BARRIERS TO
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS IN PAKISTAN:
AN EMPIRICAL STUDY.
Muhammad Naveed Anwar
Wide Angle studio (pvt) Ltd.
- Pakistan
E-mail: mnanwar1998@gmail.com
Submission: 10/12/2012
Accept: 20/12/2012
ABSTRACT
Quality
management system has played pivotal role in establishing organizational
functions and processes in the very right perspective of a very well knitted
system of documentation, training and implementation. Media organizations are
so close in their very existence and social structure and they are more than
needed to stream line their processes as their impact on social life is
significant and considerable. This study encompasses the top news channels in
Pakistan and recorded the views of their top management with respect to their
feelings pertaining to QMS. This study is very first one of its kinds in
Pakistan and it is hoped that it may open more doors for future research
avenues in this very area.
Key-words:
Quality management system, media, organization
1.
INTRODUCTION
Quality
management is a foremost managerial revolution spanning 20th century (LILLRANK,
2003). It is methodically and systematically framed on definite approach to control
production deficiencies, concentrated responsiveness towards consumers and stressed
collaborative controlling initiatives. There were lots of fair efforts to imitate
it accomplishment in corporate governance, utilities and information system
based setups (JURAN & GODFREY, 1999).
A different
set of realities come across those who seem participated in the induction and
introduction of quality management performance packages; they even experienced
reluctance in people attitude with reference to QMS at different levels. The
primary lack of top management support is considered as the fundamental reason
behind the failure of QMS initiatives in US corporate world (KRUMWIEDE, 1998)
and their negligent attitude seemed frustrating for those practitioners who
involved in implementing this system far and wide in order to bring growth and
progress on continuous basis. The general perception of masses with reference
to QMS was negative and it has been taken as supplementary pressure with
additional demand of documentation, internal audit and training with the help
of which government extends its control over people. Quality Assurance, quality
testing, quality inspection, quality control and Quality management system was
considered as a new way of doing things and practitioners advocated this way
with their fullest potential. (RIPPIN, WHITE and MARSH, 1994) Though quality
management keeps its origin in mass industrialization for market economy but
the overall picture was different from the way it was painted in the beginning.
It materialized wherever homogeneous progressions are succeeded by evidences directing
at undisputed manufacturing objectives ratified by coherent performers creating
knowledgeable selections in unrestricted marketplace. It is thus based on a
world view of Positivistic and Epistemology Functionalistic system (JACKSON,
2000; SILVESTRO, 1998).
By ensuring
quality assurance optimal improvement in performance can be achieved in an
organization (manufacturing or service). The rhetoric of quality is all about
empowerment Questionnaire will be sent to 125 respondents out of which 100
responses will be accepted with equal representation of 10 top ranking channels, as recommended by
Cohen(1998) and Barckley et al. (1995) the
minimum sample size requirement should be ten times largest. Sample size
is determined on two bases; about getting employee to own their jobs and to
join together in small group to improve every aspect of their work consistently
and forever (DEMING, 1982).
Finessing Quality
Management into the specific area of media management requires a skill of both
counselor and bureaucrat. Taking the pulse of human interaction with in media
organization involves the unique challenge of managing the oft autonomous,
artful worker .Do all media organizations subscribe to a management system?
Lusting for profits is not management, but rather an example of high level,
single issue decision making. True managers are those supervisors who nurture
quality realize that there are human persons involved in all processes.
Recognizing subordinates as stakeholders allows for the injection of a new
idea, the planting of a seed of creativity, or a mutational change potentially
cultivate traits within an organization, which can aid in its survival with in the competitive field of
media. Encouraging technical writing skills, an incredulous nature,
professional training, and a business acumen builds a better journalists.
The market
currently defines the media menu. Money is key to content, competition is key
to capitalism. If there is no competition, then the market dollars do not work
fairly to determine content. Management is indicted with harmonizing these
forces. It seems significant important to endorse corporate accountability whereas
evading restriction. Conventionally TQM was not supposed to be a considerable
factor with respect to those organizations that were involved in creative
productionism. Structured media offer facilities, as communications, or perceptible
merchandise like newspaper or magazine. Anthropological element’s acknowledgment
is essential to recognize the interactive abilities desired to accomplish and withstand
fruitful modification (WELLINS, 1995)
Number of
organizations is in use of paper based report cards for their assessment and
evaluation nonetheless numerous journalists discover this in correct intended
for a imaginative specialized commotion and appeared frustrated and dejected by
the specific QMS terminology used to frame and categorize their creative
output. It seems like converting a newsroom into the production floor of a
factory, it can be done but the point is that soon after that, the atmosphere
would be unworkable for journalists to perform their duties as they will loose
creative freedom. (UNDERWOOD, 1998).
The exceptional
diminuendos of media has not given an open way in to the quality assurance
framework and it has never had been a subject of related interest. {Submissions
in regions wherever certain supposition is not effective have a tendency to be challenging
(SEE MORGAN and MUGATROYD, 1994; KIRKPATRICK and LUCIO, 1995; ADAMS, 1998) for
instance health care and software engineering; these are based upon as
peculiar, troubleshooting routines, volatile
surroundings, and contentious intentions with a possibility of having non
market connections} a handful of researches (OSBORN and FALL, 2000; LILLRANK 2003;
JARVENPAA and STAPLES, 2000) have been piloted in this very area nonetheless plentiful
has had to be discovered as there lying many branded research studies and quality
assurance simulations/structure in academia
(at primary, secondary and higher level) Media is as unique as education in
many ways both lay in service sector. The substantial differences between
educational and commercial organization need careful considerations (SRIKANTHAN
and DALRYMPLE,2003) In such a complex
system as service sector, the diverse needs of customers and the process of
satisfying them could be a major issue(VENKATRAMAN, 2007).
Pakistan is
rapidly transforming into an information society due to changing dynamics (basic
industries manufacturing and agriculture to fast pace high value information
based economy) internationally and influx of latest information technology. The
efforts made towards information society should be correlated with strategic
planning and cultural heritage of country.
According to PEMRA survey conducted in 2005 there were 16400 people
shifted from their previously opted field to media and around 15 billion Pak Rs
have been invested in a year in this newly emerging media field. These figure
exhibit new trends but these new entrants are not properly trained and equipped
with the latest tools to work efficiently in this field due to lack of knowledge, lack of skills, lack of
confidence, lack of innovation and dependency thinking (AMEN and GORMAN, 2009).
This suggests that, in term of benefits to new team and society, we have at
least as much to gain from the rapid development of quality assurance.
This study
will provide perceptual frame work of quality assurance in media organization
and barriers to its implementation in context of Pakistan.
2. RESEARCH QUESTION
On the basis of above
discussion the following research questions arise;
1. What are the factors that
affect Quality Management in media organizations?
2. What are the barriers to
the implementation of Quality Management in media organization?
3.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Over the previous
few decades businesses have originated to comprehend that to remain universally
competitive , a continuous and comprehensive self-assessment was needed to improve
organizational performance cross the board in a holistic manner (CROSBY, 1979;
DEMING, 1986; NAVES and NAKHAI, 1993; MELE and COLUCIO, 2006). In this very
regard, there are number of gurus who define quality as Crosby (1979) describes
quality as conformance to requirement while Juran & Gryna (1980) explain
quality as fitness for use. Deming (1986) as “a predictable degree of
uniformity and dependability at low cost and suited to the market is more
toward quality in operation. The conventional definition of quality as
conformance to standard was not quiet appealing for many organizations and they
strive move towards customer focus in order to bring individual mainstream in
their processes. In the very beginning organizations kept on working on
improving their internal functions and processes and there was a very little
understanding with reference to interlink these processes and functions with
the ultimate output of the organization that directly links with real customers
of the organization (BRIGHAM, 1993). This lag between careful customer focus
and organizational processes lead to the resultant failure and pushed companies
to struggle fast to come up to the mark. The notion of quality could be more
adequate and understandable if expounded in the very right perspective of
customer needs and wants linked with organization outcome.
Quality
management confines in mass production processes related with market economy The
fundamental nursery for quality management has always been the hard core
manufacturing processes aiming at market conquerence and gaining leadership
through cost minimization. It is therefore grounded on a universal-view of empiricism
and functionalized systematic interactions (JACKSON, 2000; SILVESTRO, 1998).
Problems
appeared in those areas where these assumptions did not seem valid enough to
prove the point (SEE MORGAN and MURGATROYD, 1994; KIRKPATRICK and LUCIO, 1995; ADAMS,
1998). Scoes of services oriented organizations are out of this peculiar
procedural interface and which are exposed to a set of individualistic approach
in their functions which cannot be generalized. The core difference in these
service oriented organization with reference to quality management concepts was
the way they worked, in the absence of any well-defined code of operation, a
well written document but on man-to-man and case to case basis, their quality
parameters were altogether different from an organization working in a
controlled atmosphere. The intrinsic source of change was the information as
the entire industry was and is in the business of trading information from all
the way around. Numerous studies point out that reduced, imperfect,
in-efficient or misplaced information is supposed as a furthermost grave
quality problem (ENGLISH, 1999; FERGUSON and LIM, 2001; CRUMP, 2002). Huang et
al. (1999) underlined that information ought not to be preserved as a simple
by-product of countless undertakings nonetheless with the identical significance
as merchandises. An apparent methodology is to center on customer desires and
due needs.
In industry,
finished products are always inspected as a defined protocol of quality -control.
The question is how can we frame the finished product with reference to media?
Since that in simple words whatever is being produced is the finished product .
Though, various scholars have linked production with different forms of
services and figured out that even
though manufacturing industry and services are poles apart in terms of business
processes, number of their interfaces as customer focus, understanding customer
requirements, working in dynamic environment are very similar and
uni-dimensional (STENSAASEN, 1995; LUNDQUIST, 1998; SRIKANTHAN and DALRYMPLE,
2003). In reply to Kohn (1993), Schmoker and Wilson (1993) have emphasized that
by intelligently acclimatizing TQM in the framework of academia, it opens an exceptional
chance to flourish wherever additional struggles ought to unsuccessful. In
oppose Kohn’s explanations, they indicate Total Quality’s foundation in sound
psychology, its established and confirmed paybacks equally to TV channels and business
and its self-concentrating instrumentation. Lundquist (1998) positions that
there are particular outstanding likenesses amid manufacturing and Services –
the buyer concentration, procedural alignment and incessant upgrading ideas of
TQM approved in industry is very plentifully appropriate in service.
The
world of modest atmosphere needs Quality of media. There is absolutely a necessity to accept modification
in the, media procedures to progress and stay vigorous in the profession of
Media. TQM seems to be a methodical and a rationalized attitude for quality administration
and change management (HAMMERSLEY and PINNINGTON,
1999). At the same time, the considerable alterations in the middle of service
and marketable establishments want cautious deliberations (SRIKANTHAN and DALRYMPLE,
2003).
Barriers
As per numerous
authorities, Quality Management remains a slightest worldwide prerequisite for remaining
in trade as verbalized by variations in culture and marketplace (BRIGHAM,
1993). However, outcomes from Quality Management linked collected works determine
that in several cases, Quality Management has futile to harvest guaranteed outcomes
(KOCH and FISHER, 1998; BRIGHAM, 1993). Brigham stresses that the studies do
not settle that the Quality Management viewpoint is insignificant somewhat proposes
that the application of Quality Management has been underprovided or mistaken.
Consequently
the principal chief barricade for the submission of Quality Management in edification
is the misapprehension of Quality Management attitude and the nonexistence of
understanding the processes that are dissimilar in service industry that might
be owing to very limited knowledge with reference to quality management; in
addition to it the foremost barrier in implementing quality management in
letter and spirit is the absence of leadership in manufacturing and services
sector (BRIGHAM, 1993) or if ever it was available then the momentum and pace
of this leadership was no so absorbant, supportive and vibrant as needed. The
possibility of presence of another barricade and it was the fear with regard to
the vredibility of quality management as if it would work they way it has been
regarded or not. (SEBASTIANELL and TAMINI, 1998). Another barrier may possibly
be workers’ confrontation to change in service segment, maximum employees are mostly
specialists who by custom assume self-sufficiency and self-determination. Educational
worker possibly will not like being requested to change of mind regarding their
instruction flairs (BLANKSTEIN, 1996) additionally; it is a mutual certainty
that Quality Management enhances needless stratums of administration (SEBASTIANELL
and TAMINI, 1998) that is not a favored area amid educational experts.
Pitiable prospectus
design might tip to excellence catastrophe. There might be inappropriate educational
structures and measures that function as a blockage despite the fact commanding
alterations in prospectus or sequence provision (KOHN, 1993). In addition to it,
with Quality Management, there might be too plentiful of papers of processes, that
chomp time and energy.
An
additional blockade might be the absence of adequate reserves and capitals.
Quality Management encompasses a standard modification in the attitude of the whole
association. This can be attained over and done with methodical and planned drill
of all the staffs. Henceforth, Quality Management contains extraordinary budget,
energy and stretch (KOCH and FISHER, 1998).
Is all easier when we talk of improvement in characteristics
of a product as compared to same in service industry where intangible outcomes
are the real outcomes as in services sector the notion of quality revolves
around people, delivery time, efficiency which altogether posit a dangerous
barricade in terms of auditing the quality parameters (HARVEY, 1995b; YORKE,
1997; OWLIA and ASPINWALL, 1998).
The
Quality Assurance outline ought to be constructed upon a conventional set of fundamental
standards and notions. These standards and notions deliver the groundwork for assimilating
the significant performance necessities inside the quality context. A set of important
central standards founding the structure blocks of the planned Quality reassurance
context is enumerated as follows;
·
Leadership
and quality culture.
·
Continuous
improvement and innovation in processes.
·
Employee
participation and development.
·
Fast
response and management of information.
·
Customer-driven
quality.
·
Partnership
development, internally and external
Quality circles, a management method rented from
Japanese trade is at the moment being measured in advanced teaching surroundings
(ROMERO et al., 1995; FREED et al. 2000). A quality circle comprises of a minor
cluster of individuals that encounter on a consistent basis, to debate difficulties,
pursue solutions, and collaborate with management in the application of those
solutions (JURAN and GRYNA, 1980; ISHIKAWA, 1990). Quality circles apply prearranged
tactics to problem answering and function on the code that worker contribution
in policymaking and problem solving advances the excellence of labor
4. THEORETICAL
FRAMEWORK
It seems vital as of the collected
works that quality assurance guides to organization enactment. The proposition likewise
ascertains the involvement of definite blockades as flexible as misinterpretation of QA, deficiency of
leadership visualization, nonexistence of self-assurance of receiving wished outcome,
QM application is obstructive, QM application drinks considerable interval, privation
of enough capitals and possessions, assessment is problematic to determine.
In the theoretical model, QM application
is reserved as forecaster variable and Quality assurance is occupied as conclusion
variable. misinterpretation of QA,
deficiency of leadership visualization, nonexistence of self-assurance of
receiving wished outcome, QM application is obstructive, QM application drinks
considerable interval, privation of enough capitals and possessions, assessment
is problematic to determine are taken as moderating variables as per research
questions, supported by the literature review.
Hypotheses
H1: Lack of
necessary knowledge about quality management is the reason of barrier to its
implementation.
H2: Lack of proper
strategic leadership vision affects adversely the implementation of QM
H3: The efforts of
implementing QM do not generate desired result.
H4: QM
implementation is restrictive to the established norms of work environment.
H5: QM
implementation consumes much time for unnecessary documentation.
H6: Lack of
sufficient funds and resources is the reason of barrier to it implementation.
H7: Quality
assurance is difficult to calculate through audit
5. METHODOLOGY
Research Paradigm
Henning et al. (2004) describe a paradigm as a theory or hypothesis, a
paradigm is somewhat a context inside which theories are constructed, and that basically
effects in what way you perceive the world, concludes your perception, and figures
your indulgent of how effects are associated.
Possessing a specific world outlook impacts your own conduct, your specialized
training, and eventually the place you yield with respect to the topic of your investigation.
The scope of the hypothesis necessitates theoretical description
and hypothesis expansion over the deduction method and to gather facts to one or
the other falsify the hypothesis or gather the confirmations to upkeep the
hypothesis. So the paradigm for this study is Positivism that uses empiricism
theory for collection and organization of empirical facts, forming hypothesis,
deducing consequences of hypotheses as testable predictions, testing the
hypotheses with collected data and finally evaluating the outcome of testing.
Research Type
The hypotheses depict that the
purview of the thesis is explaining the relationship between the variables of
interest and their direction; therefore this would be an explanatory study.
Research Strategy
The basic theme of the
research is to find out the relationships among the variables of interests. For
this purpose, literature review and hypothesis are developed and will be tested
after the data collection and then conclusion will be extracted from the
results; therefore the thesis uses deductive approach.
Population
The
population of this study is satellite TV channels of Pakistan. These channels are one of the fastest growing industries of
Pakistan and because of its rapid growth it attracts fresh graduates as well as
those who are already employed and are seeking for alternative jobs. This
study will provide perceptual frame work of quality assurance in media organization
and barriers to its implementation in context of country like Pakistan
Sampling Frame
The sample frame of this study
comprises of six top performing news channels in Pakistan. Respondents would be
each firm’s Chief Executive, Marketing Director, Executive
Producer-News/current affairs, Director Human Resources, Director Information
Technology; it would make the size of total respondents as 30 with five from
each organization.
Data Collection
All the respondents were
personally contacted by the researcher through visits to their respective
organization, they were given the questionnaire and collected back once
completely filled. The data collection activity was planned and controlled;
even the researcher facilitated all the respondents with respect to the
comprehension of any clarity needed to develop in terms to better understand
the questions.
Measurement Scale:
Likert’s 5-point scale was
used to frame the responses against every question, where 1 is the lowest and 5
is the highest denominating variable, keeping 3 in the middle as average.
Statistical Interpretation of
Data:
|
Q1.
How do you rate the level of your understanding regarding Quality Management
process? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00001 |
30 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
2.8333 |
1.34121 |
1.799 |
.141 |
.427 |
|
Valid N
(listwise) |
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
above table reveals the level of understanding pertaining to quality management
system, the said question attempted by all the 30 respondents and the average
mean of responses is 2.8333 which seems parallel to the allotted ‘average’ as
per our scale. It proves the first hypothesis that reveals that lack of
necessary knowledge acts as a barrier in the implementation of Quality
management system. The level of selected respondents required extensive
understanding of Quality Management system as they are the ones who would frame
the policy guidelines, training protocols developing a quality culture across
whole population
|
Q2.
Do you agree that Quality Management practices improves efficiency of the
organization? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00002 |
28 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
3.0000 |
1.36083 |
1.852 |
.285 |
.441 |
|
Valid N
(listwise) |
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
above table shows the level of agreement of respondents with reference to the
role of quality management system in improving overall efficiency of
organization. The average response of 3 matches with the ‘average’ value of 3as
per our scale, here the average value exhibits the essence of affirmation with
reference to quality management system and its impact on the overall efficiency
of an organization.
|
Q3.
How do you rate your strategic leadership vision? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00003 |
289 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
2.6552 |
1.07822 |
1.163 |
.394 |
.434 |
|
Valid N (listwise) |
289 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
level of responses respecting strategic leadership vision touches the overall
mean value of 2.656 which is closer to our ‘average’ value that was allotted to
3. The level of respondents does require a highest rating of strategic
leadership vision and an average leadership vision seems barricade in the
implementation of quality management system across organization in a holistic
manner as captioned in second hypothesis.
|
Q4. Do you agree that strategic leadership vision is
essential for progress? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00004 |
30 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
2.9000 |
1.32222 |
1.748 |
.004 |
.427 |
|
Valid N
(listwise) |
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In
responding to the question regarding the importance of strategic leadership
vision in organizational progress, the overall response shows the average mean
value of 2.9 that seems closest to our average of 3 and does not expose the
intrinsic intensity needed in the top management to gear an organization on the
concrete track of progress and it seems difficult perhaps even improbable to
have implemented quality management system with such an average involvement.
|
Q5.
Do you agree that strategic leadership vision can be developed by training? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00005 |
30 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
2.6667 |
1.21296 |
1.471 |
.451 |
.427 |
|
Valid N
(listwise) |
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All
the respondents seem in agreement with reference to the role of training in
order to develop the strategic leadership vision in a holistic manner across
organization, the average mean value is 2.66 that is closer to our average
value of 3. It seems that the respondents feel the importance of training but
on the other hand the level of needed intensity appear missing and when we talk
of top management then we need to be sure of the ideological and conceptual
value of the response and in Pakistan, the media organizations are in the very
early phase of their lives that is why the core issues seems missing and most
of them are involved in gaining financial mileage.
|
Q6. Do you agree
strategic leadership vision enables organization to understand the demands? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std.
Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std.
Error |
|
VAR00006 |
29 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
2.9655 |
1.11748 |
1.249 |
-.093 |
.434 |
|
Valid N (listwise) |
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The overall response against this
question shows the average mean value of
2.965 that is very close to our average value of 3 and the result of question
3, 4, 5 and 6 that represents the hypothesis referencing strategic leadership
bears the average response and it in factual reality exemplifies the prevailing
state of lack of a strong leadership vision in media organizations across
Pakistan, even though the progress is significant but they are not developing
themselves in the form of organizations but as media agencies which is not a
very promising situation.
|
Q7. Do you agree that strategic leadership vision enable
organizations to prepare accordingly? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00007 |
28 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
3.2857 |
1.27242 |
1.619 |
-.351 |
.441 |
|
Valid N
(listwise) |
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
response against this question shows a slight variation from above four
questions with reference to strategic leadership vision as the average mean
value of responses is 3.285 which is higher than our average value of 3 but
less than 4. It clearly reveals the conceptual trend among respondents as they
feel the importance of strategic leadership prepares an organization to adapt
any upcoming and incoming changes accordingly; but the overall strength of
response seems weak focusing the significant of the question.
|
Q8. Do
you agree that efforts of implementing Quality Management generate desired
results? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00008 |
299 |
32.00 |
1.00 |
33.00 |
4.5517 |
6.70067 |
44.899 |
3.703 |
.434 |
|
Valid N
(listwise) |
299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
response against this questions shows 4.55 average mean score which is very
close to the ’highest’ category with 5 score and it exhibits the confidence of
respondents in uni-dimensional effort towards implementing quality management
system that generates desired results and established hypothesis covering this
question stands rejected as most number of respondents are in strong agreement
with reference to the effect of efforts, but the point is that their
inclination does not qualify their response as in previous questions the
average response reveals that they are not very enthusiastic in establishing a
concrete ground needed for implementing quality management system.
|
Q9. Do you agree that Quality Management is
norm based? (Non flexible) |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00009 |
29 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
2.6897 |
1.16813 |
1.365 |
.516 |
.434 |
|
Valid N
(listwise) |
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
mean value of the responses collected to counter this question is 3.13 which
matches the given 3 against average of responses that exemplify that the
approach of the respondents towards implementation of quality management system
is apparently restricted to established norms at the work place. This response
reveals the power of overall organization design and culture that plays a
pivotal role in every such practice that links with the behavior and norms of
an organization and if norms are not change supported then desired results
cannot be ascertained.
|
Q10.
How do you rate time consumed in Quality Management implementation? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00010 |
28 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
3.0714 |
1.21499 |
1.476 |
.255 |
.441 |
|
Valid N
(listwise) |
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
mean value of 3.07 obtained against this question relevant to fifth hypothesis
as the respondents are of the opinion that the documentation of quality
management system consumes unnecessary time. There are two dimensions of this
response as the time consumed when the documentation process is under way and
after implementation when time is required to maintain the records and keep
them intact to review and revise the processes in the light of these records.
The overall perception of the participants appear negative as they feel it as
an extra burden on them.
|
Q11. How do you rate documentation in Quality Management
implementation? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00011 |
29 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
2.6897 |
1.16813 |
1.365 |
.516 |
.434 |
|
Valid N
(listwise) |
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
role of documents in quality management system has been rated at the average
mean value of 2.68 that is near to our average of 3 which shows that
respondents consider the importance of documentation with reference to time as
average and it shows their commitment towards the process of documentation
which is the key in QM implementation
|
Q12. How do you rate funds required in Quality Management? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00014 |
30 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
3.3333 |
1.34762 |
1.816 |
-.299 |
.427 |
|
Valid N
(listwise) |
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Healthy
average mean of 3.33 appears against this question which shows the response
above our average of 3 that supports the corresponding hypothesis that lack of
funds area barrier in implementation of quality management system.
|
Q13.
How do you rate resources required in Quality Management? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00012 |
30 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
3.4333 |
1.16511 |
1.357 |
-.528 |
.427 |
|
Valid N
(listwise) |
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
role of human, financial and other resources are so important in the
implementation of quality management system is so important and above average
response of 3.433 shows that respondents are well aware of this fact that
without ample and adequate resources, effective implementation of QMS is not
possible; and most of the time the question of funds act as the most focused
barricade in this very process.
|
Q13.
Do you agree that performance of Quality Management system is difficult to
calculate through audit? |
|||||||||
|
|
N |
Range |
Minimum |
Maximum |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Variance |
Skewness |
|
|
|
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Statistic |
Std. Error |
|
VAR00013 |
29 |
4.00 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
3.0690 |
1.13172 |
1.281 |
-.144 |
.434 |
|
Valid N
(listwise) |
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overall perception of
respondents touches the average mean value of 3.0 that matches our average
value also as they are of the opinion that quality management system cannot be
judged through audit; it is again a misconception which directs towards the
very first hypothesis as the awareness of QMS is very low among top management
that is why they cannot perceive the internal audit activity that encircle
whole QMS in a very impartial, quantitative and concrete manner.
6.
CONCLUSION:
There are grave misconception
and ambiguities when we discuss QMS, especially in services sector as media
etc., and it is the core reason that in Pakistan there is no such concept of
implementing QMS and being benefitted with this implementation in media
organizations. Our study opens the doors towards the need of creating awareness
among the top brass of media organizations that is needed to have strong,
lasting and concrete steps towards its implementation in a comprehensive
manner.
REFERENCES
ADAMS, R. (1998), Quality Social Work, Macmillan,
London.
BLANKSTEIN, A.M. (1996), “Why
TQM can’t work – and a school where it did”, Education Digest, v. 62 n. 1, p.
27-30.
BRIGHAM, S. E. (1993),
“Lessons we can learn from industry”, Change, v. 25 n. 3, p. 42-7
CROSBY, P. B. (1979), Quality
Is Free, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY
CRUMP, N. (2002), “Managing
professional integration in an acute hospital – a socio-political analysis”,
The International Journal of Public Sector Management, V. 15 N. 2, p. 107-17.
DAVENPORT, T. H.; PRUSAK, L.
(1998), Working Knowledge – How Organizations Manage What They Know, Harvard Business
School Press, Boston, MA.
DEMING, W. E. (1982), Out of
the Crisis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
DEMING, W. E. (1986), Out of
Crisis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
English, L.P. (1999),
Improving Data Warehouse and Business Information Quality, Wiley, New York, NY.
FERGUSON, B.; LIM, J. N. W.
(2001), “Incentives and clinical governance – money following quality?”,
Journal of Management in Medicine, V. 15, p. 453-87.
HUANG, K. T.; LEE, Y. W.; WANG,
R. Y. (1999), Quality Information and Knowledge, Prentice-Hall, New York, NY.
HARVEY, L. (1995b), “Beyond
TQM”, Quality in Higher Education, V. 1 N. 2, p. 123-46
JURAN, J. M.; GODFREY, A. B.
(1999), Juran’s Quality Handbook, 5th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
JACKSON, M. C. (2000), Systems
Approaches to Management, Kluwer, New York, NY.
KRUMWIEDE, D. W.; AHEU, C.; LAVELLE,
J (1998). Understanding the relation of top management personality to TQM
implementation. Production & Inventory Management Journal v. 39, n. 2, p. 6-10
KIRKPATRICK, I.; LUCIO, M. M. (Eds) (1995), The
Politics of Quality in the Public Sector, Routledge, London.
KOHN, A. (1993), “Turning
learning into a business: concerns about total quality”, Educational
Leadership, V. 51 N. 1, p. 58-61
KANWAL AMEEN, G. E. Gorman, (2009),"Information
and digital literacy: a stumbling block to development?: A Pakistan
perspective", Library Management, V. 30, n.1, p. 99 - 112
KOCH, J. V.; FISHER, J. L. (1998), “Higher education
and total quality management”, Total Quality Management, V. 9 N. 8, p. 659-68.
LUNDQUIST, R. (1998), “Quality improvements of
teaching and learning in higher education: a comparison with developments in
industrial settings”, Teaching in Higher Education, V. 3 N. 1, p. 51-62.
MORGAN, C.; MURGATROYD, S. (1994), Total Quality
Management in the Public Sector, Open University
Press, Buckingham.
MELE, C.; COLUCIO, M. (2006), “The evolving path of
TQM: towards business excellence and stakeholder value”, International Journal
of Quality & Reliability Management, V. 23
NONAKA, I.; TAKEUCHI, H. (1995), The
Knowledge-creating Company, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
NEVES, J. S.; NAKHAI, B. (1993), “The Baldrige award
framework for teaching total quality management”, Journal of Education for
Business, V. 69 N. 2, p. 121-5
OWLIA, M. S.; ASPINWALL, E. M. (1998), “A framework
for measuring quality in engineering education”,
Total Quality Management, V. 9 N. 6, p. 501-18.
PAUL LILLRANK, (2003),"The quality of
information", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,
V. 20 Iss: 6 p. 691 - 703
SRIKANTHAN, G.; DALRYMPLE, J. (2003), “Developing
alternative perspectives for quality in higher education”, International
Journal of Educational Management, V. 17 N. 3, p. 126-36.
SITALAKSHMI VENKATRAMAN, (2007),"A framework for
implementing TQM in higher education programs", Quality Assurance in
Education, V. 15 Iss: 1 p. 92 - 112
SEBASTIANELL, R.; TAMINI, N. (1998), “Barriers of TQM:
a class-level student project”, Journal of Education of Business, V. 73 N. 3, p.
158-62.
SCHMOKER, M.; WILSON, R.B. (1993), “Adapting total
quality doesn’t mean turning learning into a business”, Educational Leadership,
V. 51 N. 1, p. 62-3.
SILVESTRO, R. (1998), “The manufacturing TQM and
service quality literatures: synergistic or conflicting paradigms?”,
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, V. 15, N. 3, p. 303-28.
STENSAASEN, S. (1995), “The application of Deming’s
theory of total quality management to achieve continuous improvements in
education”, Total Quality Management, V. 6
TOZER, G. (1999), Metadata Management for Information
Control and Business Success, Artech House,
Norwood, MA.
UNDERWOOD, D
(1998,July/August). Assembly-line journalism. Columbia Journalism Review, 4.
WELLINS, R.; RICK, S. (1995,October 19) Taking account
of human factor. People Management, 1(21),
30-3
WANG, R. Y.; LEE, Y. W.; PIPINO, L. L.; STRONG, D. M.
(1998), “Manage your information as a product”, Sloan Mangement Review, V. 39 N.
4, p. 95-105.
YORKE, M. (1997), “The elusive quarry: total quality
in higher education”, Tertiary Education and Management, V. 3 N. 2, p. 145-56