utilization of the TQM principles. The result of the Pearson chi-square test for PRINCIPL and FORMPLAN is shown in Table 4-20. Table 4-20. Chi-square test of PRINCIPL and FORMPLAN Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson ChiSquare 31.196 1 0.000 N of Valid Cases 63 Computed for only a 2x2 table 0 cells (0.0%) have an expected count less than 5^. The minimum expected count is 16.88. Degrees of freedom (df) refers to the number of categories or components that are free to vary. It is calculated by subtracting 1 from the number of categories. In this case there are 2 categories. Therefore the degrees of freedom equal 1 . What this means essentially is that if the sample size and the observed frequencies in one of the categories is known, the observed frequencies in the remaining category can be calculated (Bryman and Cramer, 2001) There is a restriction on using chi-square. With only two categories (or one degree of freedom), the number of cases expected to fall in these categories should be at least 5 before the test can be applied (Bryman and Cramer, 2001)

PAGE 103

92 While there is a significant measure of association between PRINCIPL and FORMPLAN the statistic provides httle information about how they are related or how strong the relation is between the variables. Does Having a TQM Plan Vary According to Length of Involvement in TQM? The responses to questions A2 and A7 (See Appendix B) were crosstabulated. . These two questions asked the respondents the following: • Does your company have a formal plan of implementation of TQM principles? • How long has your company been involved directly in implementation of TQM? The null hypothesis to be tested is that having a formal TQM plan (FORMPLAN) and the company's length of involvement in TQM (INVOLVE) are independent of each other. The Pearson chi-square test was used to test the independence of INVOLVE and FORMPLAN. The valid number of cases for each was 53 of which 24 responded affirmatively to having a formal TQM plan (45.3%). Of these 6 respondents (54.5%) had between 1 and 2 years direct involvement in the process of TQM implementation, 10 (76.9%) between 3 and 4 years, and an additional 8 (61.5%) more than 5 years of experience in utilizing TQM's principles. These results are shown in Table 4-21 and suggest that the longer companies are directly involved with TQM implementation the more likely they were to have a formal TQM plan of implementation. The expected values for each category are shown in parenthesis.

PAGE 104

93 Table 4-21. Cross-tabulation of INVOLVE and FORMPLAN FORMPLAN INVOLVE Yes No < 1 year 0 16 (7.2)* (8.8) 1 -2 years 6 5 (5.0) (6.0) 3-4. years 10 3 (5.9) (7.1) > 5 years 8 5 (5.9) (7.1) * Expected count shown in parent leses The computed chi-square statistic for this table is 20.261 with 3 degrees of freedom and has an associated probability (p value) or significance level of < 0.0005. The null hypothesis that INVOLVE and FORMPLAN are independent is rejected. There is statistically significant association between the length of time a firm is involved in TQM and having a formal TQM plan in place. The result of the chi-square test for INVOLVE and FORMPLAN is shown in Table 4-22. Table 4-22. Chi-square test of INVOLVE and FORMPLAN Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson ChiSquare 20.261 3 0.000 N of Vahd Cases 53 1 cells (12.5%) have an expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 4.98. Does Having a TQM Plan Vary According to Having an Established TQM Budget? The responses to questions A2 and A3 (See Appendix B) were crosstabulated. These two questions asked the respondents the following:

PAGE 105

94 • Does your company have a formal plan of implementation of TQM principles? • Does your company have an established budget for implementation of TQM? The null hypothesis to be tested is that having a forma TQM plan (FORMPLAN) and having an established budget for implementation of TQM (BUDGET) are independent of each other. The Pearson chi-square test was used to test the independence of BUDGET and FORMPLAN. The total number of cases for each of these variables was 110. However, the valid number of cases for each was 109 (99.1%) due to 1 missing value (0.9%) of which 29 responded affirmatively to having an established TQM budget (26.6%). Of these 24 (82.8%) had formal plans of TQM implementation and 4 (17.2%) did not. The expected values shown in parenthesis were different, namely 10.6 for those with a plan and 1 8.4 for those without any plan. Interestingly, 20.0% of those who did not have an established TQM budget in their companies had a formal plan to implement TQM. These results are shown in Table 4-23. Table 4-23. Cross-tabulation of BUDGE! r and FORMPLAN FORMPLAN BUDGET Yes No Yes 24 5 (10.6)* (18.4) No 16 64 * T:^r^^^t^A 1 „r : ^1 (29.4) (50.6) * Expected count shown in parentheses The computed chi-square statistic for this table is 36.087 with 1 degree of freedom and has an associated probability (p value) or significance level of < 0.0005. The null hypothesis that BUDGET and FORMPLAN are independent is

PAGE 106

95 rejected. There is statistically significant association between having a budget for implementation of TQM and having a formal TQM plan. The result of the chi-square test for BUDGET and FORMPLAN is shown in Table 4-2.4. Table 4-24. Chi-square test of BUDGET and FORMPLAN Value Df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson ChiSquare 36.087 1 0.000 N of Valid Cases 109 Computed for only a 2x2 table 0 cells (0.0%) have an expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 10.64. Does Having a TQM Budget Vary According to Utilization of TQM Principles? The responses to questions Al and A3 (See Appendix B) were crosstabulated. These two questions asked the respondents the following: • Does your company utilize the principles of TQM in its management operations? • Does your company have an established budget for implementation of TQM? The null hypothesis to be tested is that utilizing TQM principles (PRINICPL) and having an established budget for TQM (BUDGET) are independent of each other. The Pearson chi-square test was used to test the independence of BUDGET and PRINCIPE. The total number of cases for each of these variables was 110. However, the valid number of cases for each was 109 (99.1%) due to 1 missing value (0.9%) of which 29 responded affirmatively to having an established TQM budget (26.6%). Of these 26 (89.7%) utilized TQM

PAGE 107

96 principles in their companies and 3 (10.3%) did not. The expected values shown in parenthesis were different, namely 16.8 for those utilizing TQM and 12.2 for those who did not. Interestingly, 58.7% of those who utilized TQM principles did not have and established TQM budget in their companies. These results are shown in Table 4-25. Table 4-25. Cross-tabulation of BUDGE1 r and PRINCIPL BUDGET PRINCIPL Yes No Yes 26 37 (16.8)* (46.2) No 3 43 (12.2) (33.8) * Expected count shown in parentheses The computed chi-square statistic for this table is 16.440 with 1 degree of freedom and has an associated probability (p value) or significance level of < 0.0005. The null hypothesis that BUDGET and PRINCIPL are independent is rejected. There is statistically significant association between having a budget for implementation of TQM and utilizing the principles of TQM. The result of the chi-square test for BUDGET and PRINCIPL is shown in Table 4-26. Table 4-26. Chi-square test of BUDGET and PRINCIPL Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson ChiSquare 16.440 1 0.000 N of Valid Cases 109 Computed for only a 2x2 table 0 cells (0.0%) have an expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 12.24.

PAGE 108

97 Does Having a Mission Statement Vary According to Utilization of TQM Principles? The responses to questions Al and A4 (See Appendix B)were crosstabulated. These two questions asked the respondents the following: • Does your company have a formal plan of implementation of TQM principles? • Does your company have a published Mission/Purpose Statement? The null h5^othesis to be tested is that having a published Mission/Purpose Statement (MISSION) and utilizing TQM principles (PRINCIPL) are independent of each other. The Pearson chi-square test was used to test the independence of MISSION and PRINCIPL. The total number of cases for each of these variables was 110. However, the valid number of cases for each was 109 (99.1%) due to 1 missing value (0.9%) of which 68 responded affirmatively to having a published mission or purpose statement (62.4%). Of these 44 (64.7%) utilized TQM principles and 24 (35.3%) did not. The expected values shown in parenthesis were different, namely 39.3 for those with a statement and 28.7 for those without any statement. These results are shown in Table 4-27. Table 4-27. Cross-tabulation of MISSION and PRINCIPL PRINCIPL MISSION Yes No Yes 44 24 (39.3)* (28.7) No 19 22 (23.7) (17.3) * Expected count shown in parentheses

PAGE 109

98 The computed chi-square statistic for this table is 3.537 with 1 degree of freedom and has an associated probabiUty {p value) or significance level of 0.06. The resulting size of this statistic suggests that there might not be any association between MISSION and PRINCIPL. Therefore, null hypothesis that having a Mission/Purpose Statement and utilizing the principles of TQM are independent cannot be rejected. The resuh of the chi-square statistic test for MISSION and FRTNCIPL is shown in Table 4-28. Table 4-28. Chi-square test of MISSION and PRINCIPL Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson ChiSquare 3.537 1 0.060 N of Vahd Cases 109 Computed for only a 2x2 table 0 cells (0.0%) have an expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 17.30. Does Having a Mission Statement Vary According to Having a TQM Plan? The responses to questions A2 and A4 (See Appendix B) were crosstabulated. These two questions asked the respondents the following: • Does your company have a formal plan of implementation of TQM principles? • Does your company have a published Mission/Purpose Statement? The null hypothesis to be tested is that having a TQM plan (FORMPLAN) and having a mission statement (MISSION) are independent of each other. The Pearson chi-square test was used to test the independence of MISSION and FORMPLAN. The total number of cases for each of these variables was 1 10.

PAGE 110

99 However, the valid number of cases for each was 109 (99.1%) due to 1 missing value (0.9%) of which 68 responded affirmatively to having mission statement (62.4%). Of these 33 (48.5%) had TQM plans and 35 (50.7%) did not have a plan. The expected values shown in parenthesis were different, namely 25.0 for those with TQM plans and 43.0 for those without. The latter data are interesting in that respondents who had mission statements either did not see the need for a formal TQM plan or had stopped using one if they had before. These results are shown in Table 4-29. Table 4-29. Cross-tabulation of MISSION and FORMPLAN FORMPLAN MISSION Yes No Yes 33 35 (25.0)* (43.0) No 7 34 (15.0) (26.0) * Expected count shown in parentheses The computed chi-square statistic for this table is 10.897 with 1 degree of freedom and has an associated probability (p value) or significance level of 0.001. The null hypothesis that MISSION and FORMPLAN are independent is rejected. There is statistically significant association between having a mission statement and having a formal TQM plan. This result is not surprising since the premise of having a formal plan of implementation of total quality management in an construction firm would lead management to the establishment of a published mission statement.

PAGE 111

100 The result of the chi-square test for MISSION and FORMPLAN is shown in Table 4-30. Table 4-30. Chi-square test of MISSION and FORMPLAN Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson ChiSquare 10.897 1 0.001 N of Valid Cases 109 Computed for only a 2x2 table 0 cells (0.0%) have an expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 15.05. Does Employing a HR Manager Vary According to Having a TQM Plan? The responses to questions A2 and A5 (See Appendix B) were crosstabulated. These two questions asked the respondents the following: • Does your company have a formal plan of implementation of TQM principles? • Does your company have a Human Resources Manager? The null hypothesis to be tested is that having a TQM plan (FORMPLAN) and having a Human Resource Manager (HRMAN) are independent of each other. The Pearson chi-square test was used to test the independence of HRMAN and FORMPLAN. The total number of cases for each of these variables was 110. However, the valid number of cases for each was 109 (99.1%) due to 1 missing value (0.9%)) of which 51 responded affirmatively to having a HR manager (46.8%). Of these 25 (62.5%) had TQM plans and 26 (37.7%) did not. The expected values shown in parenthesis were different, namely 18.7 for those with TQM plans and 32.3 for those who did not. The latter data is interesting in that respondents who employed HR managers either did not see the need for a formal

PAGE 112

101 TQM plan or had stopped using one if they had before. These resuUs are shown in Table 4-31. Table 4-31. Cross-tabulation of HRMAN and FORMPLAN FORMPLAN HRMAN Yes No Yes 25 26 (18.7)* (32.3) No 15 43 (21.3) (36.7) * Expected count shown in parentheses The computed chi-square statistic for this table is 6.265 with 1 degree of freedom and has an associated probability {p value) or significance level of 0.012. The statistical size of the statistic suggests that there might not be any association between HRMAN and FORMPLAN. The null hypothesis that having a Human Resources Manager and having a formal TQM plan cannot be rejected. The result of the chi-square test for HRMAN and FORMPLAN is shown in Table 4-32. Table 4-32. Chi-square test of HRMAN and FORMPLAN Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson ChiSquare 6.265 1 0.012 N of Valid Cases 109 Computed for only a 2x2 table 0 cells (0.0%) have an expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 18.72. Does Employing TQM Personnel Vary According to Having a TQM Plan? The responses to questions A2 and A6 (See Appendix B) were crosstabulated. These two questions asked the respondents the following:

PAGE 113

102 • Does your company have a formal plan of implementation of TQM principles? • Does your company have a TQM Director, Consultant or other position responsible for implementation of the principles of TQM? The null hypothesis to be tested is that having a TQM plan (FORMPLAN) and employing TQM specific staff for implementation (TQM STAFF) are independent of each other. The Pearson chi-square test was used to test the independence of TQMSTAFF and FORMPLAN. The total number of cases for each of these variables was 1 1 0. However, the valid number of cases for each was 109 (99.1%) due to 1 missing value (0.9%) of which 32 responded affirmatively to employing TQM staff (29.4%). Of these 28 (87.5%) had TQM plans and 4 (12.5%) did not. Table 4-33. Cross-tabulation of TQMSTAFF and FORMPLAN FORMPLAN TQMSTAFF Yes No Yes 28 4 (11.7)* (20.3) No 12 65 (28.3) (48.7) * Expected count shown in parentheses The expected values shown in parenthesis were different, namely 1 1.7 for those with TQM plans and 20.3 for those who did not. There were respondents who employed staff categorized as TQM personnel but either did not see the need for a formal TQM plan or had stopped using one if they had before. These results are shown in Table 4-33. The computed chi-square stafistic for this table is 50.327 with 1 degree of freedom and has an associated probability {p value) or significance level of <

PAGE 114

103 0.0005. The null hypothesis that TQMSTAFF and FORMPLAN are independent is rejected. There is statistically significant association between having a TQM staff and having a formal plan for TQM implementation. The result of the chi-square test for TQMSTAFF and FORMPLAN is shown in Table 4-34. Table 4-34. Chi-square test of TQMSTAFF and FORMPLAN Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson ChiSquare 50.327 1 0.000 N of Valid Cases 109 Computed for only a 2x2 table 0 cells (0.0%) have an expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 11.74. Does Employing a HR Manager Vary According to Utilizing TQM Principles? The responses to questions Al and A5 (See Appendix B) were crosstabulated. These two questions asked the respondents the following: • Does your company utilize the principles of TQM in its management operations? • Does your company have a Human Resources Manager? The null hypothesis to be tested is that utilizing TQM principles (PRINCIPAL) and having a Human Resource Manager (HRMAN) are independent of each other. The Pearson chi-square test was used to test the independence of HRMAN and PRINCIPL. The total number of cases for each of these variables was 1 10. However, the valid number of cases for each was 109 (99.1%) due to 1 missing value (0.9%) of which 51 responded affirmatively to having a HR manager (46.8%). Of these 35 (68.6%) utilized TQM principles in

PAGE 115

104 their companies and 16 (31.4%) did not. The expected values shown in parenthesis were different, namely 29.5 for those with TQM plans and 21.5 for those who did not. These results are shown in Table 4-35. Table 4-35. Cross-tabulation of HRMAN and PRINCIPL PRINCIPL HRMAN Yes No Yes 35 16 (29.5)* (21.5) No 28 30 (33.5) (24.5) Expected count shown in parentheses The computed chi-square statistic for this table is 4.608 with 1 degree of freedom and has an associated probability (p value) or significance level of 0.032. The statistical size of the statistic suggests that there might not be any association between HRMAN and PRINCIPL. The null hypothesis that having a Human Resources Manager and utilizing the principles of TQM are independent cannot be rejected. The result of the chi-square statistic test for HRMAN and PRINICPL is shown in Table 4-36. Table 4-36. Chi-square test of HRMAN and PRINCIPL Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson ChiSquare 4.608 1 0.032 N of Valid Cases 109 Computed for only a 2x2 table 0 cells (0.0%) have an expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 21.52.

PAGE 116

105 Does Employing TQM Personnel Vary According to Utilizing TQM Principles? The responses to questions Al and A6 (See Appendix B) were crosstabulated. These two questions asked the respondents the following: • Does your company utilize the principles of TQM in its management operations? • Does your company have a TQM Director, Consultant or other position responsible for implementation of the principles of TQM? The null hypothesis to be tested is that utilizing TQM principles (PRINCIPL) and employing specific staff categorized as TQM personnel (TQMSTAFF) are independent of each other. The Pearson chi-square test was used to test the independence of TQMSTAFF and PRINCIPL. The total number of cases for each of these variables was 1 10. However, the valid number of cases for each was 109 (99.1%) due to 1 missing value (0.9%) of which 32 responded affirmatively to employing TQM staff (29.4%). Of these 31 (96.9%) utilized TQM principles in their companies and 1 (3.1%) did not. The expected values shown in parenthesis were different, namely 18.5 for those utilizing TQM principles and 13.5 for those who did not. There were respondents who employed staff categorized as TQM persormel but either did not see the need for a formal TQM plan or had stopped using one if they had before. These results are shown in Table 4-37. Table 4-37. Cross-tabulation of TQMSTAFF and PRINCIPL PRINCIPL TQMSTAFF Yes No Yes 31 (18.5)* 1 (13.5) No 32 (44.5) 45 (32.5) * Expected count shown in parentheses

PAGE 117

106 The computed chi-square statistic for this table is 28.358 with 1 degree of freedom and has an associated probability {p value) or significance level of < 0.0005. The null hypothesis that TQMSTAFF and PRINCIPL are independent is rejected. There is statistically significant association between these variables. The result of the Pearson chi-square test for TQMSTAFF and PRINCIPL is shown in Table 4-38. Table 4-38 Chi-square test of TQMSTAFF and PRINCIPL Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson ChiSquare 28.358 1 0.000 N of Valid Cases 109 Computed for only a 2x2 table 0 cells (0.0%) have an expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 13.50. Correlation and Regression Analysis The next analysis undertaken by this study was to determine if certain of the identified TQM criteria and problems associated with implementation of TQM were correlated with each other in a way that could be predicted based upon the responses of those participating in the survey. As with the cross-tabulation analysis, the SPSS program was utilized for this correlation study, and incorporated the Pearson Correlation Coefficient to measure the strength of the association. Correlation and regression analysis is one of the most widely used techniques in the analysis of survey data. It is used to summarize the nature of the relationship between the variables by producing a line that fits the data closely. The measures of correlation indicate both the strength and the direction of the

PAGE 118

107 relationship (positive and negative) between the tested variables (Bryman and Cramer, 2001) Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of Having a Formal TQM Plan? It was expected that the responding companies in this study that utilized TQM principles (PRINCIPL) in their operations would more likely have a formal TQM plan for implementation (FORMPLAN) in place. The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between PRINCIPL and FORMPLAN. The correlation between the variables of principles and having a forma plan is shown in Table 4-39. Table 4-39. Correlation between FORMPLAN and PRINCIPL Pearson Correlation 0.535'" Significance (1 -tailed) o.ooo" N 109 The correlation between FORMPLAN and PRINCIPL is positive (0.535) and statistically it is modestly significant'^ suggesting that as PRINCIPL increased, the value of FORMPLAN also increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.535 is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differed The closer the value of the correlation coefficient is to +1 or -1, the stronger the relationship between the variables. The nearer it is to 0 the weaker the relationship between them (Bryman and Cramer, 2001). " The statistical difference of 0.000 means p <0.0005 1 2 The rule-of-thumb guide for the strength of correlations is that 0.19 and below is very low; from 0.20 to 0.39 is low; 0.40 to 0.69 is modest; 0.70 to 0.89 is high; and 0.90 to 1 is very high or strong (Cohen and Holliday, 1982)

PAGE 119

108 significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between the utilizations of TQM principles and having a formal TQM plan in place. The regression model summary in Table 4-40 suggests that there is a linear relationship between FORMPLAN and PRINCIPL. The value of is 0.286, suggesting that PRINCIPL predicts 28.6% of the variability of FORMPLAN. Table 4-40. Regression model summary of FORMPLAN and PRINCIPL Model R R Square'^ Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.535 0.286 0.280 0.41 Predictors: (Constant t), utilization of TQM principles Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of Having a TQM Budget? It was expected that companies that utilized TQM principles (PRINCIPL) in their firms would more likely have an annual TQM budget (BUDGET) in place. The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between PRINCIPL and BUDGET. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-41. Table 4-41. Correlation between PRINCIPL and BUDGET Pearson Correlation 0.388 Significance (1 -tailed) 0.000 N 109 '^ The value R Square is often interpreted as the proportion of the total variation. R square ranges from 0 to 1 . If there is no linear relation between the dependent and independent variable, R square is 0 or very small. If all of the observations fall on the regression line, R square is 1. This measure of the goodness of fit of a linear model is also called the coefficient of determination (SPSS 1999).

PAGE 120

109 The correlation between PRINCIPL and BUDGET is positive (0.388) and statistically significant suggesting that as PRINCIPL increased, the value of BUDGET increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.388 is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differed significantly fi-om 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between the utilization of TQM principles and having an established TQM budget. The regression model summary in Table 4-42 suggests that there is a linear relationship between BUDGET and PRINCIPL. The value of R^ is 0.151, suggesting that PRINCIPL predicts 15.1% of the variability of BUDGET. Table 4-42. Regression model summary of PRINCIPL and BUDGET Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.388 0.151 0.143 0.41 Predictors: (Constant), utilization of TQM principles Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of Having a Human Resources Manager? It was expected that companies that utilized TQM principles (PRINCIPL) in their firms would more likely employ a Human Resources Manager (HRMAN). The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between PRINCIPL and HRMAN. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-43. Table 4-43. Correlation between PRINCIPL and HRMAN Pearson Correlation 0.206 Significance (1 -tailed) 0.016 N 109

PAGE 121

110 The correlation between PRINCIPL and HRMAN is positive (0.206) and statistically significant suggesting that as PRINCIPL increased, the value of HRMAN increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.206 is 0.016 indicating that the correlation differed significantly fi-om 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between the utilization of TQM principles and having a Human Resources Manager. The regression model summary in Table 4-44 suggests that there is a weak linear relationship between PRINCIPL and HRMAN. The value of R^ is 0.042, suggesting that PRINCIPL predicts only 4.2% of the variability of HRMAN. Table 4-44. Regression model summary of PRINCIPL and HRMAN Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.206 0.042 0.033 0.49 Predictors: (Constant), utilization of TQM principles Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of Having a TQM Staff? It was expected that companies that utilized TQM principles (PRINCIPL) in their operations would more likely employ staff categorized as TQM personnel (TQMSTAFF). The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between PRINCIPL and TQMSTAFF. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-45. Table 4-45. Correlation between PRINCIPL and TQMSTAFF Pearson Correlation 0.510 Significance (1 -tailed) 0.000 N 109

PAGE 122

Ill The correlation between PRINCIPL and TQMSTAFF is positive (0.510) and statistically significant suggesting that as PRINCIPL increased, the value of TQMSTAFF increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.510 is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between the utilization of TQM principles and having a TQM Staff The regression model summary in Table 4-46 suggests that there is a linear relationship between PRINCIPL and TQMSTAFF. The value of R^ is 0.260, suggesting that PRINCIPL predicts 26.0% of the variability of TQMSTAFF. Table 4-46. Regression model summary of PRINCIPL and TQMSTAFF Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.510 0.260 0.253 0.40 Predictors: (Constani t), utilization of TQM principles This result suggests a stronger linear relationship between PRINCIPL and TQMSTAFF than between PRINCIPL and HRMAN. Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of Having a TQM Budget? It was expected that those companies that had a formal TQM plan of implementation in place (FORMPLAN) would more likely have an established annual TQM budget (BUDGET) for use in implementing the practices of total quality. The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between FORMPLAN and BUDGET. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-47.

PAGE 123

112 Table 4-47. Correlation between FORMPLAN and BUDGET Pearson Correlation 0.575 Significance (1 -tailed) 0.000 N 109 The correlation between FORMPLAN and BUDGET is positive (0.575) and statistically significant suggesting that as FORMPLAN increased, the value of BUDGET increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.575 is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between having a formal TQM plan in place and having an established TQM budget. The regression model summary in Table 4-48 suggests that there is a linear relationship between FORMPLAN and BUDGET. The value of R^ is 0.331, suggesting that FORMPLAN predicts 33.1% of the variability of BUDGET. Table 4-48. Regression model summary of FORMPLAN and BUDGET Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.575 0.331 0.325 0.36 Predictors: (Constan t), formal plan of implementation Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of Having a Mission Statement? It was expected that companies that had a formal TQM plan of implementation in place (FORMPLAN) would more likely have a published mission or purpose statement (MISSION). The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between FORMPLAN and MISSION. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-49.

PAGE 124

113 Table 4-49. Correlation between FORMPLAN and MISSION Pearson Correlation 0.316 Significance (1 -tailed) 0.000 N 109 The correlation between FORMPLAN and MISSION is positive (0.316) and statistically significant suggesting that as FORMPLAN increased, the value of MISSION increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.316 is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between having a formal TQM plan in place and having a published Mission/Purpose Statement. The regression model summary in Table 4-50 suggests that there is a linear relationship between FORMPLAN and MISSION. The value of R^ is 0.100, suggesting that FORMPLAN predicts 10.0% of the variability of MISSION. Table 4-50. Regression model summary of FORMPLAN and MISSION Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.316 0.100 0.092 0.46 Predictors: (Constan t), formal plan of implementation Is Having a formal TQM Plan a Predictor of Having a Human Resources Manager? It was expected that companies that had a formal TQM plan of implementation in place (FORMPLAN) would more likely employ a Human Resources Manager (HUMAN). The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between FORMPLAN and HRMAN. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-5 1 .

PAGE 125

114 Table 4-51 . Correlation between FORMPLAN and HRMAN Pearson Correlation 0.240 Significance (1 -tailed) 0.006 N 109 The correlation between FORMPLAN and HRMAN is positive (0.240) and statistically significant suggesting that as FORMPLAN increased, the value of HRMAN increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.240 is 0.006 indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between having a formal TQM plan in place and having a Human Resources Manager. The regression model summary in Table 4-52 suggests that there is a weak linear relationship between FORMPLAN and HRMAN. The value of R^ is 0.057, suggesting that FORMPLAN predicts only 5.7% of the variability of HRMAN. Table 4-52. Regression model summary of FORMPLAN and HRMAN Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.240 0.057 0.049 0.49 Predictors: (Constan t), formal plan of implementation Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of Having a TQM Staff? It was expected that companies that had a formal TQM plan of implementation in place (FORMPLAN) would more likely employ staff categorized as TQM personnel (TQMSTAFF). The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between FORMPLAN and TQMSTAFF. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-53.

PAGE 126

115 Table 4-53. Correlation between FORMPLAN and TQMSTAFF Pearson Correlation 0.679 Significance (1 -tailed) 0.000 N 109 The correlation between FORMPLAN and TQMSTAFF is positive (0.679) and statistically significant suggesting that as FORMPLAN increased, the value of TQMSTAFF increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.679 is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between having a formal TQM plan in place and having a TQM staff. The regression model summary in Table 4-54 suggests that there is a strong linear relationship between FORMPLAN and TQMSTAFF. The value of is 0.462, suggesting that FORMPLAN predicts 46.2% of the variability of TQMSTAFF. Table 4-54 Regression model summary of FORMPLAN and TQMSTAFF Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.679 0.462 0.457 0.34 Predictors: (Constant), formal plan of implementation This result suggests a stronger linear relationship between FORMPLAN and TQMSTAFF than between FORMPLAN and HRMAN. Is Having a TQM Budget a Predictor of Having a Human Resources Manager? It was expected that companies that had an established budget for TQM implementation in place (BUDGET) would more likely employ a Human Resources Manager (HRMAN). The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no

PAGE 127

116 relationship between BUDGET and HRMAN. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-55. Table 4-55. Correlation between BUDGET and HRMAN Pearson Correlation 0.309 Significance (1 -tailed) 0.000 N 109 The correlation between BUDGET and HRMAN is positive (0.309) and statistically significant suggesting that as BUDGET increased, the value of HRMAN increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.309 is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between having an established TQM budget and having a Human Resources Manager. The regression model summary in Table 4-56 suggests that there is a linear relationship between BUDGET and HRMAN. The value of R^ is 0.096, suggesting that BUDGET predicts 9.6% of the variability of HRMAN. Table 4-56. Regression model summary of BUDGET and HRMAN Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.309 0.096 0.087 0.48 Predictors: (Constant), establis led budget for implementation Is Having a TQM Budget a Predictor of Having a TQM Staff? It was expected that companies that had an established budget for TQM implementation in place (BUDGET) would more likely employ staff categorized

PAGE 128

117 as TQM personnel (TQMSTAFF). The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between BUDGET and TQMSTAFF. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-57. Table 4-57. Correlation between BUDGET and TQMSTAFF Pearson Correlation 0.569 Significance (1 -tailed) 0.000 N 109 The correlation between BUDGET and TQMSTAFF is positive (0.569) and statistically significant suggesting that as BUDGET increased, the value of TQMSTAFF increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.569 is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between having an established TQM budget and having a TQM staff The regression model summary in Table 4-58 suggests that there is a strong linear relationship between BUDGET and TQMSTAFF. The value of is 0.324, suggesting that BUDGET predicts 32.4% of the variability of TQMSTAFF. Table 4-58. Regression model summary of BUDGE! r and TQMSTAFF Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.569 0.324 0.318 0.38 Predictors: (Constant), establis led budget for implementation This result suggests a stronger linear relationship between BUDGET and TQMSTAFF than between BUDGET and HRMAN.

PAGE 129

118 Is Having a Mission Statement a Predictor of TQM Staff? It was expected that companies that had a published mission or purpose statement (MISSION) would more likely employ staff categorized as TQM personnel (TQMSTAFF). The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between MISSION and TQMSTAFF. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-59. Table 4-59. Correlation between MISSION and TQMSTAFF Pearson Correlation 0.209 Significance (1 -tailed) 0.015 N 109 The correlation between MISSION and TQMSTAFF is positive (0.209) and statistically significant suggesting that as MISSION increased, the value of TQMSTAFF increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.209 is 0.015 indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between having a published Mission/Purpose Statement and having a TQM staff The regression model summary in Table 4-60 suggests that there is a weak linear relationship between MISSION and TQMSTAFF. The value of is 0.044, suggesting that MISSION predicts 4.4% of the variability of TQMSTAFF. Table 4-60 Regression model summary of MISSION and TQMSTAFF Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.209 0.044 0.035 0.45 Predictors: (Constant), published mission/purpose statement

PAGE 130

119 Is Having a Mission Statement a Predictor of Having a Human Resources Manager? It was expected that companies that had a pubHshed mission or purpose statement (MISSION) would more likely employ a Human Resources Manager (HRMAN). The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between MISSION and HRMAN. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-61. Table 4-61. Correlation between MISSION and HRMAN Pearson Correlation 0.311 Significance (1 -tailed) 0.000 N 109 The correlation between MISSION and HRMAN is positive (0.31 1) and statistically significant suggesting that as MISSION increased, the value of HRMAN increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.3 1 1 is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between having a published Mission/Purpose Statement and having a Human Resources Manager. The regression model summary in Table 4-62 suggests that there is a linear relationship between MISSION and HRMAN. The value of R^ is 0.096, suggesting that MISSION predicts 9.6% of the variability of HRMAN. Table 4-62. Regression model summary of MISSION and HRMAN Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.311 0.096 0.088 0.48

PAGE 131

120 Predictors: (Constant), published mission/purpose statement This result suggests a stronger linear relationship between MISSION and HRMAN than between MISSION AND TQMSTAFF. Is Having a Human Resources Manager a Predictor of Having a TQM Staff? It was expected that companies that employ a Human Resources Manager (HRMAN) would more likely employ staff categorized as TQM staff (TQMSTAFF). The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between TQMSTAFF and HRMAN. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-63. Table 4-63. Correlation between TQMSTAFF and HRMAN Pearson Correlation 0.243 Significance (1 -tailed) 0.006 N 109 The correlation between TQMSTAFF and HRMAN is positive (0.243) and statistically significant suggesting that as TQMSTAFF increased, the value of HRMAN increased. The p value associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.243 is 0.006 indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between having a Human Resources Manager and having a TQM staff. The regression model summary in Table 4-64 suggests that there is a weak linear relationship between TQMSTAFF and HRMAN. The value of R^ is 0.056, suggesting that TQMSTAFF predicts 5.6% of the variability of HRMAN.

PAGE 132

121 Table 4-64. Regression model summary of TQMSTAFF and HRMAN Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.243 0.056 0.050 0.45 Predictors: (Constant t), Human resource manager Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of TQM Criteria? It was expected that companies that utilized TQM principles (PRINl) would more likely be in agreement with certain TQM criteria . The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between PRINl (those respondents utilizing TQM principles) and these criteria. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-65. Table 4-65. Correlations of PRINl with TQM criteria Variable Pearson Correlation Significance. (1 -tailed) N Top management commitment (TMCOMMIT) 0.343 0.000 102 Top management involvement (TMINVOLVE) 0.327 0.000 102 Planning well developed throughout company (PLANNING) 0.347 0.000 101 Customer focus with feedback (CUSTFOCU) 0.019 0.427 101 Continual employee training (CONTRAIN) 0.366 0.000 101 Rewards for specific contributions (REWARD) 0.392 0.000 101 Participative management style in all areas of operation (PARTMAN) 0.308 0.001 101 Continuous improvement measurements (IMPROVE) 0.332 0.000 101 TQM measures applied to all field operations (TQMAPPLI) 0.116 0.123 101 The correlation between PRINl and most of the various TQM criteria is positive as evidenced from Table 4-66 and statistically significant suggesting that as PRINl increased, their values also increased. The p values associated with most

PAGE 133

122 of the correlation coefficients are < 0.0005 indicating that the correlations differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, most of the null hypotheses are rejected. There is a significant relationship between the utilization of TQM principles and the following criteria: • Top Management Commitment (TMCOMMIT) • Top Management Involvement (TMINVOLVE) • Planning well developed throughout company (PLANNING) • Continual employee training (CONTRAIN) • Rewards for specific contributions (REWARD) • Participative management style in all areas of operation (PARTMAN); and • Continuous improvement measures (IMPROVE) The exceptions were: • Customer focus with feedback (CUSTOFOCU) where the p value associated with the correlation coefficient of 0.019 is 0.427 indicating that the correlation did not differ significantly from 0. Accordingly the null hypothesis that PRINl and CUSTFOCU are independent cannot be rejected; and • TQM measures applied to all field operations (TQMAPPLI) where the p value associated with the correlation coefficient of 0.1 16 is 0.123 indicating that the correlation did not differ significantly from 0. Accordingly the null hypothesis that PRINl and TQMAPPLI are independent carmot be rejected. The regression model summary in Table 4-66 suggests that there is a linear relationship between PRINl and TMCOMMIT. The value of R^is 0.1 18, suggesting that PRINl predicts 1 1.8% of the variability of TMCOMMIT. Table 4-66. Regression model summary of PRFNl and TMCOMMIT Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.343 0.118 0.109 1.13 Predictors: (Constant), PRINl

PAGE 134

123 The regression model summary in Table 4-67 suggests that there is a linear relationship between PRINl and TMINVOLVE. The value of is 0.107, suggesting that PRINl predicts 10.7% of the variability of TMINVOLVE. Table 4-67. Regression model summary of PRINl and TMINVOLVE Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.327 0.107 0.098 1.23 Predictors: (Constant), PRINl The regression model summary in Table 4-68 suggests that there is a linear relationship between PRINl and PLANNING. The value of R is 0.12, suggestmg that PRINl predicts 12.0% of the variability of PLANNING. Table 4-68. Regression model summary of PRINl and PLANNING Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.347 0.120 0.111 1.22 Predictors: (Constant), PRLNl In Table 4-69 the regression model summary suggests that there is a linear relationship between PRINl and CONTRAIN. The value of R^ is 0.134, suggesting that PRINl predicts 13.4% of the variability of CONTRAIN. Table 4-69. Regression model summary of PRINl and CONTRAIN Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.366 0.134 0.125 1.26 Predictors: (Constant), PRINl

PAGE 135

124 The regression model summary in Table 4-70 suggests that there is a linear relationship between PRINl and REWARD. The value of R^ is 0.154, suggesting that PRINl predicts 15.4% of the variability of REWARD. Table 4-70. Regression model summary of PRINl and REWARD Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.392 0.154 0.145 1.34 Predictors: (Constant), PRINl In Table 4-71 the regression model summary suggests that there is a linear relationship between PRINl and PARTMAN. The value of R^ is 0.095, suggesting that PRINl predicts 9.5% of the variability of PARTMAN. Table 4-7] . Regression model summary of PRINl and PARTMAN Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.308 0.095 0.086 1.22 Predictors: (Constant), PRINl The regression model summary in Table 4-72 suggests that there is a linear relationship between PRINl and IMPROVE. The value of R^ is 0.1 1 1, suggesting that PRINl predicts 11.1% of the variability of IMPROVE. Table 4-72. Regression model summary of PRINl and IMPROVE Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.332 0.111 0.102 1.26 Predictors: (Constant), PRINl

PAGE 136

125 Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of TQM criteria? It was expected that companies that had a formal TQM plan (PLANl) would more likely be in agreement with certain TQM criteria. The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between PLANl (those respondents having a formal TQM plan) and these criteria. The correlation between these variables is shown in Table 4-73. Table 4-73. Correlations of PLANl with TQM criteria Variable Pearson Correlation Significance (1 -tailed) N Top management commitment (TMCOMMIT) 0.350 0.000 101 Top management involvement (TMINVOLVE) 0.303 0.001 101 Planning well developed throughout company (PLANNING) 0.349 0.000 101 Customer focus with feedback (CUSTFOCU) 0.103 0.154 100 Continual employee training (CONTRAIN) 0.460 0.000 100 Rewards for specific contributions (REWARD) 0.297 0.001 100 Participative management style in all areas of operation (PARTMAN) 0.270 0.003 100 Continuous improvement measurements (IMPROVE) 0.312 0.001 100 TQM measures applied to all field operations (TQMAPPLI) 0.161 0.054 100 The correlation between PLANl and most of the various TQM criteria is positive as evidenced fi-om Table 4-73 and statistically significant suggesting that as PLANl increased, their values also increased. The p values associated with the correlafion coefficients of TMCOMMIT and PLANNING are < 0.0005 indicating that the correlations differed significantly from 0. Those of TMINVOLVE,

PAGE 137

126 REWARD, and IMPROVE are 0.001 and PARTMAN is 0.003 also indicating that the correlations differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypotheses involving the majority of these variables are rejected. There is a significant relationship between having a formal TQM plan for implementation and the following criteria: • Top Management Commitment (TMCOMMIT) • Top Management Involvement (TMFNVOLVE) • Planning well developed throughout company (PLANNFNG) • Continual employee training (CONTRAIN) • Rewards for specific contributions (REWARD) • Participative management style in all areas of operation (PARTMAN); and • Continuous improvement measures (IMPROVE) The exceptions were: • Customer focus with feedback (CUSTOFOCU) where the p value associated with the correlation coefficient of 0.103 is 0.154 indicating that the correlation did not differ significantly from 0. Accordingly the null hypothesis that PLANl and CUSTFOCU are independent cannot be rejected; and • TQM measures applied to all field operations (TQMAPPLI) where the p value associated with the correlation coefficient of 0.161 is 0.054 indicating that the correlation did not differ significantly from 0. Accordingly the null hypothesis that PLANl and TQMAPPLI are independent cannot be rejected. The regression model summary in Table 4-74 suggests that there is a linear relationship between PLANl and TMCOMMIT. The value of R^ is 0.123, suggesting that PLANl predicts 12.3% of the variability of TMCOMMIT. Table 4-74. Regression model summary of PLANl and TMCOMMIT Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.350 0.123 0.114 1.14 Predictors: (Constant), PLANl

PAGE 138

127 The regression model summary in Table 4-75 suggests that there is a linear relationship between PLANl and TMINVOLVE. The value of is 0.092, suggesting that PLANl predicts 9.2% of the variability of TMINVOLVE. Table 4-75. Regression model summary of PLANl and TMINVOLVE Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.303 0.092 0.082 1.24 Predictors: (Constant), PLANl The regression model summary in Table 4-76 suggests that there is a linear relationship between PLANl and PLANNING. The value of R^ is 0.121, suggesting that PLANl predicts 12.1% of the variability of PLANNING. Table 4-76. Regression model summary of PLANl and PLANNING Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.349 0.121 0.113 1.22 Predictors: (Constant), PLANl In Table 4-77 the regression model summary suggests that there is a strong linear relationship between PLANl and CONTRAEN. The value of R'^ is 0.21 1, suggesting that PLANl predicts 21.1% of the variability of CONTRAIN. The regression model summary in Table 4-78 suggests that there is a weak linear relationship between PLANl and REWARD. The value of R^ is 0.088, suggesting that PRfNl predicts 8.8% of the variability of REWARD. Table 4-77. Regression model summary of PLAN land CONTRAIN Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.460 0.211 0.203 1.21 Predictors: (Constant), PLANl

PAGE 139

128 Table 4-78. Regression model summary of PLAN 1 and REWARD Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.297 0.088 0.079 1.39 Predictors: (Constani t), PLANl In Table 4-79 the regression model summary suggests that there is a weak linear relationship between PLANl and PARTMAN. The value of R^ is 0.073, suggesting that PLANl predicts only 7.3% of the variability of PARTMAN. Table 4-79. Regression model summary of PLANl and PARTMAN Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.270 0.073 0.063 1.24 Predictors: (Constani t), PLANl The regression model summary in Table 4-80 suggests that there is a linear relationship between PLANl and IMPROVE. The value of R^ is 0.098, suggesting that PLANl predicts 9.8% of the variability of IMPROVE. Table 4-80. Regression model summary of PLANl and IMPROVE Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.312 0.098 0.088 1.28 Predictors: (Constani t), PLANl Is the Use of TQM Principles a Predictor of TQM problems? It was expected that companies that utilized TQM principles (PRINl) would more likely be in agreement with certain TQM problems that affect implementation in field operations. The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between PRINl (those respondents utilizing TQM principles) and

PAGE 140

129 these criteria. The correlation between these variables that are statistically significant is shown in Table 4-8 1 . Table 4-81. Correlations of PRINl with TQM problems Variable Pearson Correlation Significance (1tailed) 0.01 level Significance (1 -tailed) 0.05 level N Subcontracting based on low bid (SUBCONT) -0.207 0.019 102 Subcontractors and suppliers not interested in TQM (SUBSUPP) -0.298 0.001 102 TQM just a buzz word (BUZZWORD) -0.166 0.047 103 There was little or no statistically significant correlation between PRE^l and most of the various TQM problems to implementation in the field. Those that were significant, were negative suggesting that as their values increased towards 5, the values of PRINl decreased towards 1. The p values associated with: • Subcontracting based on low bid (SUBCONT) correlation coefficient of0.207 is 0.019 at 0.05 level indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected; • Subcontractors and suppliers not interested in TQM (SUBSUPP) correlation coefficient of -0.298 is 0.001 at 0.01 level indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected; and • TQM j ust a buzz word (BUZZWORD) correlation coefficient of -0. 1 66 is 0.047 at 0.05 level indicating that the correlation differed significantly from 0. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is rejected. The regression model summary in Table 4-82 suggests that there is a weak linear relationship between PRINl and SUBCONT. The value of R^ is 0.043, suggesting that PRINl predicts only 4.3% of the variability of SUBCONT.

PAGE 141

130 Table 4-82. Regression model summary of PRINl and SUBCONT Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.207 0.043 0.098 1.27 Predictors: (Constan t), PRINl The regression model summary in Table 4-83 suggests that there is a linear relationship between PRINl and SUBSUPP. The value of R^ is 0.089, suggesting that PRINl predicts 8.9% of the variability of SUBSUPP. Table 4-83. Regression model summary of PRINl and SUBSUPP Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.298 0.089 0.080 1.19 Predictors: (Constant), PRINl The regression model summary in Table 4-84 suggests that there is a weak linear relationship between PRINl and BUZZWORD. The value of R^ is 0.028, suggesting that PRINl predicts 2.8% of the variability of BUZZWORD. Table 4-84. Regression model summary of PRINl and BUZZWORD Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.166 0.028 0.018 1.37 Predictors: (Constant), PRINl Is Having a Formal TQM Plan a Predictor of TQM Problems? It was expected that companies that had a formal TQM plan (PLANl) would more hkely be in agreement with certain TQM problems that affect implementation in field operations. The null hypothesis to be tested is that there is no relationship between PLANl (those respondents having a formal TQM plan) and these problems. However there were no statistically significant correlations

PAGE 142

131 between PLANl and these variables. Consequently the null hypotheses could not be tested. There were also no regression models. Having a formal TQM plan is not a predictor of agreement with TQM problems affecting field operations. Regression Modeling By utilizing the single-step multiple linear regression modeling in conjunction with the SPSS program, one is able to test whether there is a positive (+) correlation between a company's position relative to the various TQM criteria (CRITERIA) and TQM problems (PROBLEMS), and a number of key elements of the TQM questionnaire, namely: • The application of the principles of TQM (PRINl) • Having a formal TQM plan of implementation (PLANl) • Having an established TQM budget (BUDGET) • Having a published Mission-Purpose Statement (MISSION) • Employing a TQM staff (TQMST AFF) • Direct involvement in TQM implementation (INVOLVE), and • The problems associated with TQM field operations implementation (PROBLEMS) The measures of this association for each of questions Al 1 :(sub-parts A-G) and Bl : (sub-parts A-H) (See Appendix B) were obtained by recoding the responses into different variables. Adding up each response to a sub-part of a question and then dividing the total by the number of sub-parts calculated the score of each case in these variables. For example, for question Al 1 the scores of the responses to each of the nine sub-parts were added for each respondent, and then divided by nine to give the score for that case. In the same way the scores of the responses to each of the

PAGE 143

132 ten sub-parts to question Bl were added for each respondent, and then divided by ten to give a single score for a different recoded variable. Hypotheses to Be Tested The following hypotheses were tested with the single-step multiple linear regression analysis: • HI : The utilization of TQM principles (PRINl) is a positive predictor of describing the position of companies with respect to various TQM criteria as they apply to their firm (CRITERIA). • H2: Having a formal plan of TQM implementation (PLANl) is a positive predictor of describing the position of companies with respect to various TQM criteria as they apply to their firm (CRITERIA). • H3: Having an established budget for TQM implementation (BUDGET) is a positive predictor of the position of companies with respect to various TQM criteria as they apply to their firm (CRITERIA). • H4: Having a published mission or statement of purpose (MISSION) is a positive predictor of the posifion of companies with respect to various TQM criteria as they apply to their (CRITERIA). • H5: Employing staff categorized as TQM personnel (TQMSTAFF) is a positive predictor of the position of companies with respect to various TQM criteria as they apply to their firm (CRITERIA). • H6: The length of direct involvement in the implementation of TQM in companies (INVOLVE) is a positive predictor of the position of companies with respect to various TQM criteria as they apply to their (CRITERIA). • H7: Employing staff categorized as TQM personnel (TQMSTAFF) is a positive predictor of the position of companies with respect to various TQM problems affecting TQM implementation in field operations (PROBLEMS). • H8: The length of direct involvement in the implementation of TQM in companies (INVOLVE) is a negative predictor of the position of companies with respect to various TQM problems affecting TQM implementation in field operations (PROBLEMS). The analysis of each of the eight hypotheses to be tested are reviewed individually below. HI : Utilization of TQM Principles with Respect to Criteria Table 4-85 shows that there is statisfically significant positive correlafion (0.373) (1 -tailed) at the 0.01 level between the independent variable (predictor) the

PAGE 144

133 utilization of TQM principles (PRINl) and the dependent variable for TQM criteria (CRITERIA). As the value of PRINl increases towards 5, the value of CRITERIA also increases towards 5. The p value is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differs significantly from 0. Table 4-85. Correlations of PRINl with CRITERIA Variable Pearson Correlation Significance (1 -tailed) N PRINl 0.373 0.000 97 The regression model summary in Table 4-86 shows that utilization of principles (PRFNl ) is a strong predictor of the criteria (CRITERIA). The R value is significant (0.139) and predicts a significant portion (13.9%) of the variability in CRITERIA. The standard error (0.9495) compares favorably with the standard deviation of CRITERIA (1.0182). Table 4-86. Regression model summary of PRfNl and CRITERIA Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.373 0.139 0.130 0.9495 Predictors: (Constant), PRINl Table 4-87 shows that the F value is not small (15.387) and therefore, statistically significant, indicating that the test that each coefficient is 0 is rejected. The independent variable for principles (PRFNl) explains a significant portion of the variation of the dependent variable criteria (CRITERIA). The linear relationship between the variables is highly significant (< 0.0005).

PAGE 145

134 Table 4-87. ANOVA of PRINI and CRITERIA Model .. 1 Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 13.872 1 13.872 15.387 0.00 Residual 85.647 95 0.902 Total 99.520 96 a Predictors: (Constant), PRINI b Dependent Variable: CRITERIA As the histogram shown in Figure 4-15 demonstrates, the utilization of TQM principles (PRINI) is a positive predictor of the application of TQM criteria (CRITERIA). Dependent Variable: CRITERIA Predictor: PRINI 30 T 1 Std. Dev = .99 Mean = 0.00 N = 97.00 -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 Regression Standardized Residual Figure 4-15. Histogram of TQM principles as a positive predictor of criteria Using the coefficients from Table 4-88, the estimated model is: CRITERIA = 2.806 + 0.783 PRINI

PAGE 146

135 The predictors are useful since the t values of 17.729 and 3.923 satisfy the usefulness guidelines of either being above +2 or well below -2. Table 4-88. Coefficients of PRINl and CRITERIA Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Model B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 2.806 0.158 17.729 0.00 PRINl 0.783 .200 .373 3.923 0.00 Dependent Variable: CRI ERIA The hypothesis HI is accordingly not rejected that the utihzation of TQM principles is a positive predictor of describing the position of companies with respect to various TQM criteria as they apply to them. H2: Having a Formal TQM Plan with Respect to Criteria Table 4-89 shows that there is statistically significant positive correlation (0.381) (1-tailed) at the 0.01 level between the independent variable (predictor), having a formal TQM Plan (PLANl) and the dependent variable, TQM criteria (CRITERIA). As the value of PLANl increases towards 5, the value of CRITERIA also increases towards 5. The p value is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differs significantly from 0. Table 4-89. Correlations of PLANl with CRITERIA Variable Pearson Correlation Significance (1-tailed) N PLANl 0.381 0.000 96 The regression model summary in Table 4-90 shows that having a formal TQM plan (PLANl) is a strong predictor of the use of the criteria (CRITERIA).

PAGE 147

136 The Revalue is significant (0.145) and predicts a significant portion (14.5%) of the variability in CRITERIA. The standard error (0.9506) compares favorably with the standard deviation of CRITERIA (1.0182). Table 4-90. Regression model summary of PLAN 1 and CRITERIA Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.381 0.145 0.136 0.9506 Predictors: (Constant), PLANl Table 4-91 shows that the F value is not small (15.944) and therefore, statistically significant, indicating that the test that each coefficient is 0 is rejected. The independent variable having a formal TQM plan (PLANl) explains a significant portion of the variation of the dependent variable criteria (CRITERIA). The linear relationship between the variables is highly significant (< 0.0005). Table 4-91 ANOVA of PLANl and CRITERIA Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 14.408 1 14.408 15.944 0.00 Residual 84.943 94 0.904 Total 99.351 95 a Predictors: (Constant), PLANl b Dependent Variable: CRITERIA As the histogram shown in Figure 4-16 demonstrates that having a formal TQM plan for implementation of the TQM process in a construction organization (PLANl ) is a positive predictor of the application of the various TQM criteria (CRITERIA).

PAGE 148

137 Dependent Variable: CRITERIA Predictor: PLANl -2.25 -1.75 -1.25 -.75 -.25 .25 .75 1.25 1.75 -2.00 -1.50 -1.00 -.50 0.00 .50 1.00 1.50 2.00 Regression Standardized Residual Figure 4-16. Histogram of a TQM plan as a positive predictor of TQM criteria Using the coefficients from Table 4-92, the estimated model is: CRITERIA = 2.989 + 0.792 PLANl Table 4-92. Coefficients of PLANl and CRITERIA Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients T Sig. Model B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 2.989 0.125 23.942 0.00 PLANl 0.792 0.198 0.381 3.993 0.00 Dependent Variable: CRITERIA The predictors are useful since the / values of 23.942 and 3.993 satisly the usefulness guidelines of either being above +2 or well below -2.

PAGE 149

138 The hypothesis H2 is accordingly not rejected that having a formal TQM plan of implementation is a positive predictor of describing the position of companies with respect to various TQM criteria as they apply to their construction organization. H3: Having an Established Budget for TQM Implementation The data in Table 4-93 show that there is statistically significant positive correlation (0.389) (1-tailed) at the 0.01 level between the independent variable (predictor), having an established annual TQM budget (BUDGET 1) and the dependent variable, TQM criteria (CRITERIA). As the value of BUDGET 1 increases towards 5, the value of CRITERIA also increases towards 5. The p value is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differs significantly from 0. Table 4-93. Correlations of BUDGET 1 with CRITERIA Variable Pearson Correlation Significance (1-tailed) N BUDGET 1 0.389 0.000 96 The regression model summary in Table 4-94 shows that having a TQM budget for implementation (BUDGET 1) is a strong predictor of having the criteria in place (CRITERIA). The R^ value is significant (0.151) and predicts a significant portion (15.1%) of the variability in CRITERIA. The standard error (0.9472) compares favorably with the standard deviation of CRITERIA (1.0182). Table 4-94. Regression model summary of BUDGET 1 and CRITERIA Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.389 0.151 0.142 0.9472 Predictors: (Constant), BUDGET 1

PAGE 150

139 Table 4-95 shows that the F value is not small (16.726) and therefore, statistically significant, indicating that the test that each coefficient is 0 is rejected. The independent variable (BUDGET 1) explains a significant portion of the variation of the dependent variable (CRITERIA). The linear relationship between having a TQM budget (BUDGET 1) and criteria (CRITERIA) the variables is highly significant (< 0.0005). Table 4-95. ANOVA of BUDGET 1 and CRITERIA Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 15.008 1 15.008 16.726 0.00 Residual 84.343 94 0.897 Total 99.351 95 a Predictors: (Constant), BUDGETl b Dependent Variable: CRITERIA Using the coefficients from Table 4-96, the estimated model is: CRITERIA = 3.055 + 0.879 BUDGETl Table 4-96. Coefficients of BUDGETl and CRITERIA Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Model B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 3.055 0.114 26.788 0.00 BUDGETl 0.879 0.215 0.389 4.090 0.00 Dependent Variable: CRI ERIA The predictors are useful since the / values of 26.788 and 4.090 satisfy the usefulness guidelines of either being above +2 or well below -2.

PAGE 151

140 As the histogram shown in Figure 4-17 demonstrates, having an established annual budget for the implementation of TQM within an organization (BUDGET 1) is a positive predictor of the application of the various TQM criteria outlined in the study (CRITERIA). Dependent Variable: CRITERIA Predictor: BUDGET 1 -2.25 -1.75 -1.25 -.75 -.25 .25 .75 1.25 1.75 -2.00 -1.50 -1.00 -.50 0.00 .50 1.00 1.50 2.00 Regression Standardized Residual Figure 4-17. Histogram of a TQM budget as a positive predictor of criteria. The hypothesis H3 is accordingly not rejected that having an established budget for TQM implementation is a positive predictor of describing the position of companies with respect to various TQM criteria as they apply to them. H4: Having a Published Mission Statement From Table 4-97, it is evident that there is statistically significant positive correlation (0.223) (1 -tailed) at the 0.05 level between the independent variable

PAGE 152

141 (predictor), having a Mission/Purpose Statement (MISSION 1) and the dependent variable, TQM criteria (CRITERIA). As the value of MISSION 1 increases towards 5, the value of CRITERIA also increases towards 5. The p value is 0.015 indicating that the correlation differs significantly from 0. Table 4-97. Correlations of MISSION 1 with CRITERIA Variable Pearson Correlation Significance (1 -tailed) N MISSIONl 0.223 0.015 96 The regression model summary in Table 4-98 shows that having a published mission statement (MISSIONl) is actually only a weak predictor of TQM criteria (CRITERIA). The R^ value is significant (0.050) and predicts a small portion (5.0%) of the variability in CRITERIA. The standard error (1 .0023) compares favorably with the standard deviation of CRITERIA (1 .0182). Table 4-98. Regression model summary of MISSIONl and CRITERIA Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.223 0.050 0.039 1.0023 Predictors: (Constant), MISSIONl The data in Table 4-99 shows that the F value (4.921) and therefore, it is statistically significant, indicating that the test that each coefficient is 0 is therefore rejected. The independent variable of having a published mission statement (MISSIONl) explains a small portion of the variation of the dependent variable for

PAGE 153

142 criteria (CRITERIA). The linear relationship between these variables is significant ( 0.029). Table 4-99. ANOVA of MISSION 1 and CRITERIA Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 4.921 1 4.921 4.899 0.029 Residual 94.429 94 1.005 Total 99.351 95 a Predictors: (Constant), MISSION 1 b Dependent Variable: CRITERIA Using the coefficients from Table 4-100 the estimated model is: CRITERIA = 3.003 + 0.470 MISSION 1 The predictors are useful since the t values of 17.727 and 2.213 satisfy the usefulness guidelines of either being above +2 or well below -2. Table 4-100. Coefficients of MISSION 1 and CRITERIA Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Model B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 3.003 0.169 17.727 0.00 MISSION 1 0.470 0.213 0.223 2.213 0.029 Dependent Variable: CRI' ERIA As the histogram shown in Figure 4-18 demonstrates that an organization's having a published mission statement (MISSION 1) is a positive predictor of the application of the various TQM criteria outlined in the study (CRITERIA).

PAGE 154

143 Dependent Variable: CRITERIA Predictor: MISSION 1 16 1412 10. 8. 6. nc 4. cr 2. f-> tin 0 Std. Dev = .99 Mean = 0.00 N = 96.00 -2.50-2.00-1.50-1.00 -.50 0.00 .50 1.00 1.50 2.00 -2.25-1.75-1.25 -.75 -.25 .25 .75 1.25 1.75 Regression Standardized Residual Figure 4-18. Histogram of having mission statement as a predictor of criteria The hypothesis H4 is accordingly not rejected that having a published mission or statement of purpose is a positive predictor of describing the position of companies with respect to various TQM criteria as they apply to them. H5: Employing TQM Persormel and Criteria Table 4-101 shows that there is statistically significant positive correlation (0.377) (1-tailed) at the 0.01 level between the independent variable (predictor), having a TQM staff (TQMSTAFl) and the dependent variable, TQM criteria (CRITERIA). As the value of TQMSTAFl increases towards 5, the value of CRITERIA also increases towards 5. The p value is < 0.0005 indicating that the correlation differs significantly Irom 0.

PAGE 155

144 Table 4-101. Correlations of TQMSTAFl with CRITERIA Variable Pearson Correlation Significance (1 -tailed) N TQMSTAFl 0.377 0.000 96 The regression model summary in Table 4-102 shows that TQMSTAFl is a strong predictor of CRITERIA. The R^ value is significant (0.142) and predicts a significant portion (14.2%) of the variability in CRITERIA. The standard error (0.9524) compares favorably with the standard deviation of CRITERIA (1.0182). Table 4-102. Regression mode summary of TQMSTAFl and CRITERIA Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.377 0.142 0.133 0.9524 Predictors: (Constant), TQMSl '^AFl Table 4-103 shows that the F value is not small (15.537) and therefore, statistically significant, indicating that the test that each coefficient is 0 is rejected. The independent variable (TQMSTAFl) explains a significant portion of the variation of the dependent variable (CRITERIA). The linear relationship between the variables is highly significant ( < 0.0005). Table 4-103. ANOVA of TQMSTAFl and CRITERIA Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 14.092 1 14.092 15.537 0.00 Residual 85.258 94 0.907 Total 99.351 95 a Predictors: (Constant), TQMSTAFl b Dependent Variable: CRITERIA

PAGE 156

145 As the histogram shown in Figure 4-19 demonstrates, employing a staff specifically dedicated to the implementation of TQM (TQMSTFl) is a positive predictor of the application of the various TQM criteria outlined in the study (CRITERIA). Dependent Variable: CRITERIA Predictor: TQMSTFl i 8 C7 0) 6 Std. Dev = .99 Mean = 0.00 N = 96.00 -2.25 -1.75 -1.25 -.75 -.25 .25 .75 1.25 1.75 -2.00 -1.50 -1.00 -.50 0.00 .50 1.00 1.50 2.00 Regression Standardized Residual Figure 4-19. Histogram of TQM staff as a predictor of criteria Using the coefficients from Table 4-104, the estimated model is: CRITERIA = 3.044 + 0.827 TQMSTAFl The predictors are useful since the / values of 25.964 and 3.942 satisfy the usefulness guidelines of either being above +2 or well below -2.

PAGE 157

146 Table 4-104. Coefficients of TQMSTAFl and CRITERIA Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Model B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 3.044 0.117 25.964 0.00 TQMSTAFl 0.827 0.210 0.377 3.942 0.00 The hypothesis H5 is accordingly not rejected that employing staff categorized as TQM personnel is a positive predictor of describing the position of companies with respect to various TQM criteria as they apply to them. H6: Length of Direct Involvement in Implementation of TQM The data in Table 4-105 show there is statistically significant positive correlation (0.397) (1-tailed) at the 0.01 level between the independent variable (predictor), length of TQM involvement (INVOLVE) and the dependent variable, TQM criteria (CRITERIA). As the value of INVOLVE increases towards 5, the value of CRITERIA also increases towards 5. The p value is 0.002 indicating that the correlation differs significantly from 0. Table 4-105. Correlations of INVOLVE with CRITERIA Variable Pearson Correlation Significance (1-tailed) N INVOLVE 0.397 0.002 50 The regression model summary in Table 4-106 shows that INVOLVE is a strong predictor of CRITERIA. The R^ value is significant (0.157) and predicts a significant portion (15.7%) of the variability in CRITERIA. The standard error (0.9281) compares favorably with the standard deviation of CRITERIA (1.0182).

PAGE 158

147 Table 4-106. Regression mode summary of INVOLVE and CRITERIA Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.397 0.157 0.140 0.9281 Predictors: (Constant), INVOLVE The data in Table 4-1 07 show that the F value is not small (8.972) and therefore, statistically significant, indicating that the test that each coefficient is 0 is rejected. The independent variable (INVOLVE) explains a significant portion of the variation of the dependent variable (CRITERIA). The linear relationship between the variables is significant (0.004). Table 4-107. ANOVA of INVOLVE and CRITERIA Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 7.729 1 7.729 8.972 0.004 Residual 41.348 48 0.861 Total 49.077 49 a Predictors: (Constant), INVOLVE b Dependent Variable: CRITERIA Using the coefficients from Table 4-108, the estimated model is: CRITERIA = 2.443 + 0.346 INVOLVE Table 4-108. Coefficients of INVOLVE and CRITERIA Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Model B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 2.443 0.313 7.799 0.000 INVOLVE 0.346 0.116 0.397 2.995 0.004 Dependent Variable: CRI' ERIA The predictors are useful since the t values of 1.199 and 2.995 satisfy the usefulness guidelines of either being above +2 or well below -2.

PAGE 159

148 As the histogram shown in Figure 4-20 demonstrates, employing a staff specifically dedicated to the implementation of TQM (TQMSTFl) is a positive predictor of the application of the various TQM criteria outlined in the study (CRITERIA). Dependent Variable: CRITERIA Predictor: INVOLVE! -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 Regression Standardized Residual Figure 4-20. Histogram of management involvement as a predictor of criteria A graphic demonstration of the positive relationship that exists between the length of time an organization is involved in TQM implementation and the response to the utilization of the various TQM criteria is shown in the Scatterplot in Figure 4-2 1 .

PAGE 160

149 6.00 5.00 4.00 o c 4-1 C a> E 0) I 3.00 > c o 2.00 S 1.00 .00 _ ^ 1 1 1.0 = < lyr. 2.0 =1-2 yrs. ; 3.0=3-4 yrs. j 4.0 => 4 yrs. " 2 3 TQM Criteria Utilization Figure 4-21. Length of Direct Involvement and TQM Criteria Utilization''' The hypothesis H6 is accordingly not rejected that the length of direct involvement in implementation of TQM is a positive predictor of describing the position of companies with respect to various TQM criteria as they apply to them. H7: Employing TQM Personnel and Problems Table 4-109 shows that there is statistically significant positive correlation (0.221) (1 -tailed) at the 0.05 level between the independent variable (predictor), TQM staff (TQMSTAFl) and the dependent variable, position of companies with regard to TQM problems (PROBLEMS). As the value of TQMSTAFl increases '"^ On the horizontal scale used, 1 = Totally Disagree, 2 = Generally Disagree, 3 = Somewhat Agree, 4 = Generally Agree, 5 = Totally Agree

PAGE 161

150 towards 5, the value of PROBLEMS also increases towards 5. The p value is 0.020 indicating that the correlation differs significantly from 0. Table 4-109. Correlations of TQMSTAFl with PROBLEMS Variable Pearson Correlation ISignificance h -tailed) N TQMSTAFl 0.221 1 0.020 87 The regression model summary in Table 4-110 shows that TQMSTAFl is a weak predictor of PROBLEMS. The R^ value is significant (0.049) and predicts a significant portion (4.9%) of the variability in PROBLEMS. The standard error (0.8607) compares favorably with the standard deviation of PROBLEMS (1.0182). Table 4-11 0. Regression mode summary of TQMSTAFl and PROBLEMS Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.221 0.049 0.038 0.8607 Predictors: (Constant), TQMSl rAFl From Table 4-111, it is evident that the F value is (4.382) and therefore, h is statistically significant, indicating that the test that each coefficient is 0 is rejected. The independent variable (TQMSTAFl) explains a portion of the variation of the dependent variable (PROBLEMS). The linear relationship between the variables is significant (0.039).

PAGE 162

151 Table 4-11 1. ANOVA of TQMSTAFl and PRO] BLEMS Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 3.247 1 3.247 4.382 0.039 Residual 62.975 85 0.741 Total 66.222 86 a Predictors: (Constant), TQMSTAFl b Dependent Variable: PROBLEMS As the histogram shown in Figure 4-22 demonstrates, employing a staff specifically dedicated to the implementation of TQM (TQMSTFl) is a positive predictor of the problems identified (PROBLEMS). Dependent Variable: PROBLEMS Predictor: TQMSTFl Std. Dev = .99 Mean = 0.00 N = 87.00 -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 Regression Standardized Residual Figure 4-22. Histogram of TQM staff as a predictor of problems Using the coefficients from Table 4-112, the estimated model is: PROBLEMS = 2.414 0.432 TQMSTAFl

PAGE 163

152 Table 4-112. Coefficients of TQMSTAFl and PROBLEMS Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Model B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 3.278 0.108 30.23 0.000 TQMSTAFl -0.432 0.206 -0.221 2.093 0.039 a Dependent Variable: PROBLEMS The predictors are useful since the t values of 30.23 and -2.093 satisfy the usefulness guidelines of either being above +2 or well below -2. The hypothesis H7 is accordingly not rejected that employing staff categorized as TQM personnel is a positive predictor of describing the position of companies with respect to various problems with implementing TQM in their field operations. H8: Direct Involvement in Implementation of TQM From Table 4-1 13, it is evident that there is stafistically significant negafive correlation (-0.293) (1 -tailed) at the 0.05 level between the independent variable (predictor), length of TQM involvement (INVOLVE 1) and the dependent variable, the position of companies related to TQM problems (PROBLEMS). As the value of INVOLVE increases towards 5, the value of PROBLEMS decreases towards 5. The p value is 0.023 indicating that the correlation differs significantly from 0. Table 4-113. Correlafions of INVOLVE 1 with PROBLEMS Variable Pearson Correlation Significance (1 -tailed) N INVOLVE -0.293 0.023 47 The regression model summary in Table 4-114 shows that INVOLVE 1 is a weak predictor of PROBLEMS. The Revalue is significant (0.086) and predicts a

PAGE 164

153 small portion (8.6%) of the variability in PROBLEMS. The standard error (0.8935) compares favorably with the standard deviation of PROBLEMS (1.0182). Table 4-11 4. Regression model summary of INVOLVE 1 and PROBLEMS Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.300 0.090 0.070 0.8916 Predictors: (Constant), INVOLVE 1 The data in Table 4-115 show that the F value (4.451) is significant, indicating that the test that each coefficient is 0 is rejected. The independent variable (INVOLVE 1) explains a portion of the variation of the dependent variable (PROBLEMS). The linear relationship between the variables is significant (0.040). Table 4-115. ANOVA of INVOLVE 1 and PROBLEMS Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 3.538 1 3.538 4.451 0.040 Residual 35.772 45 0.795 Total 39.310 46 a Predictors: (Constant), INVOLVE 1 b Dependent Variable: PROBLEMS Using the coefficients from Table 4-116, the estimated model is: PROBLEMS = 3.992 0.232 INVOLVEl Table 4-116. Coefficients of INVOLVE and PROBLEMS Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Model B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 3.992 0.298 13.395 0.000 INVOLVE -0.232 0.112 -0.293 -2.059 0.045 a Dependent Variable: PROBLEMS

PAGE 165

154 One of the predictors is useful since only the t value of 13.395 satisfies the usefulness guidelines of either being above +2 or well below -2. As the histogram shown in Figure 4-23 demonstrates, the length of involvement in TQM implementation (FNVOLVEl) is a positive predictor of the problems identified (PROBLEMS). Dependent Variable: PROBLEMS Predictor: INVOLVE! Std. Dev = .99 Mean = 0.00 N = 47.00 -3.00 -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 -2.50 -1.50 -.50 .50 1.50 Regression Standardized Residual Figure 4-23. Histogram of involvement in TQM as a predictor of problems The graphic demonstration of the negative relationship between the length of time a company is involved in TQM implementation and the Contractor responses to the various TQM problems is shown in Figure 4-24.

PAGE 166

155 6.00 s c o E > o > c o £ J O) c « 2 3 TQM Problems Figure 4-24. Length of Direct Involvement and TQM Problems'^ The hypothesis H8 is accordingly not rejected that the length of direct involvement in implementation of TQM is a negative predictor of describing the position of companies with respect to various problems with implementing TQM in their field operations. Key Predictors of TQM Criteria and TQM Problems The key issues, which were examined through the questionnaire, were the respondents positions with respect to the utilization of the various TQM criteria (CRITERIA) and the problems that they had experienced with implementation of TQM into their field operations (PROBLEMS). In order to determine the key predictors of TQM criteria (CRITERIA) and the position of companies related to 15 On the horizontal scale used, 1 = Totally Disagree, 2 = Generally Disagree, 3 Somewhat Agree, 4 = Generally Agree, 5 = Totally Agree

PAGE 167

156 TQM problems (PROBLEMS), the independent variables were tested with stepwise multiple linear regression. Stepwise multiple linear regression'^ is frequently used to determine how and whether independent variables should be entered into the multiple linear regression equation. The confidence level utilized for this analysis, as with all other statistical data in this study has been established at the ninety-five (95%) 1 7 percent confidence interval level, unless otherwise noted. Stepwise Regression Model for CRITERIA Stepwise regression analysis produced one (1) model for utilization of TQM criteria (CRITERIA), namely the establishment of a specific annually budget for implementation of TQM (BUDGET 1). The regression model summary in Table 4-117 shows that BUDGETl is a strong predictor of the utilization of CRITERIA. Table 4-117. Stepwise regression model summary for predictors of CRITERIA Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.418 0.175 0.158 0.9265 Predictors: (Constant), BUDGETl The stepwise method begins by entering into the model the variable that has the strongest positive or negative correlation with the dependent variable; and at each step, both add the variable with the strongest partial correlation. As each step, variables are tested for removal (SPSS, 1999). A confidence interval level for a population characteristic is an interval of plausible values for the characteristic. It is constructed so that, with a chosen degree of confidence, the value of the characteristic will be captured inside the interval.

PAGE 168

157 The value is 0.175 predicting a significant portion (15.8%) of the total variability in CRITERIA, using the adjusted R^ value. From Table 4-118, the F statistic is (9.979) for the model including BUDGET 1 and is therefore statistically significant, indicating that the test that each coefficient is 0 is rejected. The linear relationship is significant (p = 0.003), suggesting that there is only a 3 in 1 ,000 likelihood that this result was obtained by chance. Table 48 ANOVA for predictors of CRITERIA Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 8.566 1 8.566 9.979 0.003 Residual 40.342 47 0.858 Total 48.908 48 a Predictors: (Constant), BUDGET 1 b Dependent Variable: CRITERIA Using the coefficients from Table 4-119, the final model is CRITERIA = 3.026 + 0.907 BUDGETI Table 4-11 9. Coefficients for predictors o: CRITERIA Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Model B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 3.026 0.159 19.046 0.000 BUDGETI 0.907 0.287 0.418 3.159 0.003 Dependent Variable: CRITERIA The predictors are useful since the / values in the model satisfies the usefulness guidelines of either being above +2 or well below -2.

PAGE 169

158 Figure 425 graphically demonstrates the normal plot of regression for the standardized residual for this analysis. Dependent Variable: CRITERIA Key Predictor: BUDGET! Observed Cumulative Probability Figure 4-25. Normal Probability Plot of regression for standardized residuals Table 4-120 identifies each of the variables that were excluded in this stepwise regression analysis as the utilization of TQM principles (PRINl), having a formal TQM plan of implementation (PLANl), having a published mission statement (MISSION 1), employing a TQM staff (TQMSTAFl), and the length of management involvement in TQM implementation (FNVOLVEl).

PAGE 170

159 Table 4-120. Variables Excluded as predictors for CRITERIA Variable Excluded Beta In t Sig. Partial Correlation Co linearity Statistics Model Tolerance 1 PRINl .231 1.733 .090 .248 .950 PLANl .128 .849 .400 .124 .780 MlSSIONl .096 .687 .495 .101 .911 TQMSTAFl .029 .159 .874 .023 .550 INVOLVE 1 -.221 -1.607 .115 -.231 .896 a Predictors in the Model: (Constant), BUDGET 1 b Dependent Variable: CRITERIA Stepwise Regression Model for PROBLEMS While not as significant as the Stepwise regression model for CRITERIA, the Stepwise regression produced one (1) model for identification of problems inherent in TQM implementation (PROBLEMS), namely the involvement of top management in the TQM process (fNTVOLVEl). The regression model summary in Table 4-121 shows that INVOLVE 1 is the most significant predictor of PROBLEMS among the variables tested. While this predictor does not meet the criteria for a confidence level of ninety-five (95%) percent, as with CRITERIA, it would meet the confidence level of ninety (90%). It will be discussed in the next chapter how the responses to top management involvement and top management commitment were both ranked as of great importance in the implementation of TQM. Table 4-121. Stepwise regression model summary for predictors of CRITERIA Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 1 0.291 0.085 0.064 0.8976 Predictors: (Constant t), PROBLEMS

PAGE 171

160 The value is 0.085 predicting a significant portion (6.4%) of the total variability in PROBLEMS, using the adjusted R^ value. From Table 4-122, the F statistic is (4.085) for the model including INVOLVE 1 and is therefore statistically significant, indicating that the test that each coefficient is 0 is rejected. The linear relationship is significant {p = .049), suggesting that there is only a 49 in 1 ,000 likelihood that this result was obtained by chance. Table 4-122. ANOVA for predictors of PROBLEMS Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Regression 3.291 1 3.291 4.085 0.049 Residual 35.448 44 0.806 Total 38.738 45 a Predictors: (Constant), INVOLVE 1 b Dependent Variable: PROBLEMS Using the coefficients from Table 4-123, the final model is PROBLEMS = 3.270 + 0.571 INVOLVEl Table 4-123. Coefficients for predictors of PROBLEMS Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Model B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 3.270 0.161 20.287 0.000 INVOLVEl 0.571 0.282 0.291 2.021 0.049 Dependent Variable: PROBLEMS The predictors are useful since the t values in the model satisfies the usefulness guidelines of either being above +2 or well below -2.

PAGE 172

161 Figure 426 graphically demonstrates the plot of regression for the standardized residual for this analysis. Dependent Variable: PROBLEMS Key Predictor: INVOLVE 1 Observed Cumulative Probability Figure 4-26. Normal Probability Plot for standardized residuals Table 4-124 identifies the variables that were excluded in this analysis as utilization of TQM principles (PRFNl), having a formal TQM plan for implementation (PLANl), having a published mission statement (MISSION 1), employing a TQM staff (TQMSTAFl), and the length of involvement in TQM by management (INVOLVE 1).

PAGE 173

162 Table 4-124. Variables Excluded as predictors for PROBLEMS Variable Excluded Beta In t Sig. Partial Correlation Co linearity Statistics Model 1 olerance 1 PRINl 0.052 0.188 0.852 0.029 0.277 PLANl 0.125 0.697 0.489 0.106 0.659 BUDGET 1 -0.108 -0.710 0.482 -0.108 0.905 MISSION 1 0.137 0.883 0.382 0.133 0.864 TQMSTAFl -0.097 -0.590 0.558 -.0.090 0.788 a Predictors in the Model: (Constant), INVOLVE 1 b Dependent Variable: PROBLEMS In Chapter Five the results of the data analysis within this study, and the significance of the key predictors are discussed and compared with the reviewed literature.

PAGE 174

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS OF TQM SURVEY DATA ANALYSIS Introduction Through the utilization of both the initial TQM questionnaire, and the statistical analysis of the various responses of the contractors surveyed, certain key criteria and problems were determined to impact the utilization of TQM by general contractors in their field operations. In this chapter, the results of the data analysis will be discussed in conjunction with the findings of the literature search on the subject of total quality management as it is applied both across all industries, and specifically to construction. Formal TQM Plans vs. Utilization of TQM Principles The data from this study suggested that a significant number of construction companies utilized TQM principles but either did not embrace the concept totally or only used parts of TQM programs selectively. For example, a number of companies (23.9%) ufilized TQM principles but did not see the need for a formal TQM plan or had possibly stopped using one if they had previously done so (See Table 4-7). Additionally, a significant number (40.0%) of the companies that had formal TQM plans had no established TQM budget but had formal plans to implement TQM (See Table 4-1). 163

PAGE 175

164 The longer companies were involved with implementing TQM the more likely they were to have a formal TQM plan in place. Of the respondents who had TQM implementation plans, 61 .5% had been involved with TQM for more than 5 years. While only 26.6% of the respondents had established TQM budgets, 82.8% of these firms had formal TQM plans. This finding, in conjunction with the regression analysis, suggests that companies who are willing to commit resources to implementing TQM would most likely also have a formal plan in place to accomplished the desired results. However, 89.7% utilized TQM principles in their companies. Interestingly, 58.7% of the companies utilizing TQM did not have a TQM budget. Of those respondents (62.4%) who had a published mission or purpose statement, 48.5% had TQM plans in place while 64.7% utilized TQM principles in their daily operations. Similarly a minority of the respondents (46.8%)) employed a Human Resources (HR) manager. Of these 62.5% had TQM plans in place while 68.6% utilized TQM principles in their daily business activities. With respect to the employment of TQM personnel, only 29.4% of respondents employed TQM staff Of these 87.5% had TQM plans. However, 96.9% utilized TQM principles. These results suggest that most respondents regarded the utilization and implementation of TQM principles as being more relevant to them than merely having a TQM plan in place. However, having a TQM plan (FORMPLAN) was a better predictor of other variables than the utilization of TQM principles (PRINCIPL). The correlation between FORMPLAN and these variables was stronger than between

PAGE 176

165 PRINCIPL and the same variables. For example, while PRINCIPL predicted 15.1% of the variability of having a TQM budget, FORMPLAN predicts 33.1% of the variability. Similarly, FORMPLAN predicts 46.2% of the variability of employing TQM staff, PRINCIPL predicts 26.0%. Key Predictors Stepwise regression modeling identified two primary predictor s for the areas of the study, which reviewed the various criteria that comprise the utilization factors of TQM in an organization (CRITERIA) and the hindrances to TQM implementation (PROBLEMS). These were the establishment of a budget for implementation (BUDGET 1), and the involvement of top management in implementation (INVOLVE 1), respectively. Establishment of an Annual TQM Budget The Stepwise regression modeling undertaken substantiated that the strongest predictor of the position of companies to the utilization of the various TQM criteria (CRITERIA) was having an established annual budget (BUDGETl) for TQM implementation. This result is not surprising considering the competitive environment in which construction takes place and where the bottom line is still the primary motivation of construction companies. Top management is not going to spend its resources in areas that do not produce a positive impact on the financial statement of the organization. This fact is also confirmed from one of the earliest recorded manuscripts, The Holy Bible, which states in the book of Matthew, Chapter 6, Verse 21, that where you treasure is, there will your heart be also.

PAGE 177

166 If a company is willing to commit its resources to TQM, then they will be more likely to utilize the criteria of TQM in their operations. Further, companies are prepared to only implement those aspects of TQM programs that will provide them with competitive advantage and improve their overall financial performance. Ironically, research conducted by others (Zantanidis and Tsiotras, 1 998) has identified quality as being the most significant provider of competitive advantage. Construction companies clearly have not bought into this finding in their daily operations on site. In addition, the establishment of a budget represents an increased commitment, beyond merely involvement on the part of top management to implementation of TQM as evidenced by the identification of the hindrances to transfer of the principles of TQM to field operations. Management Involvement and Commitment The involvement of top management in TQM implementation (rNVOLVEl) was found to be the most significant predictor of the problems with the identification of the problems encountered in the transfer of TQM to the field operations (PROBLEMS). Even though the result of the analysis for PROBLEMS was not as strong as that of CRITERIA, it is still significant, particularly when considered in conjunction with the responses of the commitment of top management to the TQM process in their organizations. All of the respondents to the quesfionnaire survey which had formal TQM implementation plans regarded their top or senior management as both committed and involved in the TQM process as being important for the implementation of TQM to be

PAGE 178

167 successful (See Table 4-5). Unsurprisingly, companies who had formal plans in place for TQM implementation regarded these two issues as the highest ranking criteria or requirements for the successful implementation of TQM principles in their daily operations (See Table 4-6). Those who had no formal plans in place regarded top management's commitment and involvement as only slightly lower ranked than their focus on customers (See Table 4-14). This finding accords with those of several other studies (Reed et al., 2000; Kathuria and Davis, 1999; Miller, 1996; Anderson et al., 1994; Tata and Prasad, 1998; Douglas and Judge, 2001; Saraph et al., 1989; Rahman, 2001). Management leadership is regarded as one of the categories needed for adoption as determined by the Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Award in the United States. Further, this pivotal role of top management for quality improvement programs is embodied in the working definition of TQM for construction firms as outlined earlier in Chapter 2 which states, TQM is a continuous process whereby the top management of construction firms take whatever steps are necessary to enable everyone in the organization, especially construction field supervisors and construction workers in the course of executing all their activities on construction sites to establish and achieve standards, which include completion on time, within budget, to optimum quality standards, and without loss of life or limb, and exceed the needs and expectations of their clients, both internal and external. Several studies have shown that the lack of upper or top management's involvement and a commitment to TQM represents a major stumbling block to its successful implementation (Schriener et al., 1995: Glover, 2000) Customer Focus Both those contractors with formal TQM plans, and those without such plans regarded primary customer focus as the next most applied requirement for successful

PAGE 179

168 TQM implementation. Those who had formal TQM plans in place considered this criterion of TQM slightly less often than well developed planning throughout the company operations. However, companies that had no formal plans in place regarded it as even more important than top management involvement. Several authors by definition consider customer focus as equally important as upper management involvement and commitment to TQM principles (Kelemen, 2000; BS 4778, 1991; Anfuso, 1994; AGC, 1992). In many studies, the issue of customer satisfaction or focus featured prominently as a defining concept or critical element of TQM implementation (Anderson et al., 1994; Shammas-Toma et al., 1998; Tata and Prasad, 1998; Douglas and Judge, 2001; Black and Porter, 1996; Rahman, 2001). Participative Management Style While planning also ranked as an important issue in the implementation of TQM, participative management was an equally important criteria to the respondents. This finding is well-supported in the literature (Kathuria and Davis, 1 999; Young and Wilkinson, 2001 ; Ho et al., 2000; Stashevsky and Elizur, 2000). The importance of participative management is suggested by the notions of relationship oriented practices (Kathuria and Davis, 1999), employee fulfillment (Anderson et al., 1994), teamwork (Shammas-Toma et al., 1998; Black and Porter, 1996), employee involvement, empowerment and teamwork (Tata and Prasad, 1998; Population Reports, 1998), employee relations (Saraph et al., 1989), people (Rahman, 2001; Yusof and Aspinwall, 2000), and human resource development and development (MBNQA). The lack of integration between TQM and human resource practices has been cited as a major barrier to achieving full-blown TQM (Glover, 2000).

PAGE 180

169 Transfer of TQM from the Home Office to Field Operations The data from Table 4-1 indicates that most of the companies with formal TQM plans (92.5%) had made efforts to implement the principles of TQM within their management operations. Relatively few of these same firms (12.6%) reported that they had been successful in transferring this effort to their field operations as indicated in Table 4-7. Unless TQM can be effectively implemented into field operations on site its benefits to the construction industry will, by and large, be of minimal effect. Since profits and losses are generated by construction activities on the project sites, the improvement efforts of both profitability and quality have to be targeted at this essential area. In construction the majority of a company's workers are employed on construction sites, as opposed to the home office. Several authors maintain that workers need to be trained in, empowered to make decisions, and actively involved in TQM principles. They have argued for a shift in power from home office management to field operations (Richbell and Rasiatou, 1999); increased involvement of workers and increased contextual application of TQM principles (Glover, 2000); increased training of both supervisors and hourly paid workers (Kassicieh and Yourstone, 1998; Chandler, 2000); and increased training in problem-solving and statistical process control (Marler, 1998). The following key elements were found to be major hindrances to the transfer of TQM from the contractors' home offices to the field operations of construction companies:

PAGE 181

170 • Too much paperwork; • Transient nature of workforce; • Field employees regard TQM as irrelevant; • Difficulty in measuring results; • Low bid subcontracting; and • Subcontractors and suppliers not being interested in TQM. • Each of these problem areas that have been identified through the questionnaire and the data analysis is briefly discussed in the next section. Too Much Paperwork Table 4-7 again demonstrates that most of the respondents with formal plans in the sample (82.1%) regarded the generation of too much paperwork through implementation of TQM principles as the most inhibiting issue to its success in the field. Most construction projects already involve large amounts of paperwork in the form of communications, change orders and requests for information. These include voluminous contract documents, records of plans and amendments, architects' instructions, steel bending schedules, change orders, forms to record the requisition, order, delivery and movement of material, plant and labor, and material safety data sheets to name just a few. Several authors support the view that too much paperwork creates difficulty in construction. Harari (1993a and 1993b) was concerned about the creation of cumbersome bureaucracies due to increases in paperwork to track the benefits of TQM programs. Lilrank et al. (2001) argue that excessive paperwork is prohibitive.

PAGE 182

171 Transient Nature of Workforce Similarly, most of the respondents with formal plans (76.3%) stated that the transient nature of the workforce was restrictive to the implementation of TQM on construction sites. By its nature construction to a certain degree necessitates a transient workforce. Each project is built on a new construction site. Usually that site is not close to where workers had previously worked. Consequently workers will seek employment closer to home or have to relocate where this is not possible. Crosby (1990) suggests that companies need to work as hard on employee relationships as they do on their customer interfaces. Field Employees Regard TQM as Irrelevant A large proportion of respondents with formal plans (78.3% of the sample) indicated that workers on construction regarded TQM as irrelevant to their performance. Schriener et al. (1995) suggested that obsession with the bottom line and seeing quality as merely an overhead might be contributory to this attitude. Further the exclusion of employees from quality improvement efforts and especially decision making relative to this improvement is a serious problem (Richbell and Rasiatou, 1999; Chandler, 2000; Senge et al., 1994). Other exacerbating factors include lack of proper training and continuous skills development (Katz, 1995; Wruck and Jensen, 1998; Reed et al., 2000), difficulty in generalizing training to opportunities to apply what has been taught (Marler, 1 998), motivation of workers to want to improve their work (Hackman and Wageman, 1995; Katzenbach, 2000), and effective communication and project coordination (Shammas-Toma et al., 1998). Both

PAGE 183

172 construction managers and workers require a paradigm shift to a team approach (Shammas-Toma et al., 1998; Allan and Kilmann, 2001; Reed et al., 2000). Difficulty in Measuring Results Again, a review of Table 4-7 indicates that most of the formal TQM plan respondents (76.4%) noted the difficulty in measuring results on construction sites as problematic for TQM implementation on those sites. Schriener et al. (1995) have suggested the lack of meaningful measurements as a major stumbling block. Whalen and Rahim (1994) and most TQM patriarchs from Deming to Juran echo these views. The assessment of quality is cited in the Malcolm Baldridge Award as being a critical feature of TQM (George and Weimerskirch, 1998). Wruck and Jensen (1998) suggested several performance measurement systems that could be used such as construction cycle time, late delivery rates, and order lead times. Low Bid Subcontracting Similarly, most of the firms with formal TQM plans (71.8%) reported that low bid subcontracting presented a serious challenge to the successful implementation of TQM on construction sites. Low bid strategies have been the basis for awarding the majority of construction projects, especially subcontracts. This occurs despite the general contract being awarded on a different basis. The fourth point of Deming specifically advises that the practice of awarding business on price tag alone should be ended (Table 2-1). Schriener et al. (1995) also refer to this issue when they describe the obsession of companies with the bottom line as a stumbling block to TQM. Shammas-Toma et al. (1998) support this view. Glover (2000) refers to this tendency as business short-termism. According to Lahndt (1999), the construction industry's

PAGE 184

173 inherent competitive bid process and competitive environment has led to an emphasis on quick work and short time horizons, and a lack of long term viability and quality. Subcontractors and Suppliers Not Interested in TQM This issue was identified as a major problem to overcome by the majority of those with formal TQM plans (69.2%), only slightly below that of low bid subcontracting. For a TQM program to be successful, it has to be all-inclusive and comprehensive. In the overall sample, 26 of the 109 of respondents (See Table 4-9) indicated that they utilized TQM principles in their operations but did not have any formal TQM plans in place confirming the tendency of firms to only use selected parts of TQM programs. Wruck and Jensen (1998) and Douglas and Judge (2001) argue that the implementation of only selected parts of TQM programs threatens its successful implementation. Reed et al. (2000) contend that cross-functional communication that in the case of construction must include subcontractors and suppliers is necessary to solve quality problems. Shammas-Toma et al. (1998) suggest that effective teamwork is essential. To this end they argue that all parties must be bound together by mutually set and internalized goals rather than by contractual arrangements alone. The development of quality teams on the job site will lead to better support and quicker response to all members of the supply chain. By being part of quality teams subcontractors and suppliers will be more responsive to the needs of the general contractor, becoming more cooperative and displaying a better performance record (Wong and Fung, 1999). Subcontractors should be treated as partners (Kanji and

PAGE 185

174 Wong, 1998). As such they must be provided with all the information and support to enable them to carry out their work. A participatory approach to project management involving all parties, both internally and externally, as in the case of subcontractors and suppliers, is advocated by the ClOB (1995) based on evidence identified in studies related to the Japanese construction industry. Ulrich et al. (1999) maintain that the value of the whole should be more than the sum of its parts. Kale and Arditi, (2001) point out that the general contractor to be successful must consider the subcontractors and suppliers on the project as a strategic asset critical to the project, and the ultimate perceived performance of the general contractor by the customer. It is apparent that if TQM is to be implemented successfully on construction sites the issues that have been discussed need to be addressed on a comprehensive and integrative basis. In Chapter Six the findings of the focus group questionnaire survey and follow-up discussions are presented and compared to both the literature search and the research undertaken based upon the initial questionnaire of the overall industry.

PAGE 186

CHAPTER 6 IMPROVING TQM IN FIELD OPERATIONS Introduction In order to establish a list of proposals to improve the implementation of TQM in field operations the establishment of a focus group of twelve (12) General Contractors known to be active in the area of continuous quality improvement was determined to be an important step in this study. The development of the questionnaire discussed in detail in Chapter 3 was in direct response to the findings of the initial survey of the larger sample of 109 contractors. The questions were designed with two purposes. The first purpose of the questionnaire was to quantify with direct "yes" or "no" answers their position relative to the problem areas identified in the initial survey. The second portion of a number of the questions was designed to elicit a detailed response as to steps their organization may have taken to reduce the impact of this problem within their organization. This chapter presents and discusses the results of these findings. Management Commitment Of the 12 participants, eleven (1 1) of the respondents, or (91 .6%) indicated that management was committed to implementing the principles of TQM in the daily operations of their businesses. This result is shown in Figure 6-1. 175

PAGE 187

176 Management commitment 92% No management commitment 8% Figure 6-1 . Extent of management commitment to TQM principles The commitment of management is demonstrated in several ways. These include the following: • Setting up special structures and forums such as Quality Steering Teams (QST), Lean Construction Steering Teams (LCST) and committees that direct all initiatives relative to quality improvements. Management through their own personal involvement and commitment of resources supports these structures. In one instance 50 cents per man hour of all labor is spent on quality initiatives. • Establishing and supporting special training forums such as company universities, annual company seminars, bi-annual company wide strategic planning sessions, company wide and project weekly training meetings, and continuing education programs. • Setting standards in the form of a formal written document endorsed and supported by management of the highest quality for every aspect of the company that includes and involves every employee. Of the eleven (11) respondents who answered this question, nine (9), or (82%) indicated that the style of management in their companies was participatory involving all employees, only one ( 1 ) of the firms (9%) indicated that they had a top down authoritarian management style and one (1) other (9%) indicated that their management style was hierarchical. In this last case the company had a

PAGE 188

177 clearly defined organizational chart developed for growth and promotion of its employees. This result is shown graphically in Figure 6-2. In one case the management style is authoritarian or top down only when important initiatives are being implemented and all employees are expected to participate in their implementation. Generally, employees are required and expected to participate in the TQM process. In one instance the company management believe that every employee is a "take-charge problem solver." Another company believes its management are "hands on" leaders who embrace a team approach in which everyone in the company contributes to provide the best possible outcome for clients. One company used many of their general workers to lead and take responsibility for quality control sessions. Hierarchical 9% Authoritarian 9% Participatory 82% Figure 6-2. Distribution of management styles

PAGE 189

178 Almost all of the respondents (91%) indicated that the actions of the top management in their companies were consistent with their commitment to TQM. The consistency of this commitment is demonstrated in several ways by the respondents such as the following: • Involvement in Quality Operating Systems (QOS); • Commitment of financial resources; and • Employee driven programs supported and directed by upper management. This result is shown in Figure 6-3. Inconsistent management actions 9% Consistent management actions 91% Figure 6-3. Consistency of management actions relative to commitment to TQM In response to the question of whether top management had been willing to shift power to construction site operations, eight (8) of the respondents (73%) indicated that there was such a willingness in their companies, one (1) of the organizations (9%) indicated that there had not been a complete willingness of this

PAGE 190

179 notion, and the remaining two (2) firms (18%) indicated that there was an unwillingness to shift power to the construction site, where the work must be put into place. This result is shown in Figure 6-4. Not completely No 18% 73% Figure 6-4. Willingness of management to shift power to construction site operations This willingness is expressed in several ways. In almost all the cases a certain amount of autonomy was given to project and on site management teams. One company reported that decisions by these teams were driven by Safety, Quality and Productivity. Another stressed that construction site staff had been trained to be an extension of upper management. A company emphasized that the jobsite was where "the rubber meets the road."

PAGE 191

180 Focus on Customer Needs and Expectations All the respondents confirmed that their daily operations were driven by a focus on customer needs and expectations. This process is facilitated in some cases by project work being negotiated directly with the client and the contractor being appointed at the same time as the design team is appointed. In this way the project specifics of the client are established early and the contractors' systems are then tailored to meet these needs or expectations of the customer. One participant in the focus group reported that they consistently develop a "Job Site Quality Plan " (JSQP) for each project that outlines and identifies the steps needs to meet or exceed the expectations of the client. Included in each such plan is fimely followup on customer feedback and satisfaction with the service that they have received.. One company identifies at the outset of construction certain overall project objectives and involves the field staff in their formulation. These objectives are reviewed with the client and agreed upon in advance. Project staff are then responsible for achieving the objectives and to advise all parties if any impediments arise that would prevent their achievement. Another company indicated that focusing on their customer needs and meeting or exceeding expectations was their "culture and reputation." Their stated intent was to make raving fans out of their customers. Activities that one company engaged in to meet clients' objectives include bi-annual customer surveys, architect/engineer roundtables to discuss issues and potential solutions, and similar subcontractor roundtables designed to improve the

PAGE 192

181 performance of both the general contractor and the performance of the subcontractors related to the construction of their projects.. Worker Participation and Empowerment Figure 6-5 shows that in 83% of the companies participating in the focus group indicated that their workers, which were actually assigned to the construction sites, were empowered to make decisions relating to qualitj' improvement measures. In one instance the ideas of one of the foremen resulted in a significant cost savings to both the general contractor and the owner.. In addition, the owner received an improved final product and increased quality control. Figure 6-5. Extent of empowerment of workers to make quality decisions The project being constructed was a timeshare building where there was a "false" balcony that consisted of a 6" projection of the concrete slab at the sliding

PAGE 193

182 glass doors. The projection had a handrail mounted on top and was interrelated with the associated exterior siding and trim of the facade. This particular detail created a number of difficulties relative to the concrete structure, aesthetics of the exterior siding and trim and waterproofing the building envelope. Additionally, it was labor intensive due to its complexity. One of the foremen suggested a creative alternative that was recommended to the client and architect. The suggestion reduced the labor intensity of the work involved, saving time and increasing productivity. It created a better waterproofing envelope giving the client a better product. The change made only minor changes to the aesthetics of the facade pleasing the architect. Prior to commencing any new construction activity in one company, foremen meet with their crews to ensure that the work could be performed safely and to the best quality standards possible. On one project field staff devised a barricading and access plan for a very tight site that allowed a difficult demolition process to occur more efficiently and safely. According to another company, "Every person on our staff is encouraged to find a better, or efficient way to achieve the best result for the client. Creative, 'outside-the-box' thinking is what keeps companies fresh and distinguishes our company from the rest of the competition." One other firm indicated that their jobsite staff was held accountable for the end quality of the project and for the customer's satisfaction. Therefore, since they are to be held accountable, they were likewise given the responsibility and were empowered with the authority to insure that the quality delivered equaled or exceeded the customer's expectations.

PAGE 194

183 The focus group questionnaire and subsequent discussions indicated that in 73% of the companies construction workers were empowered to stop work operations on the project site if quaHty problems arose. This finding is shown in Figure 6-6. Figure 6-6. Extent of empowerment of workers to stop work operations As shown in Figure 6-7, 46% of the focus group companies, which participated in the survey, provide extensive and broad-based training in the use of quality tools and techniques to their construction supervisors and workers assigned to the project site. In one of the firms , representing 9% of the companies responding, all of the firm's supervisors and selected other workers were provided quality training. The remaining 45% of the firms acknowledged that they provide no specific training in quality tools and techniques to their field employees.

PAGE 195

184 Selective training provided 9% Training provided 46% No training provided 45% Figure 6-7. Extent of training provided to construction supervisors and workers As shown in Figure 6-8, slightly more than one-half of the companies (58%) experienced problems with transferring TQM to their construction sites. The companies who had overcome the problematic nature of transferring TQM to their field operations did so in a number of ways. For example, one firm ensured that all their project staff had been appropriately trained to deal with TQM prior to the efforts at putting it in place on their project sites. This organization had effectively used several different training forums to accomplish this goal. They had developed what they considered their in-house company university, project managers' conferences, project superintendents' conferences, pre-job meefings, post-job meetings, on-going seminars, and follow-up by management to assure that the TQM process was becoming an integral part of their field operations. Transfer of TQM to Construction Sites

PAGE 196

185 Two other companies indicated that they used constant reinforcement and encouragement by top management to demonstrate their commitment to TQM's success. Another firm stated that they had developed and used various TQM procedures manuals for implementation guidelines. Non-problematic transfer 42% Problematic transfer 58% Figure 6-8. Extent of problems with transfer of TQM to construction sites The companies who had encountered problems with the transfer of TQM experienced these for a number of different reasons. These included the following examples of the problems faced: • Belief that the TQM process was more important than the outcomes; • Lack of control over subcontractor employees; • Bureaucratic nature of TQM training and procedures; • Low bidding subcontractors with no focus on quality; • Lack of time to meet and transfer knowledge; • Unwillingness of clients to pay more for improved quality; and • Shortage of adequately trained workers.

PAGE 197

186 Paperwork Most of the companies (75%) did not encounter problems with too much paperwork resulting from implementing TQM in their companies. This result is shown in Figure 6-9. While acknowledging that more paperwork is generated, some companies were looking at ways to reduce paperwork where possible or at least make them easier to work with. Others have opted for replacing paperwork by using electronic retrieval and storage media such as PDAs and PCs. Paperwork problem Problem 75% Figure 6-9. Extent that too much paperwork is a problem Transient Nature of Construction Workforce Many companies (58%) experienced problems in implementing TQM in the field as a result of the transient nature of their work force (see Figure 6-10). This problem is being addressed in different ways such as the following: • Working with trade unions to train workers in TQM;

PAGE 198

187 • Retaining employees within companies for longer periods and reducing turnover; • Training and re-training new workers and then keeping them; • Motivate workers to remain through jobsite awards; and • Ensuring that workloads are manageable and equitable. Figure 6-10. Extent of problem with transient nature of workforce Relevance of TQM to Construction Workers As shown in Figure 6-11, three-quarters of the companies (75%) stated that their construction workers did not regard TQM as irrelevant to their daily activities and performance. In some companies workers understood the importance of client satisfaction and delivering what they commit to deliver. Qther participants in the focus group conducted regular reviews to ensure that TQM remains relevant and important. Assistant superintendents, project superintendents, division managers, regional superintendents and vice-presidents of operations usually conducted these reviews.

PAGE 199

188 In one company workers who produced inferior work were assigned to remediation activities that are less desirable than their normal tasks. By so doing these workers were exposed to the time and expense of remedying bad work. Irrelevant Figure 6-11. Relevance of TQM to construction workers Measurement of Quality Improvements A large proportion of companies (67%) experienced difficulties in measuring quality improvements on construction sites. This result is shown in Figure 6-12. These problems were overcome in the following ways: • Formulation of project specific goals for quality that are used to measure the performance of the work force; • Focusing on overall performance standards such as schedule, safety, level of construction quality, client satisfaction, and profitability; • Daily and weekly inspections by superintendents who "have a keen eye for quality" as part of "problem solving, quality oriented management;" • Customer Surveys of Satisfaction; and • "Do it right the first time" attitude of workers.

PAGE 200

189 Companies used a wide range of performance measures to measure quality improvements or the status of quality initiatives on their construction projects. One company has "sacrificed the empirical performance measures in a strict TQM program and have instead focused our efforts on trying to improve the product in the field as opposed to trying to develop creative ways of measuring quality improvement." Figure 6-12. Extent of difficulties experienced with measuring quality improvements The following is a list of the various performance measures used by companies: Operations: • Size and complexity of punch lists versus previous projects; • Subcontractor performance evaluations incomplete; • Project schedule has been communicated and understood by customer; • Extra and disputed work quotes resolution not resolved; • Total number of OFI's submitted; No Difficulties Experienced 33% •'Difficulties Experienced 67%

PAGE 201

190 • Total number of CIM's submitted; • Extent of worker participation; • Level of training of all staff versus total number of employees; • Number of subcontractor roundtables; and • Number of Architect/Engineer roundtables. Estimating: • New awards; and • Quantity and quality of opportunities. Sales: • Sales by customer/market; and • Awards vs. Goals. • Human Resources: • Hours of training; • Cost of training; and • Performance evaluations percent complete. Accounting • Actual costs incurred versus budget; and • Owners/Payment not current. • Information Technology: • Computer deployment. Legal: New and current challenged subcontract items; and Cost incurred for subcontract management. Quality Combined operations measurements; Audit report/non-conformances; Customer feedback; and Level of construction quality. Safety Incident and frequency rates; Jobsite safety statistics; Subcontractor safety incidents; and

PAGE 202

191 • Hours lost for accidents versus total hours worked. Subcontractor and Supplier Interest in TQM More than half the companies (58%) indicated that their subcontractors and suppliers were not interested in TQM. One company overcame this problem through a pre-qualification of subcontractors. "We know who the performers and the non-performers are. In certain instances we will not only specify what subcontractor [we] will have on any particular job but we will also specify who the foreman, superintendent and project manager will be and that will be written into their contract." According to another company, "most subcontractors are interested in getting paid as much and as soon as possible with as marginal performance as they can get away with. During the finalizing of a subcontract we attempt to ensure that the complete scope of work is clearly defined, the schedule clear and other contract conditions clearly understood. We then push hard to make them perform pursuant to their agreement." Another company when dealing with subcontractors echoes this type of action, "some subs we must control contractually. In the case of some others, we make as decision not to use them again in the future. But most often, we just monitor their performance very carefully." Another contractor suggested that the goal of most subcontractors "is to complete the work contracted in the least amount of time for the least amount of money, which in itself is not wrong, however unless tightly managed, quality is in many instances an afterthought if considered at all."

PAGE 203

192 Figure 6-13. Level of interest of subcontractors and suppliers in TQM The rankings in Table 6-1 show that quality ranks third behind previous performance and price with respect to criteria used to select subcontractors and suppliers. Table 6-1. Ranking of criteria to select subcontractors and suppliers Firm Price Previous Delivery Quality Safety Reputation Credit Performance Time Record Worthiness 1 2 1 3 4 6 5 7 2 1 7 4 5 2 3 6 3 3 1 5 4 6 2 7 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 5* 5 2 3 4 6 1 7 6 2 1 4 5 3 6 7 7 2 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 4 1 5 3 6 2 7 9 1 5 2 3 4 6 7 10 2 3 6 1 4 5 7 11 2 1 4 3 5 6 7 12 2 1 3 5 4 6 7 Average 2.25 2.16 3.75 3.75 4.67 4.50 6.91 Rank 2 1 3 3 6 5 7 *We have bund t tiat we can learn much about a subcontractor through our use of references.

PAGE 204

193 This result of the focus group responses to the ranking of subcontractor and supplier criteria is shown graphically in Figure 6-14. Price Previous Delivery Tinie Quality Safety record Reputation Credit Performance Worthiness Criteria Figure 6-14. Average ranking of selection criteria for subcontractors and suppliers One company responded that if, based upon previous performance, a subcontractor's delivery time and quality were bad, that the subcontractor or supplier would not be used again. In their organization, they stated with regard to a poor subcontractor "Price makes no difference." Most companies (75%) included or consulted with their field construction supervisors before the awarding of subcontracts and selecting suppliers of materials. This result is shown in Figure 6-15. One company indicated that while vice-presidents and project managers made the final decisions, project

PAGE 205

194 superintendents were asked to provide input on their experiences with subcontractors and into the scope of work to be performed by the subcontractors selected.. Not Consulted or Involved 25% Involved 75% Figure 6-15. Extent of involvement of construction supervisors in award process Other Focus Group Comments Most of the companies provided additional comments to their overall responses. Some of these are included in this section. For anonymity and privacy reasons the identities of the companies are not given. Company A "We do not see the implementation of TQM on construction sites as being important to our overall success. [Company A] is committed to the production of quality projects, but we use other means to meet this end. For instance, developing a written preplan and following this plan is an extremely important tactic that we

PAGE 206

195 use on all projects. The plan includes construction means and methods, site utilization plans, staffing charts, safety programs, partnering objectives, etc., which are all important targets that must be met to insure a successful project. Our struggle with TQM is the regimented process that must be followed. Using the process appears, to us, to have little impact on how our work is actually constructed." Company B "The greatest suggestion that 1 can have relative to the implementation of TQM is to try to find a more flexible program that has grass roots within each of the individual construction entities such that they can have a format, guideline or template to develop their own quality control program whereby when completed they feel that they are the owner and the author of the program instead of a program that is canned or out of a book, or somebody else's program that they are being forced to use." Company C "I see the overall interest in TQM waning. I don't see most of our customers as willing to pay what they perceive as a premium for guaranteeing quality. They often just believe that all contractors will deliver about the same quality regardless of their programs for quality. We are unfortunately in a price driven business." Company D "I think it has to be first driven by the Owner where they understand the cost implication and are committed to the result and so the General Contractor understands the requirement and is able to select the team based on this priority.

PAGE 207

196 Unfortunately in many areas of construction the end user may not appreciate the result or be willing to pay the cost differential." Company E "If it's not a part of the culture and everyday practices of the company, it will just become the "program du jour" and doesn't stand a chance of success." Company F "It starts at the top. . .if management promotes TQM and reinforces its commitment to the staff, TQM will be an integral part of the company's culture." Company G "There has to be a "Quality Culture" developed on the jobsite an attitude an attention to detail We must break down the barriers between the team members Architects, Owners Reps, and Subcontractors should be in touch with each other so they work to achieve the goals of the Project instead of working at conflicting interests. Quality begins at the top of the pyramid but many times the Culture never gets down to where the "rubber meets the road". At [Company G] we hold what we call "Executive Level Progress Meeting every four to six weeks with all the principals of the firms involved. We meet for about an hour and a half and we talk about our performance as a team. Everyone is charged with creating an atmosphere of cooperation, quality, and safety, which extends down to the workmen on the site. The workmen need to be given feedback." In the following chapter the study is summarized, concluded and a recommended agenda for future research is presented.

PAGE 208

CHAPTER 7 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction Throughout this study the research has been directed at identifying the hindrances to and factors that may improve the use of Total Quality Management in the construction industry. In this chapter, those factors will be reviewed and summarized. In addition, certain conclusions will be stated, along with specific proposals to improve TQM implementation in field operations. Finally, this chapter shall incorporate recommendations for future studies on this subject. Review of Study Objectives This study of the commercial contracting industry had two primary objectives, 1) to identity those factors that hinder the implementation of the principles of Total Quality Management (TQM) in the actual field operations of a construction jobsite; and, 2) to formulate proposals for implementation of the principles of TQM in field operations at the level of the Field Superintendent and below. The study excluded those markets traditionally considered as industrial or single-family housing. This chapter summarizes the findings of the study, draws conclusions and makes recommendations for future study relative to each of these objectives. Hindrances to TQM Implementation on Construction Sites Unless TQM can be effectively implemented into field operations on site its benefits to the construction industry at large will be minimal. Quality improvement 197

PAGE 209

198 efforts have to be directed at construction activities on site since that is where profits and losses are generated. Most of the workers of construction companies are employed on construction sites. These workers need to be empowered and involved in TQM principles. Therefore there is a need for a shift in power from management to field operations, increased involvement of workers and increased contextual application of TQM principles; increased training of supervisors and hourly paid workers; and increased training in problem-solving and statistical process control. The lack of upper or top management involvement or commitment to TQM in their companies is a major obstacle to its successful implementation. Without the support of the top management of construction companies, any program of change or improvement is destined to fail In a number of studies, the issue of customer satisfaction or focus featured prominently as a defining concept or critical element of TQM implementation. Through implementing the principles of TQM on construction sites it is possible to meet the project objectives and satisfy or exceed the expectations of clients. The lack of participative management has been identified as a serious hindrance to TQM. However, success can be achieved through programs that involve workers at all levels of quality improvement initiatives and programs. These efforts should focus on relationship oriented practices, greater employee involvement, empowerment and teamwork, employee relations, and human resource development and development. The lack of integration between TQM and human resource practices has been cited as a major barrier to achieving full-blown TQM. While many construction companies direct their TQM efforts at improving their home office operations, it is necessary that these efforts be expanded to include

PAGE 210

199 their construction sites. The literature review established that for the maximum benefit of TQM to be gained its principles needed to be introduced comprehensively and company wide. This study identified the following items as major hindrances to the transfer of TQM to the field operations of construction companies: • Annual budget for TQM implementation • Management commitment and involvement; • Customer focus; • Participative management style; • Transfer of TQM to field operations; • Too much paperwork; • Transient nature of workforce; • Field employees regard TQM as irrelevant; • Difficulty in measuring results; • Low bid subcontracting; and • Subcontractors and suppliers not interested in TQM. In addition to those hindrances identified consistently by the respondents, there were addition items identified as areas in which means of mitigating their effect could be beneficial to the construction industry. These factors included: • Low education of the construction field work forces • Contractor focus on short-term savings • Project schedules that are too tight to allow TQM implementation • Lack of benchmarking opportunities in construction These findings support the reviewed literature and the results of the survey administered to the focus group of construction companies. A comparison with those factors identified by other studies on TQM application to other industries is shown Table 7-1. While those studies did not focus specifically on TQM implementation in construction, it is noteworthy that the majority of the factors identified in this study were also noted by the authors listed in Table 7-1.

PAGE 211

200 Hindrance Whiteman Survey Annual TQM Budget Management Commitment TQM Irrelevant to Field Employees Difficulty in Measuring Results Low Bid Subcontracting Subcontractor & Suppliers Not Interested Low Education Level of Field Employees Focus on Short term Savings Lack of Benchmarking Opporutinities Low education of the construction field work forces Saraph et al. (1988) Douglas and Judge, (2001) Anderson et al., (1994) ShammasToma et al. (1998) Tata and Prasad (1998) Population Reports (1998) Project Schedules are Too Short

PAGE 212

201 Table 7-1 . Matrix of TQM Hindrances in Construction Recommendations to Improve TQM Implementation on Construction Sites The study identified a number of sound principles, that if followed will improve the transfer of the TQM process from the home office of a construction organization to the project site. These were shown to include: Establishment of an annual TQM budget The research conducted in this study demonstrated that one of the key predictors of the successful implementation of TQM principles is the establishment of an adequate annual budget to provide the resources for consistent and continuous quality improvement on construction sites. With such a budget, the organization would be able to develop the skills of their staff to such a degree that a "Quality Culture" would begin to emerge within the firm. This budget is pivotal to enable the TQM action plan to be effectively and successfully executed. The focus group survey highlighted several practical measures that form the basis of the action plan to reduce the impact of the hindrances to the implementation of TQM on construction sites. These are outlined below in a list that is not by any means exhaustive: Management involvement and commitment • Develop a participatory management style throughout the company that allows for the involvement of all construction workers in the TQM process; • Ensure that the actions of management are consistent with their commitment to TQM; • Establish quality forums on which management serves, to direct all quality improvement initiatives such as Quality Steering Teams (QSTs) that include construction site supervisors and other site workers; • Establish and/or support training forums and programs such as regular seminars and continuing education programs that provide specific training in TQM principles by making resources available for all construction site workers to participate in;

PAGE 213

202 • Produce a formal written document covering all aspects of quality for every aspect of construction site activities engaged in by the company; and • Give a certain amount of autonomy to project and site management teams. Focus on Customer Needs and Expectations • Revise the basis on which work is obtained to allow the company to be appointed at the same time as the design team is appointed; • Develop project specific quality plans to meet or exceed the expectations of clients that facilitate timely follow up on client feedback and satisfaction; • Involve construction supervisors and construction workers in the formulation of these overall project objectives; • Conduct regular customer surveys; and • Arrange regular roundtables with subcontractors. Worker Participation • Provide extensive and broad-based training to all construction supervisors and site workers in the principles of TQM; • Ensure that construction foremen and supervisors meet with their crews before commencing any new construction activity to ensure that it can be carried out safely and to the highest possible quality standards; • Empower trained construction workers to make decisions relative to quality improvement; and • Empower these workers to stop work when quality problems arise. Transfer TQM to Construction Sites • Use different training forums to ensure that all construction supervisors and workers are able to deal with TQM; • Arrange regular quality meetings with construction site staff such as pre-job and post-job meetings; and • Produce various simple and user-friendly quality procedures manuals. Paperwork • Investigate ways to reduce paperwork and make paper documents easier to deal with; and • Consider replacing paperwork by using electronic retrieval and storage media such as PDAs and PCs. Transient Nature of Workers • Work with unions and other General Contractor and Subcontractor trade associations to train workers in TQM; • Retrain existing workers to keep them in companies for longer periods to reduce turnover;

PAGE 214

203 • Train new workers and keep them employed; • Develop jobsite award systems to motivate workers to remain with the company; • Ensure manageable and equitable workloads; Relevance of TQM to Workers • Conduct regular reviews with construction workers to ensure that TQM remains relevant and important; and • Expose poorly performing workers to remediation activities and the time and expense of remedying bad work. Measurement of Quality Improvements • Formulate project specific and measurable goals for quality; • Focus on overall performance measures such as schedule, safety, level of construction quality, customer satisfaction and profitability; • Conduct daily and weekly quality inspections; • Carry out regular customer satisfaction surveys; and • Promote a "do it right the first time" attitude among construction workers. Subcontractor and Supplier Interest in TQM • Pre-qualify subcontractors and suppliers by make quality the most important criteria used to select them; • Clearly define the full scope of the work to be done or service to be provided; • Ensure that the schedule is clear and other contract conditions are clearly understood such as quality standards and penalties for non-conformance; • Consult with construction supervisors before awarding any subcontracts and selecting suppliers. Additional Considerations Several additional things became clear through the use of the industry survey and the follow-up focus group survey and discussions. These issues relate directly to the implementafion of Total Quality Management in the field operations of a construcfion company. This study demonstrates that the majority of the responding General Contractors are interested in the implementation of TQM within their organizations,

PAGE 215

204 but that their roadblocks to success are in some cases deemed to be beyond their direct control. The elements of TQM over which they could exert control included top management's involvement and commitment, acceptance of the importance of a participative management style, empowerment and training of their own employees, the reduction of paperwork, and development of a customer focused culture throughout their company. In addition to the proposals outlined in this chapter, the areas of TQM that seem to provide the greatest remaining obstacles to the construction industry are those over which the General Contractor has a limited ability to exert significant control or to influence their outcome. The total group of organizations involved in the development, design, and construction process on most projects can generally be divided into four basic categories • the Owner • the Design Team • the General Contractor or Construction Manager • the Subcontractors and Suppliers It was found that Owners for the most part were not willing to pay a perceived higher price for quality, choosing the lowest price rather than the best price. This mindset of contracting for the lowest initial cost then forces the General Contractor into a similar selection process with their subcontractors and suppliers. Likewise, the Design Team is too often price driven in the development cost of their plans, and do not incorporate all of the information needed to effect a quality installation without major revisions and clarifications. Once all of the revisions and

PAGE 216

205 change orders are incorporated into the cost, the Owner no longer has the either the lowest price, or the best price that they could have achieved had they utilized a more effective construction process. The Subcontractor and Supplier industry was reported in the study to generally be interested only in providing what is required of them for the lowest price, since this is the method by which they are typically retained for the project. Change orders for each and every detail overlooked in the design and establishment of the scope of work for the subcontractor are to be expected when using a selection process involving low bid contracting. Recommendations for Future Research This study recommends four major areas of future study to improve the implementation of Total Quality Management's success in the construction industry: General Observations Future studies on the subject of TQM in construction should undertake to evaluate companies on the basis of a number of factors that this study did not incorporate in significant detail. This would include reviewing TQM implementatin based upon: • Size of companies being surveyed, by categories • Number of employees, by position • Union vs. Non-union operations • Annual budgets for TQM implementation In addition, survey questions should be developed which provide analysis over a wide range of variables such that the results will demonstrate the manner in which the companies of different sizes, number of employees, and other such criteria can be accurately identified.

PAGE 217

206 General Contractor TQM studies Based upon the surveys conducted and the research incorporated in this study, there are a number of additional topics which should be studied to improve the implementation of TQM in the construction industry. The studies, which are recommended, include the following topics. Annual TQM Budgets for TQM Implementation Since the greatest indicator of TQM utilization was found to be the establishment of an annual TQM budget, it would appear that additional study should be undertaken to determine the level of annual expenditures that will allow an effective TQM program to be developed in a construction organization. This would include a study of those firms which have successfully implemented TQM into their field operations, and would review their training methods, the staff costs which are dedicated to implementation, and what percentage of the overall annual volume of a firm can financially be dedicated to quality improvement. Elimination of Non-Essential Paperwork One of the major concerns identified by the respondents were that there is too much paperwork in the traditional TQM process. Contractors repeatedly voiced concern that traditional TQM efforts seem to focus too much of their efforts at paperwork documentation rather than on the improvement of quality in their field operations. An area of future study that is recommended is to determine effective means to reduce the required paperwork in the TQM process for construction to the documentation of only those documents that are essential to improving the quality of the completed components. It was noted by several of the focus group participants that they had gone to a "lean enterprise" as it related to paperwork, and that they were

PAGE 218

207 focusing on measurement of the key elements of the project. This study should also focus on the establishment of paperwork methods that can be documented by those working in the field with a minimum of training in TQM analysis. TQM Measurement Methods for Construction Most of the contractors surveyed were still reliant upon the "keen eye" of their superintendents to focus on quality, and were exerting little effort in developming key measures of quality performance, and that there is difficulty in measuring results for a number of stated reasons. Identifying key areas in which quality improvement can be measured is an area in which the construction industry could be greatly improved. Such a study would include a review of those means that have been found to be effective in accomplishing this leaner TQM process without compromising measurement of results. Success in this area might also result in an improvement in the attitude demonstrated by the survey responses which stated that many field workers considered quality management irrelevant to their measure of performance. TQM Training Programs for Field Construction Staff In this regard, studies should be undertaken to develop a TQM orientation and training program for the typical construction workers located at the project site. Much has been written about TQM for managers, but very little was identified specifically for those employed in the skilled and unskilled trades that put in place the majority of the work in the field. Even though only a few of the responding firms were primarily union operations, it seems that there have been efforts made on the part of both management and labor in those construction market areas which are predominately dominated by union labor forces to provide elementary training in the TQM process. A review of these and other such field worker based training programs could form the

PAGE 219

208 basis for a study on the methods to improve worker participation and interest in Total Quality Management. Customer TQM studies The second major area of study recommended includes conducting surveys of the Customers and Owners who acquire construction services to determine the implementation of TQM into their organizations. This study should include determining whether these buyers have or consider requiring their contractors to maintain a program of quality management. The study should attempt to quantify the success of TQM where firms have required its usage, as compared to those that buy construction services solely based upon price. In addition, these studies could investigate areas such as the level of perceived quality improvement, cost savings and early completions that are associated with those Owner which have utilized construction organizations that have TQM implemented into their field operations, as compared to those that do not have such programs. Design Team TQM studies The third area of study should be a review of all of the Design disciplines within the construction industry to see if there have been any efforts at implementation of TQM into their operations. Much was found in the literature search on TQM as applied across all industries, but somewhat less related to TQM in construction. Far less, in fact, very little was found that dealt primarily with the design disciplines. It is clear, that ambiguous, uncoordinated, and incomplete plans represent an opportunity for quality failure in the field. Studies in this area would compare areas such as the number of requests for information (RFI's), change orders, and delays associated with

PAGE 220

209 design changes required as a result of the failure to have complete drawings and specifications prepared at the time of construction commencement. Subcontractor and Supplier TQM studies The final area of study that is recommended is that of the Subcontractor and Supplier involvement in the quality management of a construction project. Most General Contractors today subcontract out the majority of the work to be performed on the jobsite. Yet, the study shows that low bid subcontracting still is a prevalent problem within the industry. In addition, it was found that most subcontractors do not have an interest in TQM, finding it too cumbersome for them to implement. A study of contractors and subcontractors that have worked together to overcome this problem would be beneficial to others who are still relying primarily on award to the lowest bidder regardless of qualifications or quality management principles of the firm.

PAGE 221

APPENDIX A COVER LETTER USED IN TQM SURVEY OF GENERAL CONTRACTORS Date: Contractor Principal's Name: Company Name: Street Address: Suite (if applicable): City: State: Zip Code: Dear (Contractor's Name): The few minutes that it will take you to complete the enclosed TQM Survey of General Contractors will be time that will result in the completion of a study on the effectiveness of the principles of Total Quality Management (TQM) in the construction industry. This study is being performed as part of a Doctoral Dissertation on the subject: The Application of Total Quality Management at the Construction Field Supervisory Level The principles of TQM have been widely successful in industries other than construction, and in certain aspects of the construction industry as well. However, it seems that the transfer of the TQM techniques used to improve quality and production in other areas, have not as yet been successfully applied to the field operations of the construction jobsite. The purpose of this study is to identify the hindrances to implementation of TQM principles in construction field operations, and to determine means to improve its application to our industry. Please take a few minutes to complete the enclosed Contractor Survey, and return it in the enclosed stamped self-addressed envelope to the University of Florida's M. E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction. 210

PAGE 222

211 Contractor Name: Date: Page Two: Your assistance in this effort will be greatly appreciated. Should you wish to receive a summary copy of the results of this study, please complete the company information portion of the enclosed survey. Thank you again for your participation. Sincerely, Daniel E. Whiteman Ph.D. Candidate

PAGE 223

APPENDIX B TQM SURVEY OF GENERAL CONTRACTORS This survey is being prepared for the purpose of assisting in research at the University of Florida's M.E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction on the use of Total Quality Management (TQM) methods in the construction industry. Particular emphasis in this research study is on the use, or lack thereof of TQM methods by Field Supervisory Personnel. [Please take a few moments and complete this survey and provide any information that you can. Return it in the enclosed postage paid envelope.] A. Current Usage of TQM Methods: 1 . Does your company utilize the principles of TQM in its management operation? Yes No 2. Does your company have a formal plan of implementation of TQM principles? Yes No 3. Does your company have an established budget for implementation of TQM? Yes No 4. Does your company have a published Mission/Purpose Statement? Yes No 5. Does your company have a Human Resources Manager? Yes No 6. Does your company have a TQM Director, Consultant or other position responsible for implementation of the principles of TQM? Yes No 212

PAGE 224

213 7. How long has your company been involved directly in implementation of TQM? Less than 1 year 1-2 years 3-4 years More than 5 years 8. Please identify those employees in your company which have received special TQM training: Job Position Total Number Total Number Trained of Employees in TQM Executive Administrative Project Managers Project Superintendents Foremen Labor force 9a. Annual Budget for implementation of TQM (If applicable). Less than $10,000 $10,000 to $25,000 $25,000 to $50,000 $50,000 to $ 1 00,000 $100,000 to $250,000 Greater than $250,000 9b. What portion of above Annual Budget does your company spend on outside consultant(s)? % 10. What financial support does the company provide for Continuing Education of the following employee groups? Job Position None 1-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-100% Executive Administrative Project Managers Project Superintendents Foremen Labor force

PAGE 225

214 1 1 . How would you describe your company's position to the following TQM criteria? (1 = Totally Disagree, 2 = Generally Disagree, 3 = Somewhat Agree, 4 = Generally Agree, 5 = Totally Agree) A Top Management is Committed 1 2 3 4 5 B Top Management personally involved in TQM 1 2 3 4 5 C Plarming is well developed throughout the company, with action to make improvements in each area of operation 1 2 3 4 5 D The focus is primary on the customer, including customer feedback to improve operations within each area of operation 1 2 3 4 5 E Each employee is continually trained in TQM procedures 1 2 3 4 5 F Employees are rewarded for specific contributions to the TQM efforts within the company 1 2 3 4 5 G Participative management style is evident in all areas of operations employees are enthusiastic about TQM and its potential to improve the company 1 2 3 4 5 H Continuous improvement measurements are taken for all operations and used consistently in areas of quality, service, and efficiency of all operations 1 2 3 4 5 I Total Quality Management measures are applied to all field operations including work performed by company employees and subcontractors, and in material management 1 2 3 4 5 B. Implementation of TQM Principles in the Construction Field Operations: Please rate the following statements on the scale: (1 = Totally Disagree, 2 = Generally Disagree, 3 = Somewhat Agree, 4 = Generally Agree, 5 = Totally Agree)

PAGE 226

215 12. Problem areas to the application of TQM in field operations include: A Too much paperwork to complete 2 3 4 5 B Education level of the field forces is too low 2 3 4 5 C Field employees consider TQM irrelevant to their performance 2 3 4 5 D Difficulty in measuring results 2 3 4 5 E Workforce is too transient to maintain a trained team 1 2 3 4 5 F Construction is too unique to obtain consistent measurement 1 2 3 4 5 G Too many uncontrollable factors (e.g. poor management) 1 2 3 4 5 H Too much focus is on short term cost savings to implement in field 1 2 3 4 5 I Purchasing of subcontracts is based predominantly on low bid 1 2 3 4 5 J Scheduling of projects is too tight to 11 i' * 1 J.1 T^/^H It allow time for in depth TQM 1 2 3 4 5 K Subcontractors and suppliers are not interested in TQM 2 3 4 5 L TQM is just a "Buzz Word" and doesn't really mean anything 2 3 4 5 M No available construction operations to benchmark for implementation 2 3 4 5 13. Transfer of the application of TQM fi-om the home office to the field operations of the General Contractor's own workforce, including subcontractors, and suppliers has not kept pace with other industries. 1 2 3 4 5 14. If you have a predominately Union labor force or subcontractor base please complete the following questions: A Union leaders are supportive of the application of TQM principles 1 2 3 4 5 B Union leaders consider TQM to be a threat to their authority 1 2 3 4 5 C Union leaders believe TQM to be simply a way to reduce labor cost 1 2 3 4 5 D Union leaders believe TQM leads to unreasonable productivity levels 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 227

216 15. Other hindrances you have found to implementation of TQM into your field operations includes: C. If your organization already has a TQM program: 16. What benefits has it provided to your company? 1 7. What obstacles has your company experienced during its implementation? 1 8. How can we improve its implementation? D. Company Profile: 19. What is the size of your company in annual volume? Less than $ 1 0 million $ 1 0-25 million $25-1 00 million Over $100 million

PAGE 228

217 20. Type of work: % Residential (Single Family) Family) % Commercial % Residential (Multi% Institutional % Industrial 2 1 . Company Labor Force: Total Number of Employees Non-union 22. Subcontractor Labor Force: Non-union 23. Corporate Ownership: Sole Proprietor 2-5 Stockholders More than 10 Publicly Held _% Other (Specify) % Union % Union % % 6-10 Stockholders E. Optional: If you would like to have a summary of the results of the survey, or would be willing to discuss your interest in this area further, then please provide us with the following: Company name: Contact: Title of person completing survey: Years in current position: Years of construction experience: Company address: Phone Number: Fax Number:

PAGE 229

APPENDIX C COVER LETTER USED IN TQM SURVEY OF FOCUS GROUP Date: Contractor Name & Address: Dear (Contractor's Name): I want to thank you for agreeing to take your valuable time to participate in a discussion of the application of the principles of Total Quality Management (TQM) within your organization. Your contribution to this research is the major step in a study on the effectiveness of transferring the principles of TQM from the home office to the field operations within the construction industry. This study is being performed as part of a Doctoral Dissertation within the M. E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction at the University of Florida entitled: "The Application of Total Quality Management in Construction Field Operations" Previously, over 100 contractors from across the nation participated in a survey to identify the hindrances to implementation of TQM principles in construction field operations. With these hindrances now identified, it is important to see how a select group of contractors who are committed to the principles of TQM have made efforts to overcome these stumbling blocks to successfully implementing quality management in their field operations. Enclosed for your review is the TQM Focus Group Questionnaire, which I would like to discuss with you during the next week. There is no need for you to complete the survey, I will do this as a part of our discussion. I will give you a call later this week to establish a time frame convenient to you in which to discuss the efforts of your firm in overcoming the specific hindrances which you have found in the implementation of these principles within your organization. Again, thank you for your participation. Sincerely, Daniel E. Whiteman Ph.D. Candidate 218

PAGE 230

APPENDIX D TQM FOCUS GROUP SURVEY Demographic Information Name of company , Name of respondent Title or position in company Company address Phone number Fax number E-mail address 1 . Is management committed to implementing the principles of TQM in the daily operations of your business? If no, skip to Question 9. Yes No 2. Describe how management demonstrates this commitment 3. Would you describe the style of management in your company as being participatory, authoritarian or hierarchical? Participatory Authoritarian Hierarchical 219

PAGE 231

220 4. Explain the basis of your response 5. Are the actions of management consistent with their commitment to TQM? Yes No 6. Explain the basis of your response 7. Has management been willing to shift power away fi-om management to construction site operations? Yes No 8. If yes, describe how this was achieved 9. Are the daily operations of your company driven by a focus on customer needs and expectations? If no, skip to Question 1 1 . Yes No 10. Describe some of the strategies used by your company 1 1 . Are workers on construction sites empowered to make decisions relating to quality improvement? If no, skip to Question 15 Yes No

PAGE 232

221 12. Provide examples of this empowerment 13. Are workers empowered to stop work operations if quality problems arise? Yes No 14. Are construction supervisors and workers on sites provided with extensive and broad-based training in the use of quality tools and techniques? Yes No 15. Has the transfer of TQM to construction sites been problematic in your company? If yes, skip to Question 17 Yes No 16. Describe the steps taken by your company 17. Provide reasons why this transfer has been problematic 18. Is too much paperwork resulting from implementing TQM a problem in your company? If no, skip to Question 20 Yes No 19. Describe the steps taken by your company to overcome this problem 20. Has the transient nature of your construction workforce been a problem in implementing TQM in the field? If no, skip to Question 22 Yes No

PAGE 233

222 21 . Describe the steps taken by your company to overcome this problem 22. Do your construction workers regard TQM as irrelevant to their daily activities and performance? If no, skip to Question 24 Yes No 23. Describe the steps taken by your company to overcome this problem 24. Have you experienced difficulties in measuring quality improvements on construction sites? If no, skip to Question 27 Yes No 25. Describe the steps taken by your company to overcome this problem 26. List the performance measures used in your company 27. Have you found that your subcontractors and suppliers are just not interested in TQM? If no, skip to Question 29 Yes No

PAGE 234

223 28. How did you overcome this problem? Rank the following criteria with respect to selecting subcontractors and suppliers on construction projects in order of importance (1= most important, 2= less important, etc.): Price Previous performance Delivery time Quality Safety record Reputation Credit terms or days of credit 30. Are construction supervisors consulted or involved in the award process? Yes No Additional comments In the space below provide any comments and/or suggestions to improve the implementation of TQM on construction sites Thank you for your contribution to improving the construction industry in the United States and the rest of the world. Please return the completed questionnaire to: Daniel E. Whiteman, 3007 S W 1 92"'' Avenue, MIRAMAR, FL 33029 e-mail: Dan9969(a),aol.com Telephone: (305) 559-4900, Mobile: (305) 796-3251, Facsimile: (954) 447-3798

PAGE 235

APPENDIX E TOP TEN ITEMS MENTIONED AS AREAS TO OVERCOME IF TQM IS TO BE SUCCESSFUL: 1 . Management commitment and involvement 2. Customer focus 3. Participative management style 4. Transfer of TQM to field operations 5. Too much paperwork 6. Transient nature of workforce 7. Field employees regard TQM as irrelevant 8. Difficulty in measuring results 9. Low bid subcontracting 10. Subcontractors and suppliers not interested in TQM 224

PAGE 236

LIST OF REFERENCES The Associated General Contractors of America (1992): An Introduction to Total Quality Management, Washington, D. C, AGC of America Ahmad, L and Sein, M. (1997): "Construction Project Teams for TQM: A Factor-Element Impact Model", Construction Management and Economics, Volume 15, pp. 457-467 Allen, R.S. and Kilmann, R.H. (2001): "Aligning Reward Practices in Support of Total Quality Management," Business Horizons, Volume 44, Issue 3, pp. 77-84 Anderson, J.C., Rungtunsanatham, M. and Schroeder, R.G. (1994): "A Theory of Quality Management Underlying the Deming Management Method," Academy of Management Review, Volume 19, Number 3, pp. 472-509 Anfiiso, D. (1994): "L.L. Bean's TQM Efforts put People before Processes," Personnel Journal, July, pp. 72-83 Berger, J. (2000): "The Health and Safety Protection Plan and the File Containing Features of the Building According to EEC Directive 92/57" In Coble, Haupt and Hinze (eds.): The Management of Construction Safety and Health, Rotterdam, A. A. Balkema, pp. 39-46 Black, S.A. and Porter, L.J. (1996): "Identification of the Critical Factors of TQM", Decision Sciences, Volume 27, pp. 1-21 Brewster, C.J. and Richbell, S. (1983): "Industrial Relations Policy and Managerial Custom and Practice," Industrial Relations Journal, Volume 14, pp. 22-3 1 Brown, M. D. (1993): "Why Does Quality Fail in Two out of Three Tries", Journal for Quality and Participation ", Volume 16, Issue 2, pp. 80-89 Bryman, A. and Cramer, D. (2001/Qualitative Data Analysis with SPSS for Windows A Guide for Social Scientists, London, Routledge Publishing BS 4778:Part 2 (1991): Quality Vocabulary: Quality Concepts and Related Definitions, London, British Standards Institution Cameron, K.S. and Smart, K. (2001): "The Importance of the Quality Culture," Intercom, Volume 48, Issue 5, pp. 41-42 225

PAGE 237

226 Chandler, G.N. (2000): "Human Resource Management, TQM and Firm Performance in Small and Medium-Size Enterprises," Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, Volume 25, Issue 1, pp. 43-5.7 Chartered Institute of Building (1995): Time for Real Improvement: Learning from Best Practice in Japanese Construction, Research and development Report, Ascot, CIOB Chase, Gerald G.W. (1993): Implementing TQM in a Construction Company, Washington D.C., AGC Publications, pp. 10-13 Cohen, L. and HoUiday, M. (1982), Statistics for Social Scientists, London, Harper & Row Construction Industry Institute (1999): "Project Specific Employee Incentives", Based on a Report from Task Force 140, Austin, Texas, June, 1999, pp. 1-4. Cjou, F. (1999): "The Industry's New Year Resolution More On-Site Training, Reed Business Information, Ltd, January, pp. 12-16 Crosby, P. (1990): Let's Talk Quality, New York, McGraw-Hill Dahlgaard, S.M.P. (1999): "The Evolution Patterns of Quality Management: Some Reflections on the Quality Movement," Total Quality Management, Volume 10, Issue 4/5, pp. 473-4.80 Davis, K. (2000): "Implications of the Relationship between Construction Quality and Safety," In Coble, Hinze and Haupt (eds.): Construction Safety and Health Management, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, pp. 145-168 Dean, J.W. and Bowen, D.E. (1994): "Management Theory and Total Quality: Improving Research and Practice through Theory Development," Academy of Management Review, Volume 19, pp. 392-4.18 Detert, J.R. (2000): "A Framework for Linking Culture and Improvement Initiatives in Organizations," Academy of Management Review, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp. 850-863 Devore, J. and Peck, R. (1993): Statistics The Exploration and Analysis of Data, Cahfomia, Wadworth Publishing, p. 90 Dooley, K.J. and Flor, R.E. (1998): "Perceptions of Success and Failure in TQM Initiatives," Journal of Quality Management, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp. 157-174 Douglas, T.J., Judge Jr., W.Q. (2001): "Total Quality Management Implementation and Competitive Advantage: The Role of Structural Control and Exploration," Academy of Management Journal, Volume 44, Issue 1, pp. 158-169

PAGE 238

227 Easton, G.S.; Jarrell, S. L. (1998): "The effects of total quality management on corporate performance: an empirical investigation," The Journal of Business; Volume71, Number 2, pp. 253 -307 Eskildsen, J.K. (2000): "A Causal Model for Employee Satisfaction," Total Quality Management, Volume 11, Issue 8, pp. 1081-1094 Ferber, R., Sheatsley, P., Turner, A. and Waksberg, J. (1980): What is a Survey? Washington, D.C., American Statistical Association Fisher, D., Miertschin, S. and Pollock, D.J. (1995): "Benchmarking in the Construction Industry," Journal of Management in Engineering, Volume 1 1, Number 1, pp. 50-57 George, S. and Weimerskirch, A. (1998): Total Quality Management: Strategies and Technologies Proven at Today's Most Successful Companies, New York, John Wiley and Sons Glover, L. (2000): "Neither Poison nor Panacea: Shop Floor Responses to TQM," Employee Relations, Volume 22, Issue 1/2, pp. 121-141 Hackman, R. and Wagerman, R. (1995): "Total Quality Management: Empirical, Conceptual, and Practical Issues," Administrative Science Quarterly, Volume 40, pp. 203-270 Harari, O. (1993a): "Ten Reasons Why TQM Doesn't Work," Management Review, Volume 82, Number l,pp. 33-3.8 Harari, 0. (1993b): "The Eleventh Reason Why TQM Doesn't Work," Management Review, Volume 82, Number 5, pp. 26-29 Hart, D.R. (1994): Quality Handbook for the Architectural, Engineering and Construction Community, Milwaukee, ASQC Quality Press Hayes, R.H. (1981): "Why Japanese Factories Work," Harvard Business Review, Volume 59, July-August, pp. 57-66 Hinze, J.W. (1997): Construction Safety, Prentice-Hall, Inc., New Jersey Ho, D.C.K., Cheng, E.W.L., and Fong, P.S.W. (2000): "Integration of Value Analysis and Total Quality Management: The Way Ahead in the Next Milleimium," Total Quality Management, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp. 179-186 Huq, Z. and Martin, T. (2000): "Workforce Cultural Factors in TQM/CQI Implementation in Hospitals", Health Care Management Review, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp. 80-94 Huff, J.O. (1998): "Quality = Commitment," Textile World, Volume 148, Issue 10, pp. 29

PAGE 239

228 Jonas, P. (1996): "The Missing Letter in TQM," Occupational Health and Safety, Volume 65, Number 3, pp. 18-19 Kale, S. and Arditi, D. (2001): "General Contractors' Relationships with Subcontractors: A Strategic Asset", Construction Management and Economics, Volume 19, Issue 5, pp. 541-550 Kols, A.J. and Sherman, J.E. (1998): "Principles of Quality Management," Population Reports, John Hopkins University, Volume 26, Number 3, pp. 13-16 Kanji, G. and Wong, A. (1998): "Quality Culture in the Construction Industry," Total Quality Management, Volume 9, Issue 4/5, pp. 133-140 Kassicieh, S.K. and Yourstone, S.A. (1998): "Training, Performance Evaluation, Rewards, and TQM Implementation Success," Journal of Quality Management, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp. 25-38 Kathuria, R. and Davis, E.B. (1999): "Quality and Work Force Management: From Manufacturing Managers' Perspective," Journal of Quality Management, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp. 147-166 Katz, A. (1993): "Eight TQM Pitfalls," Journal for Quality and Participation, Volume 16, Number 4, pp. 24-2.7 Katzenbach, J.R. (2000): Peak Performance, Harvard Business Press Kelemen, M. (2000): "Too Much or Too Little Ambiguity: The Language of Total Quality Management," Journal of Management Studies, Volume 37, Issue 4, pp. 485-498 Korukonda, A.R., Watson, J.G. and Rajkumar, T.M. (1999): "Beyond Teams and Empowerment: A Counterpoint to Two Common Precepts in TQM," S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal, Volume 64, Issue 1, pp. 29-36 Krizan, W.G. and Winston, S. (1998): "Scarcity of Skilled Workers will put Brakes on Growth," Engineering News Record, January, pp. 95-96 Lahndt, L. (1999): "TQM Tools for the Construction Industry," Engineering Management Journal, Volume 1 1 , Number 2, pp. 23-27 Landesberg, P. (1999): "In the Beginning, there were Deming and Juran," Journal of Quality and Participation, Volume 22, Issue 6, pp. 59-61 Leavitt, T. (1988): "The Improving Organization," Harvard Business Review, January, pp. 7 Levitt, R.E. and Samelson, N.M. (1993): Construction Safety Management, New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

PAGE 240

229 Likert, R. (1967): The Human Organization, New York, McGraw-Hill, pp. 20-40. Lilrank, P., Shani, A.B., and Lindberg, P. (2001): "Continuous Improvement: Exploring Alternative Organizational Designs," Total Quality Management, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp. 41-54 Love, P.E.D. and Heng, L. (2000): "Total Quality Management and the Learning Organization: A Dialogue for Change in Construction," Construction Management and Economics, Volume 18, Issue 3, pp. 321-331 MacDonald, J. (1993): "Bridge the Inhibiting Gap," Managing Service Quality, September, pp. 55-58 Manser, J. (1998): "TQM: A Contractor's Perspective." /«/er/ace, February, pp. 11-12 Manzella, J.C. (1997): "Achieving Safety performance Excellence through Total Quality Management," Professional Safety, Volume 42, Number5, pp. 26-29 Marler, J. H. (1998): "The Effect of TQM Training, Flexible Work, and Flexible Technology on Continuous Improvement," Journal of Quality Management, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp. 241-266 May, T. (1997): Social Research: Issues, methods and process, Buckingham, Open University Press Miller, W.J. (1996): "A Working Definition for TQM Researchers," Journal of Quality Management, Volume 1, pp. 149-159 Mohanty, R. P. (1998): "Understanding the integrated linkage: Quality and productivity," Total Quality Management; Volume 9, Issue 8, pp. 753 Moon, C. and Swaffin-Smith, C. (1998): "Total Quality Management and New Patterns of Work: Is there Life beyond Empowerment?" Total Quality Management, Volume 9, Issue 2/3, pp. 301-310 Oakland, J.S. (1993): Total Quality Management, London, Butterworth-Heinemann Porteous, W.A. (1999): 'Characteristics of the Building Industry and its Clients,' Global Building Model in the Next Millennium Convention, 12-15 April 1999 Rahman, S. (2001): "Total Quality Management Practices and Business Outcome Evidence from Small and Medium Enterprises in Western Australia," Total Quality Management, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp. 201-210 Reed, R., Lemak, D.J. and Mero, N.P. (2000): "Total Quality Management and Sustainable Competitive Advantage," Journal of Quality Management, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp. 526

PAGE 241

230 Richbell, S. and Ratsiatou, I. (1999): "Establishing a Shared Vision under Total Quality Management; Theory and Practice," Total Quality Management, Volume 10, Issue 4/5, pp. 684-6.89 Romani, P.N. (1997): "MBO by any other name is still MBO," Supervision, Volume 58, Issue 12, pp. 6-8 Saraph, J.V., Benson, P.G. and Schroeder, R.G. (1988): "An Instrument for Measuring the Critical Factors of Quality Management," Decision Sciences, Volume 20, pp. 810-828 Saunders, I. W. and Graham, M. A. (1992): "Total Quality Management in the Hospitality Industry", Total Quality Management, Volume 3, Issue 3, pp. 1A3-1A6 Schneider, S. (1993): An Agenda for Change, Report of the National Conference on Ergonomics, Safety, and Health in Construction, Center to Protect Workers' Rights, Washington, D.C., 18-22 July Senge, P., Kleimer, A., Roberts, C. and Smith, B. (1994): The Fifth Discipline Handbook, New York, Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group Shammas-Toma, M., Seymour, D.E., and Clark, L.A. (1998): "Obstacles to Implementing Total Quality Management in the UK Construction Industry," Construction Management and Economics, Volume 16, Issue 2, pp. 177193 Shani, A.B. and Mitki, Y. (1994): "Roadblocks to Total Quality Management Implementation: A Cross-Cultural Investigation," Total Quality Management, Volume 5, Issue 6, pp. 407-416 Shea, CM. and Howell, J.M. (1998): "Organizational Antecedents to the Successful Implementation of Total Quality Management: A Social Cognitive Perspective," Journal of Quality Management, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp. 3-2.4 Shriener. Angelo and McManamy, (1995): "Total Quality Management Struggles into a Low Orbit," ^M?, May 15, pp. 24-2.8 Schuman, H. and Presser, S. (1981): Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys Experiments on question form, wording, and context. New York, Academic Press Slockblower, R. and Brown, R.D. (1993): "TQM Case: The Dewatering of Algiers Lock," The Military Engineer, November-December, pp. 1 1 Smallwood, J. and Haupt, T (2000): "Safety and Health Team Building," In Coble, Hinze and Haupt (eds.): Construction Safety and Health Management, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, pp. 115-144 Sommerville, J. (1994): "Multivariate Barriers to Total Quality Management within the Construction Industry," Total Quality Management, Volume 5, Issue 5, pp. 289-298

PAGE 242

231 Sonquist, J.A., and Dunkelberg, W.C. (1977;.Survey and Opinion Research: Procedures for processing and Analysis, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, Inc. SPSS, Inc. (1999): SPSS Base 10.0 Application Guide, Chicago, SPSS. Stashevsky, S. and Elizur, D. (2000): "The Effect of Quality Management and Participation in Decision-making on Individual Performance," Journal of Quality Management, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp. 53-6.5 Tata, J. and Prasad, S. (1998): "Cultural and Structural Constraints on Total QuaHty Management Implementation," Total Quality Management, Volume 9, Issue 8, pp. 703-7.10 Uhich, D. Zenger, J. and Smallwood, N. (1999): Results Based Leadership, Harvard Business School Press Walton, M. (1986): The Deming Management Method, New York, Prestige Books, p. 133 Weinstein, M.B. (1996): "Total Quahty Approach to Safety Management," Professional Safety, Volume 41, Number7, pp. 18-20 Weinstein, M.B. (1998): "Improving Behavior-Based Safety through TQM," Professional Safety, Volume 43, Numberl, pp. 29-34 Wells, J. (1986): The Construction Industry in Developing Countries: Alternative Strategies for Development, London, Croom Helm Whalen, M.J. and Rahim, M.A. (1994): "Common Barriers to Implementation and Development of a TQM Program," Total Quality Management, Volume 5, pp. 19-21 Wong, A. and Fung, P. (1999): "Total Quality Management in the Construction Industry: A Supply Chain Management Perspective," Total Quality Management, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp. 199-208 Wruck, K.H. and Jensen, M.C. (1998): "The Two Key Principles Behind Effective TQM Programs," European Financial Management, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp. 401-422 Yong, J. and Wilkinson, A. (2001): "Rethinking Total Quality Management," Total Quality Management, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp. 247-258 Yukl, G.A. (1994): Leadership in Organizations, Englewood Chffs, Prentice-Hall Yusof, S.M. and Aspinwall, E. (1999): "Critical Success Factors for Total Quality Management Implementation in Small and Medium Enterprises," Total Quality Management, Volume 10, Issue 4/5, pp. 803-8.09

PAGE 243

232 Yusof, S.M. and Aspinwall, E. (2000): "Total Quality Management Implementation Frameworks: Comparison and Review," Total Quality Management, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp. 281-294 Zantanidis, S. and Tsiotras, G. (1998): "Quality Management: A New Challenge for the Greek Construction Industry," Total Quality Management, Volume 9, Issue 7, pp. 619-632 Zbaracki, M. (1998): "The Rhetoric and Reality of Total Quality Management", Administrative Science Quarterly, Volume 43, Issue 3, pp. 602-637 Zhang, Z. (2000): "Developing a model of quality management methods and evaluating their effects on business performance," Total Quality Management; Volume 11, Issue 1, pp. 129

PAGE 244

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Daniel E. Whiteman was bom on July 27, 1947 in Chattanooga, Tennessee. He moved to Florida in 1964 and graduated from Daytona Beach Community College in 1967, whereupon he transferred to the University of Florida. Dan graduated with a Bachelor's of Building Construction Degree in 1969. This same year he married Diana Marie Hayes, now his wife for over 32 years. They reside in Miramar, Florida with their two children, Donald (1979) and Debra (1982). Upon graduation from the University of Florida, and after a short time in the U. S. Marines Corps, Dan joined Tennessee Valley Authority (TV A) in the position of Project Engineer in their Power Construction Division. This position resulted in a life-long appreciation for the effort that is required to manage the field operations of a construction operation, which is the basis for this dissertation. After three years with TV A, Dan accepted a position with Gulf Constructors, in Sarasota, Florida, as a Project Manager in 1972. He remained with Gulf Constructors for over 20 years, rising to the position of President, a position he held for 13 years with the company. During this time he served in virtually every role in the construction management of a company, from Project Manager to Estimator, to Division Manager to President. During Dan's employment with Gulf, the company grew to join the ranks of the Engineering News Record's (ENR) Top 400 Contractors nationally. 233

PAGE 245

234 In 1991, Dan began what had become a career desire, to re-enter academia and earn his Master's Degree and Doctor of Philosophy Degree from the University of Florida. Dan earned his Master's Degree from the M. E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction in 199 In 1993, Dan returned to a full-time position in the construction industry, while at the same time completing his requirements for candidacy in the Doctoral Program at the University of Florida. His re-entry into the industry began as President of Oceania Contractors in Miami Beach, where he was responsible for the construction of a highrise condominium development consisting of five 28-story towers and accompanying amenities. Upon completion of this assignment, Dan joined Coastal Construction Company in 1997 as Executive Vice-President, and became President of Coastal in the fall of 2001, a position he still holds. Dan continued to pursue his career goal of returning to academia, and was admitted to candidacy for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree in December of 1995. Dan has committed to spending the last years of his active construction career teaching the younger generation the principles needed to succeed in this industry. The M. E. Rinker, Sr. School of Building Construction recognized Dan as its Distinguished Builder in 1984. In addition, he has served in a number of professional organizations, including serving the Associated General Contractors of America's Mid-Florida Chapter as Vice-President, Legislative Chairman, and President.

PAGE 246

I certify that I have read this study and that in myopinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is Mly adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Phi oaophy. R. RaymOT d&j^a, Chair Professor ef Building Construction I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of DoctojxJfPhjlosophy. )ert F. Cox, Cochair Associate Professor of Building Construction I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully a^quate, scope ajid quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Phjki^phy. Ian FMiad Assa6iate Professor of Building Construction I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Diane A. Schaub Assistant Engineer in Industrial and Systems I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Hiiloso pl w. Kwaku Tenah ' Associate Professor of Building Construction

PAGE 247

This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the College of Design, Construction and Planning and to the Graduate School and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Dean, Graduate School