The Effective Design of Work Under Total Quality Management
Abstract
In this research, we address the question: Why do many total quality management implementations fail? We develop a theoretical model in which the total quality management role for line employees results in a dual work design that requires both standardized production and continuous improvement. We propose that workers effectively integrate both types of work by switching, defined as shifting between standardized production and continuous work while on the job in response to situational cues. Alternatively, workers can respond to the challenges of a job involving both types of work by avoiding the continuous improvement work. Switching and avoidance are associated with different performance and attitudinal outcomes. We present evidence drawn from an exploratory field study which suggests that line employees who effectively integrate standardized production and continuous improvement work by switching experienced less job stress and greater job satisfaction. Moreover, plants which were more effective in total quality management performance had a greater proportion of line employees using switching.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In work settings with detailed descriptions of expected sequences, participants introduce variations.
“In work settings with detailed descriptions of the expected sequence of steps in a procedure, for instance, participants introduce variations (Roy, 1959; Victor, Boynton, and Stephens-Jahng, 2000; Narduzzo, Rocco, and Warglien, 2000).”
From Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change (2003) · cites this paper as Victor, Boynton, and Stephens-Jahng, 2000
Cites
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449 · see citing works
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017) · Aldine (Routledge reprint) · doi:10.4324/9780203793206 · Cited by 25,789 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change
Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. (2003) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3556620 · Cited by 4,020 · see citing works
- Authors
- Victor, B., Boynton, A., & Stephens-Jahng, T.
- Affiliations
- Vanderbilt University (US)
- International Institute for Management Development (CH)
- Odenton, Maryland 21113
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2000-02
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 102-117
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W1991823282
- Cited by
- 101
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 7.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Organization Science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Quality and Supply Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Management Systems and Quality Improvement
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Keywords
- total quality management, job design, continuous improvement, production standardization, job switching, occupational stress, job satisfaction, situational cues
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review