Introduction:
The evolution of TQM has resulted from the development, on a global scale, of a consistent philosophy concerning the relationship between business and customers. At various stages in this development, different ideologies and practices for implementing quality management have been prominent, but the consistent goal has been to pursue the quality of products and services, to reduce costs, and to raise business performance.
The decreasing adoption of TQM and the increasing trend of Six-Sigma:
a) The successful implementation of TQM does indeed result in better business performance, as firms expect (Hendricks & Singhal, 1996; Gunasekaran, 1999; Hansson & Eriksson, 2002).
b) The benefits come in the areas of cost reduction, increased market share, increased profit, and enhanced business competitiveness (Youssef et al., 1996; Gunasekaran, 1999).
c) TQM has therefore been widely adopted by industries, even in non-profit and governmental organizations.
d) Several critical factors are essential if TQM is to be successfully implemented. These include the support of top management, visionary leadership, and effective management of human resources, employee involvement, and a corporate culture of commitment to quality and customer satisfaction (Joseph et al., 1999; Suresh chandar et al., 2001).
e) These corporate factors are not easy to achieve. As a result, the literature contains reports of several cases in which the implementation of TQM has failed.
f) Hubiak & O’Donnell (1996), for example, have asserted that approximately two-thirds of companies in the United States have either failed or stalled in their attempts to implement TQM.
g) Many of these TQM programs have been cancelled, or are in the process of being cancelled, as a result of the negative impact on profits (Anonymous, 1996).
h) The failure implementation of TQM is due to several factors. Besides the difficult achievement of TQM practices, one of them is that TQM has been a rather diffuse concept, with many vague descriptions but few more graspable definitions, and the management does not have a complete picture of what TQM really means (Hellsten & Klefsjö, 2000). Another one is that too management teams over the world do not realize that implementation of TQM means a cultural change (Hansson & Klefsjö, 2003). In fact, TQM was one of two workplace trends that recorded a significant decline in1996 (Anonymous, 1996).
i) Academic discussion of TQM and its implementation has suffered similar decline in recent years.
j) It is a contention that this is not an accurate reflection of the current status of TQM. Reports of instances of failed TQM implementation are only part of the explanation for the apparent declining trend in TQM.
k) In reality, TQM has been so prominent for about twenty years that many firms and institutions have incorporated TQM into daily management activities.
l) The result is that a well-established model of TQM has been so much a part of the routine business activities, that the ‘decline’ in discussion and implementation of the TQM is apparent, rather than real.
m) As interest in TQM has apparently waned, interest in the Six Sigma program has increased. Since General Electric (GE) initiated its Six Sigma program (GE-six-sigma) in October 1995, the results have been far beyond the company’s original hopes and expectations. Based on the remarkable business successes achieved in GE and other large corporations, an increasing number of companies have initiated the GE- six-sigma program as a business improvement and re-engineering strategy (Pearson, 2001; Lucas, 2002).
Comparison between TQM and GE-SIX-SIGMA:
a) The passion for TQM has apparently declined, whereas GE-six-sigmahas been receiving increased attention (Anonymous, 1996; Pande et al., 2000). As a result, there are several assertions related to the relationship between TQM and GE-six-sigmaappeared especially the treatise that TQM will be replaced by GE-six-sigmaHowever, there are very few studies in the literature that directly compare TQM with GE-six-sigmacompletely, and in the limited studies that do exist, conclusions on the relationship between TQM and GE-six-sigmahave differed significantly.
b) Harry (2000b) has claimed that Six Sigma represents a new, holistic, multidimensional systems approach to quality that replaces the “form, fit and function specification” of the past.
c) However, it is not readily apparent from Harry (2000a) which aspects of this multidimensional systems approach are presumed to be absent from TQM.
