Love, P E D; Edwards, D J and Sohal, A (2004) Total quality management in Australian contracting organisations: Pre-conditions for successful implementation. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 11(3), pp. 189-198. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Total quality management (TQM) is widely recognised as an enabler for performance improvement in the construction industry. This paper presents empirical findings from eight contracting organisations that have adopted TQM practices in response to competitive and environmental pressures. Using the NIES "How To" model developed by the Australian Government's National Industry Extension Scheme, the paper describes pragmatic considerations. Case study findings reveal that when implementing TQM, contractors must align their organisational culture with the objectives of their TQM program.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Australia; change management; construction industry; organizational culture; total quality management |
| Index terms: | performance improvement, implementation, construction industry, case study, Australia, program, contracting organization, organizational culture, total quality management, change management |
| Subjects: | evaluation methods, contractual arrangements, practitioner, data collection methods, industry analysis, sociology, Geography, software systems, performance measurement, management |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Quality Management, Digital Applications, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here