Introduction TQM is management philosophy that seeks to integrate all organizational functions (marketing, finance, design, engineering, production,

customer etc) to focus on meeting customer needs and organizational objectives.TQM vie s an organization as a collection of processes. !t maintains that organizations must al ays strive to continuously improve these processes by incorporating the kno ledge and e"periences of orkers. Implementation of Quality The implementation of total #uality is similar to that of other decentralized control methods. !n developing TQM, companies need to understand ho consumers define #uality in both goods and services offered. !f a company pays more attention to #uality in its production processes, fe er problems are bound to occur hen the product is in the customers$ hands. Management should make a commitment to measure the performance of a product relative to its #uality through customer surveys, hich can help managers to identify design, manufacturing or any other process that has a bearing on the #uality of a product or service, and therefore provide an opportunity for continuous improvement. %n obstacle is an object, a thing, an action or a situation that causes an obstruction. &bstacles can be physical, social, economic, technological or political. There are a number of barriers that face the process of TQM implementation. 'iscussed belo are some of the barriers or obstacles that total #uality management face during implementation. Most scholars ho have researched on the subject choice to focus on the specific industries like the construction, %griculture e.t.c and specific economies. (hat e came up ith are general barriers that are likely to cut across the economic board. 1. Competitive markets % competitive market is a driving force behind many of the other obstacles to #uality. &ne of the effects of a competitive market is to lo er #uality standards to a minimally acceptable level. This barrier to #uality is mainly a mental barrier caused by a misunderstanding of the definition of #uality. )nfortunately, too many companies e#uate #uality ith high cost. Their definition leads to the assumption that a company can$t afford #uality. % broader definition needs to be used to look at #uality, not only in the company$s product, but in every function of the company. %ll company functions have an element of #uality. !f the #uality of tasks performed is poor, unnecessary cost is incurred by the company and, ultimately, passed to the customer. TQM should ork by inspiring employees at every level to continuously improve hat they do, thus rooting out unnecessary costs. 'one correctly, a company involved ith TQM can dramatically reduce operating costs. The competitive advantage results from concentrating resources (the employees$ brainpo er) on controlling costs and improving customer service. 2. Bad attitudes/abdication of responsibility/management infallibility

The competitive environment, poor management practice, and a general lack of higher e"pectations have contributed to unproductive and unhealthy attitudes. These attitudes often are e"pressed in popular sayings, such as *!t$s not my job+ and *!f ! am not broke, don$t fi" it. ,uch attitude sayings stem from the popular notion that management is al ays right and therefore employees are+ only supposed to implement management decisions ithout #uestioning. -ethargy is further propagated through management$s failure to train employees on TQM fundamentals that build better attitudes by involving them in teams that identify and solve problems. ,uch training can transform employees from being part of the problem to part of the solution. This ill foster motivation and creativity and build productive and healthy attitudes that focus employees on basic fundamentals, such as. keep customer needs in mind, constantly look for improvements, and accept personal responsibility for your ork. 3. Lack of leaders ip for !uality /"cess layers of management #uite often lead to duplication of duty and responsibility. This has made the lo er employees of an organization to leave the #uality implementation to be a management$s job. !n addition, #uality has not been taken as a joint responsibility by the management and the employees. 0oupled ith the notion that management is infallible and therefore it is al ays right in its decisions, employees have been forced to take up peripheral role in #uality improvement. %s a result employees ho are directly involved in the production of goods or delivery of services are not motivated enough to incorporate #uality issues that have been raised by the customers they serve since they do not feel as part of the continuous process of #uality improvement. Moreover, top management is not visibly and e"plicitly committed to #uality in many organizations. ". #eficiency of cultural dynamism /very organization has its o n uni#ue ay of doing things. This is defined in terms of culture of the organization. The processes, the philosophy, the procedures and the traditions define ho the employees and management contribute to the achievement of goals and meeting of organizational objectives. !ndeed, sticking to organizational culture is integral in delivery of the mission of the organization. 1o ever, culture has to be revie ed and for that matter re2 adjustments have to be done in tune ith the prevailing economic, political, social and technological realities so as to improve on efficiency. !n ade#uate cultural dynamism has made total #uality implementation difficult because most of the top level management of many organizations are rigid in their ays of doing things.

$. Inade!uate resources for total !uality management ,ince most companies do not involve #uality in their strategic plan, little attention is paid to TQM in terms of human and financial resources. Much of the attention is dra n to increasing profit margins of the organization ith little regard as to hether their offers3 supply to customers is of e"pected #uality. There is paltry budgetary allocation made to ards employee training and development hich is critical for total #uality management implementation. /mployee training is often vie ed as unnecessary cost hich belittles the profits margins hich is the primary objective for the e"istence of businesses and as a result TQM has been neglected as its implementation *may not necessarily bring gains to the organization in the short term+. %. Lack of customer focus. Most strategic plans of organizations are not customer driven. They tend to concentrate much on profit2oriented objectives ithin a given time frame. -ittle (if any) market research is done to ascertain the product or service performance in the market relative to its #uality. ,uch surveys are regarded by most organizations as costly and thus little concern is sho n to #uality improvement for consumer satisfaction. &. Lack of effective measurement of !uality improvement TQM is centered on monitoring employees and processes, and establishing objectives that anticipate the customer4s needs so that he is surprised and delighted. This has posed a considerable challenge to many companies. Measurement problems are caused by goals based on past substandard performance, poor planning, and lack of resources and competitor2based standard. (orse still, the statistical measurement procedures applied to production are not applicable to human system processes. '. (oor (lanning The absence of a sound strategy has often contributed to ineffective #uality improvement. 'uran noted that deficiencies in the original planning cause a process to run at a high level of chronic aste. )sing data collected at then recent seminars, 'uran (5678) reported that although some managers ere not pleased ith their progress on their #uality implementation agenda, they gave #uality planning lo priority. %s &akland (5676) said, the pre2planning stage of developing the right attitude and level of a areness is crucial to achieving success in a #uality improvement program. 9e ell and 'ale (566:) in their study observed that a large number of companies are either unable or un illing to plan effectively for #uality improvement. %lthough many

performed careful and detailed planning prior to implementation, not one of the firms studied or identified beforehand the stages that their process must endure. ;erhaps the root cause of poor plans and specifications is that many o ners do not understand the impact that poor dra ings have on a project$s #uality, cost, and time. <egardless of the cause, poor plans and specifications lead to a project that costs more, takes longer to complete, and causes more frustration than it should. 0ompanies using TQM should al ays strive to ards impressing upon o ners the need to spend money and time on planning. !f management took reasonable time to plan projects thoroughly and invest in partnering to develop an effective project team, a lot could be achieved in terms of product performance as these investments in prevention2 oriented management can significantly improve the #uality of the goods or services offered by an organization ). Lack of management commitment % #uality implementation program ill succeed only if top management is fully committed beyond public announcements. ,uccess re#uires devotion and highly visible and articulate champions. 9e ell and 'ale (566:) found that even marginal avering by corporate managers as sufficient to divert attention from continuous improvement. %dditionally, ,chein (5665) reported that the ).,. Quality 0ouncil is most troubled by the lack of top management commitment in many companies. -ack of commitment in #uality management may stem from various reasons. Major obstacles include the preoccupation ith short2term profits and the limited e"perience and training of many e"ecutives. 'uran, for e"ample, observed that many managers have e"tensive e"perience in business and finance but not in #uality improvement. ,imilarly, =othe (5677) pointed out that although the 0/& does not have to be a #uality e"pert, programs fail hen the 0/& does not recognize the contribution these techni#ues make to ard profitability and customer satisfaction. Top management should, therefore, embrace #uality improvement programs no matter ho far reaching the programs may appear the monetary implications therein. 0ompetition alone should not be considered as the single factor that drives managers into implementing #uality initiatives. 1*. +esistance of t e ,orkforce % orkforce is often un illing to embrace TQM for a variety of reasons. &akland (5676) e"plained that a lack of long2term objectives and targets ill cause a #uality implementation program to lose credibility. >eys (5665) arned that an adversarial relationship bet een management and non2 management should not e"ist, and he emphasized that a cooperative relationship is necessary for success. % TQM project must be supported by employee trust, acceptance and understanding of management4s objectives ./mployees ,therefore, should be recognized by the management as

vital players in the decision making processes regarding to #uality improvement as involving them ould have motivating effect on implementation of #uality programs. 11. Lack of proper training/Inade!uate -uman +esource #evelopment There is evidence that lack of understanding and proper training e"ists at all levels of any organization, and that it is a large contributor to orker resistance. ,chein (566:), for e"ample, mentioned that business school failure to teach relevant process skills contributed to manager ineffectiveness.TQM re#uires a ell2educated orkforce ith a solid understanding of basic math, reading, riting and communication. %lthough companies invest heavily in #uality a areness, statistical process control, and #uality circles, often the training is too narro ly focused. ?re#uently, 'uran$s arning against training for specific organizational levels or product lines is unheeded. This has also been underscored by 9e ell and 'ale ho argue that poor education and training present a major obstacle in the development and implementation of a #uality program. . ?or a company to produce a #uality product, employees need to kno ho to do their jobs. ?or TQM to be successful, organizations must commit to training employees at all levels. TQM should provide comprehensive training, including technical e"pertise, communication skills, small2team management, problem2solving tools, and customer relations. Conclusion and +ecommendation The advantages of TQM have been idely discussed, but the challenges of implementation have received little attention. % #uality philosophy is re#uired for the successful implementation of a #uality project. This philosophy must facilitate a long2term lifestyle change for a company. 0ommitment of top management is essential. ,ubstantial inflo of resources, ade#uate training, orkforce participation and effective measurement techni#ues are some of the key success factors. % successful TQM program is uni#ue, and it should motivate middle management to focus on long2term strategies rather than short2term goals. Team ork is the key to involvement and participation. @roups should be encouraged to ork closely and effectively, and should focus on #uality improvement and customer satisfaction. %ll organizations should focus on the follo ing for successful TQM implementation. i) 0reate consistency of purpose to ard improvement of the product and service so as to become competitive, stay in business and provide jobs. ii) 0ease dependence on mass inspectionA re#uire, instead, statistical evidence that #uality is built on. iii) %dopt the ne philosophy. (e are in a ne economic age. (e no longer need live ith commonly accepted levels of delay, mistake, defective material and defective orkmanship. iv) !mprove the #uality of incoming materials. /nd the practice a arding business on the basis of price alone. !nstead, depend on meaningful measures of #uality, along ith price.

v)

?ind the problemsA constantly improve the system of production and service. There should be continual rise in productivity and a decrease in costs.