Overcoming the Barriers to TQM’s Success
T
HE BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTING TOTAL
quality management (TQM) know no
limits; they show up in all sectors—man-
ufacturing, services, government, and
education. Therefore, it is important for
all organizations to understand and avoid these
barriers both before and during TQM implemen-
tation.
An extensive literature review has found 15 dis-
tinct barriers to TQM that are common to all types
of organizations and within all management levels.
This list of barriers is shown in Table 1. The eight
A road map of that plague organizations most often are discussed
here in detail.
potential
Lack of management commitment
hazards along
All types of organizations, including schools,
the TQM manufacturing companies, health care organiza-
tions, and public organizations, experience low
journey employee participation and interest in their TQM
programs when management commitment is miss-
ing at any level. Missing or even minimal support
from the chief executive officer and administrators
can hinder TQM’s successful implementation. For
example, TQM will not succeed if upper manage-
ment is only motivated by outside pressures, such
by as needing to please the board of directors or meet
Robert J. Masters an accrediting agency’s standards. If employees
see discrepancies in what management says and
what it actually does, they will lose interest and
faith in TQM.
For successful implementation, the administra-
tive team must have a clearly communicated pur-
pose for adopting TQM, be consistent in its appli-
cation of TQM principles, and not treat it as the
latest management fad.
Inability to change organizational culture
Many have found that changing a company’s
culture to reflect TQM is difficult and requires a
lot of time; W. Edwards Deming has stated that it
takes three to five years to fully implement TQM
into an organization.1 First, the fear of change
must be removed from the organization, poor
labor-management relations must be resolved, and
the company’s focus must change from the status
quo. Unfortunately, in the United States, organiza-
tions are impatient and often focus on the quick fix
for obtaining results.
For an organization’s culture to change, the
effort must be targeted and continuous, administra-
tors must be committed to it and support all change
efforts, and TQM principles must be consistently
used so they become an integral part of how the
organization works.
Upper management must identify and deal with
inconsistencies in the organization and focus on
adhering to the principles of the new organization.
Managers must support each other. Open, non-
threatening communication is critical as everyone
works to implement TQM principles. It is useless
for management to sell TQM to the staff and then
revert to its old way of doing business.
Improper planning
Another barrier is created by a lack of clarity in
the implementation plan and the failure to promote
open dialogue among the participants. Many
implementation problems can be overcome with
proper planning. Three components of a successful
TQM plan are:
• Obtaining companywide commitment
• Communicating company vision, mission, and
goals
• Providing open communication about the com-
pany’s new focus
The board of directors or other controlling
group must be involved from the beginning. A
time frame, such as a Gantt chart, should be devel-
oped and posted in public areas so that everyone
remains focused on TQM. The plan should remain
flexible, however, so that adjustments and
improvements can be made as the culture evolves.
Lack of continuous training and education
Training and education is an ongoing process
that facilitates continuous quality improvement in
any organization. Leaders involved in the TQM
implementation should identify the educational
needs of the organization and be creative in meet-
ing those needs efficiently and cost-effectively.
Training and education should be both formal
and informal. One health care organization, for
example, used a leading consulting group to train
its vice presidents to be trainers for the rest of the
organization. This approach demonstrates manage-
/
Quality Progress May 1996 53
 Table 1. The Top 15 Barriers to TQM Implementation

The following barriers were most frequently cited in the literature review. References to related works are cited with each barrier;
organizations implementing TQM can find more information on these barriers by examining these resources.

Barrier Reference
1. Lack of management commitment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 7, 11, 12, 15, 16
2. Inadequate knowledge or understanding of TQM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11, 12, 15
3. Inability to change organizational culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 16, 17
4. Improper planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16
5. Lack of continuous training and education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3, 4, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16
6. Inability to build a learning organization that provides for continuous improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6, 10
7. Incompatible organizational structure and isolated individuals and departments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3, 7, 9, 11, 17
8. Insufficient resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11, 12, 14, 16
9. Inappropriate reward system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4, 10, 11, 13
10. Use of a prepackaged program or inappropriately adapting TQM to the organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6, 16
11. Ineffective measurement techniques and lack of access to data and results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2, 4, 5, 7, 10, 14, 15, 16
12. Short-term focus or using a Band-Aid solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4, 5, 14
13. Paying inadequate attention to internal and external customers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 17
14. Inappropriate conditions for implementing TQM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7, 17
15. Inadequate use of empowerment and teamwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16

References
1. W. Edwards Deming, Out of the Crisis (Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1986).
2. Eugene H. Fram and Robert C. Camp, “Finding and Implementing Best Practices in Higher Education,” Quality Progress, February
1995, pp. 69-73.
3. Paul Froiland, “TQM Invades Business Schools,” Training, July 1993, pp. 52-56.
4. K.N. Gopalakrishnan and Barry E. McIntrye, “Hurdles to Quality Health Care,” Quality Progress, April 1992, pp. 93-95.
5. John A. Goodman, Gary F. Bargatze, and Cynthia Grimm, “The Key Problem With TQM,” Quality Progress, January 1994, pp. 93-95.
6. Robert H. Hayes and Gary P. Pisano, “Beyond World-Class: The New Manufacturing Strategy,” Harvard Business Review, January
1994, pp. 78-81.
7. A.C. Hyde, “Barriers in Implementing Quality Management,” The Public Manager, Spring 1994, pp. 33-37.
8. Robert W. Laza and Perry L. Wheaton, “Recognizing the Pitfalls of Total Quality Management,” Public Utilities Fortnightly, April 12,
1990, pp. 17-20.
9. H. Gary Pehrson, “Give It Time,” Healthcare Forum Journal, July/August 1994, pp. 34-39.
10. James F. Rand, “Learning Comes Before Ownership,” Journal of Quality and Participation, July/August 1994, pp. 64-68.
11. Carol A. Reeves and David A. Bednar, “What Prevents TQM Implementation in Health Care Organizations,” Quality Progress, April
1993, pp. 41-43.
12. Laura Rubach, “Total Quality Forum VI Speakers Focus on Change,” Quality Progress, February 1995, pp. 40-47.
13. David P. Stevens, “Avoiding Failure With Total Quality,” Quality, December 1993, pp. 18-22.
14. L. David Weller and Sylvia A. Hartley, “Why Are Educators Stonewalling TQM?” The TQM Magazine, March 1994, pp. 23-28.
15. Steve Wernick, “Self-Directed Work Teams and Empowerment,” Journal of Quality and Participation, July/August 1994, pp. 34-36.
16. M.J. Whalen and M.A. Rahim, “Common Barriers to Implementation and Development of a TQM Program,” Total Quality
Management, March/April 1994, pp. 19-21.
17. Stan Zetie, John Sparrow, Alan Woodfield, and Tom Kilmartin, “The Tyrannical Chef: A Barrier to TQM?” International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, January/February 1994, pp. 42-45.

ment’s commitment to TQM and ensures the principles are con- uals and departments will dissolve over time. Teamwork is an
sistently taught to all employees. The vice presidents also con- essential part of the TQM environment, and some success has
tinually learn the principles as they teach them. Informal train- been realized by managers who used TQM principles to resolve
ing could include circulating articles on TQM or displaying some of the most longstanding turf battles that prevailed in their
information about TQM on company bulletin boards. organizations. Tools such as brainstorming, fishbone diagrams,
and workflow diagrams can be successful in identifying the dis-
Incompatible organizational structure and isolated crepancies and misinterpretations that are often the root cause
individuals and departments of such feuds.
Autocratic organizational structure and management policies
can lead to TQM implementation problems. If organizational Ineffective measurement techniques and lack of
structure is a problem, part of the planning process should be access to data and results
restructuring with a defined purpose and explicit expected out- Having no measurement process or ineffective measurement
comes. When TQM principles are used, the isolation of individ- techniques, failing to maintain accurate and reliable data, and
54 /
Quality Progress May 1996
failing to provide sufficient access to data run counter to TQM nization. Management must understand that they do exist and
principles. Data are critical to decision making in a TQM cul- should not only deal with them in the implementation process
ture. Key quality characteristics should be measured consistent- but plan for them as well.
ly so that reliable, comparative data are produced over time. The list of barriers in Table 1 can be used in the planning or
Data must be credible and reliable, or decision makers will be early implementation phases of TQM to increase awareness and
unable to make appropriate and proper decisions. Quick, easy understanding of the principles. It can be used by organizations
access to data is important; data retrieval must be efficient, not that have been involved in TQM for some time to evaluate
time consuming or labor intensive. Decision makers must also progress and to improve existing systems. Awareness of these
receive training in data analysis and interpretation so that the barriers should be emphasized when training organizations in
measurement system will serve its intended purpose. TQM concepts and methods. If these potential problems are
understood and prepared for, plans can be made to counter
Paying inadequate attention to internal and external them. Any organization can benefit from a better understanding
customers and knowledge of TQM.
Organizations must pay attention to both their internal and
external customers so that they can understand the needs and Reference
expectations of both types of customers from both perspectives. 1. W. Edwards Deming, Out of the Crisis (Cambridge, MA:
Too often, managers assume they know what customers need
Cambridge University Press, 1986), p. 153.
and expect, which results in misdirected efforts and invest-
ments. An astute organization makes a high priority of under-
standing all customers’ changing needs and expectations. Robert J. Masters is dean of the School of Business at Southeastern
Oklahoma State University in Durant. He has a doctorate in higher
Inadequate use of empowerment and teamwork
education administration from Purdue University in West Lafayette,
Complacency in teams will inhibit TQM progress.
IN. Masters is a member of ASQC.
Ineffective teams that fail to stay focused or complete their tasks
are a big expense to organizations. To be effective, teams need
trained facilitators, a mission or purpose, a time frame for com-
pleting projects, members who represent the functional areas of
the process to be improved, and accountability. The mission of
the team must not be overwhelming; some tasks might need to
be broken down into manageable phases so this is not the case.
Whenever possible, teams’ recommendations and solutions What did you think about this article?
should be implemented; this sends a powerful, positive message Quality Progress needs your Excellent Circle #329
to employees about the importance of empowerment and team- feedback. On the postage-paid
reader service card inserted toward Good Circle #330
work.
the back of this magazine, please
circle the number that corresponds Fair Circle #331
Avoid TQM barriers by understanding them with your opinion of the preceding Poor Circle #332
While these barriers occur to varying degrees and with vary- article.
ing frequency, there is little doubt that they exist in every orga-

/
Quality Progress May 1996 55