Masters Dissertation Uk

ThesisBlog.
com Dissertation Writing Service
The Adaptation and Implementation of Private

Sector Management Paradigms to the Public Sector
© 2009 ThesisBlog.com 1
ThesisBlog.com Dissertation Writing Service
Table of Contents
Table of Contents .......................................................................................... 2

List of Figures ............................................................................................... 5
List of Tables ................................................................................................ 6
Statements and Declaration ........................................................................... 7
Abstract ....................................................................................................... 9
Chapter 1 - Introduction and Overview ......................................................... 10
1.1: Introduction ......................................................................................... 10
1.2: Importance of Topic ............................................................................. 10
1.3: State of the Field .................................................................................. 11
1.4: Field Research Problems ....................................................................... 11
1.5: Dissertation Outline .............................................................................. 12
1.6: Summary ............................................................................................. 12
Chapter 2 - Contemporary Management Practices: Organisational Development,
Structure and Contemporary Management Practices....................................... 14
2.1: Introduction ......................................................................................... 14
2.2: Public and Private Sector Organisational Management ............................. 15
2.2.1 Characteristics of Public Sector Organisations..................................................16
2.2.2 Characteristics of Private Sector Organisations ................................................18
2.3: Growth Stages and Challenges .............................................................. 19
2.4: Strategy .............................................................................................. 29
2.5: Decision Making ................................................................................... 30
2.6: Summary ............................................................................................. 34
Chapter 3 - Contemporary Management Practices: The Conceptual and Theoretical
Fundamentals of TQM ................................................................................. 35
3.1: Introduction ......................................................................................... 35
3.2: Definition of TQM ................................................................................. 35
3.2.1 Defining Principles .................................................................................................37
3.3: Theoretical Underpinning ...................................................................... 39
3.3.1 Total Systems Theory ...........................................................................................39
3.3.2 Strategic Planning .................................................................................................43
3.3.3 Project Management .............................................................................................45
3.3.5 Performance Measurement and Statistical Rigor .............................................46

3.4: Summary ............................................................................................. 51
Chapter 4 - Research Methodology ............................................................... 53
4.1: Introduction ......................................................................................... 53
4.2: Research Background ........................................................................... 53
4.2.1 Research Hypotheses ...........................................................................................53
4.2.2 Research Questions ..............................................................................................53
4.2.3 Research Objectives..............................................................................................54
4.3: Research Design and Research Methodology .......................................... 54
4.3 Research Purpose........................................................................................................55
4.3.1 Exploratory .............................................................................................................55
4.3.2 Descriptive ..............................................................................................................56
4.3.3 Explanatory ............................................................................................................56
4.3.4 Prescriptive .............................................................................................................57
4.4: Research Approach ............................................................................... 57
4.4.1 The Deductive versus the Inductive Approach? ...............................................58
4.4.2 The Qualitative versus the Quantitative Approach ..........................................59
4.5: Research Strategy ................................................................................ 61
4.5.1 Qualitative Sampling .............................................................................................62
4.5.2 Qualitative Data Collection...................................................................................63
4.5.3 Qualitative Data Handling ....................................................................................65
4.6: Credibility and Quality of Research Findings ............................................ 68
4.6.1 Reliability ................................................................................................................68
4.6.2 Validity ....................................................................................................................68
4.6.3 Quality .....................................................................................................................69
4.7: Summary ............................................................................................. 70
Chapter 5- Presentation of Results ................................................................ 71
5.1: Introduction ........................................................................................ 71
5.2: Conceptual Model 1: Organisation A....................................................... 71
5.2.1: Conceptual Model 1 .................................................................................................72
5.2.2 Conceptual Model 2 ..............................................................................................73
5.2.6 Results.....................................................................................................................77
5.3: Conceptual Model 2: Organisation B ....................................................... 78
5.3.6 Results.....................................................................................................................84
5.4: Summary ............................................................................................. 85
Chapter 6- Discussion .................................................................................. 86
6.1: Introduction ........................................................................................ 86
6.2: Organisational Preparedness ................................................................. 86
6.2.1 Growth Stage .........................................................................................................88
6.2.1 Decision Making .....................................................................................................92
6.2.2 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................94
6.3: The TQM Model .................................................................................... 95
6.3.1 The Foundations of Successful TQM Implementation .....................................96
6.4: Impact of TQM on Organisational Performance ..................................... 103
6.4.1 Employee Satisfaction.........................................................................................103
6.4.2 Service Quality .....................................................................................................104
6.4.3 Customer Satisfaction .........................................................................................105
6.5: Conclusion ......................................................................................... 106
Chapter 7 - Conclusion .............................................................................. 108
7.1: Contributions of the Research.............................................................. 110
7.2: Implications of the Research ............................................................... 111
7.2.1 Implications for Theory .......................................................................................... 112
7.2.2 Implications for Public Sector Organisations ...................................................... 114
7.2.3 Implications for Future Research ......................................................................... 116
7.3: Limitations of Study ............................................................................ 117
7.4: Final Conclusion ................................................................................. 118
References ............................................................................................... 119

List of Figures

Figure 3. 1: A Total Systems' Model of the Organisation's Macro-Micro Elements ........... 41

Figure 4. 1: Deductive and Inductive Thinking.................................................................... 59

Figure 6. 1: Soft and Hard TQM Constructs ...................................................................... 100

Элементы списка иллюстраций не найдены.
Элементы списка иллюстраций не найдены.
List of Tables

Table 2. 1: Greiner's Growth Phases ............................................................................................. 20

Table 2. 3: Churchill & Lewis’ growth stages............................................................................... 22
Table 2. 4: Scott & Bruce's Growth Stages ................................................................................... 24
Table 2. 5: Kazanjian’s Growth Stages ......................................................................................... 26
Table 2. 6: Decision Types and Characteristics ............................................................................ 33

Table 3. 1: Research Knowledge Gaps.......................................................................................... 51

Table 4. 1: Distinction Between Quantitative and Qualitative Methods ....................................... 60

Table 7. 1: Research Questions and Answers.............................................................................. 108
Statements and Declaration

DECLARATION
This work has not been previously accepted in substance for any degree and is not being concurrently
submitted in candidature for any degree.
Signed ……………………………………… (candidate)
Date ………………………………………
STATEMENT 1
This dissertation is being submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
……………………………………
Date ………………………………………
STATEMENT 2
This dissertation is the result of my own independent work/investigation, except where otherwise
stated. Other sources are acknowledged explicit reference. References and Bibliographies are
appended.
Date ………………………………………
STATEMENT 3
I hereby give consent for my dissertation, if accepted, to be available for photocopying and for inter‐
library loan, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organisations.
Date ………………………………………

Abstract
This study examines the division between the public and the private sector, seeking to determine
whether that division, or separation, inhibits the implementation of management strategies traditionally
associated with the private sector to the public sector. Following an extensive literature review, the
study determined the division as largely artificial, in the sense that it has been imposed on either sector
by the management paradigms favoured by either. The implication here is that the private sector is not
inherently decentralized, informal and organic and the public sector is not, by definition, the antithesis
of all of the stated. Instead, management paradigms and strategies have imposed decentralization
versus centralised, formality versus informality and dynamism versus mechanism on either. The findings
of the literature review, as summarized, were confirmed by a field study which involved the extensive
interviewing of top level management at one public sector (Organisation A, City Council) and one private
sector (Organisation B, Financial Institution) organisation. With the findings concluding that there are
no insurmountable structural barriers to the implementation of private sector management strategies
to the public sector, the strategies by which TQM can be implemented within the public sector are
critically discussed. Overall, the study contributes a greater understanding of the similarities between
the public and the private sector and the means by which to implement TQM in the public sector, and
the benefits of doing so.
Chapter 1 - Introduction and Overview

1.1: Introduction
Focusing on the prevalent organisational structure and management distinctions between
the private and the public sector, the dissertation aims to demonstrate the tendency of the public
sector to adhere to outmoded and inefficient management models as compared to the best
practices models, strategies, tools and mechanisms adopted within the private sector. The
disparity between public and private sector management styles and paradigms is customarily
justified through reference to organisational structural differences. This dissertation takes a
contrary position, arguing that even though there may exist structural differences between public
and private sector organisations, the differences are not such as to prevent the successful
implementation of private sector management strategies and paradigms in public sector
organisations. These statements and arguments shall be validated through a review of the
literature on public and private sector organisations and contemporary management strategies
and, solidified through the results of the field study.
The purpose of the dissertation is to argue and prove that there exists no valid obstacle in
the face of the public sector’s adoption of management strategies which are comparable to those
prevalent in the private sector. A guideline for the successful implementation of total quality
management (hereafter TQM) in the public sector shall be proposed.
1.2: Importance of Topic

The study proposes to examine the similarities and differences between the public and the
private sector for determination of whether or not private sector management strategies withstand
successful adaptation to, and implementation in, the private sector, from within a framework of specific
research questions. The research questions are:
Q1: Can management strategies, tools, and paradigms, traditionally associated with the
private sector be applied to the public sector?
Q2: How can TQM as a strategic management paradigm be successfully implemented in
the public sector?
The importance of the topic stems from its area of focus and purpose. Focusing on the
differences between the public and the private sectors and outlining the set of contemporary
management strategies associated with best practices and total quality management, the dissertation’s
primary purpose is to prove the possibilities, and imperatives, of the public sector’s adoption of `private
sector management strategies.’ The dissertation derives greater primary importance upon
consideration of the relationship between public and private sector organisations. As Flynn (2002)
explains, public and private sector organisations do not occupy different spaces, nor do they operate in
isolation from one another. Rather, public and private sector organisations operate within the same
space, the same environment, as in market, economy and community and, continually interact with one
another on a business and professional level. Insofar as it proceeds from an acknowledgement of the
similarities between the two, and the imperatives of removing artificial obstacles to the efficient and
effective operation of the public sector, whether within the context of sectoral matrix or its relationship
with the private sector, this present study is important.
1.3: State of the Field

The greater majority of comparative researches and studies on public and private sector
management have focused on structural differences, just as the majority of the literature on TQM and
strategic management has focused on their implementation in the private sector. There exists,
however, a small body of academic literature which focuses on the disputation of the boundaries
between the private and the public sector, insofar as the applicability of TQM and strategic
management is concerned. This dissertation aims to contribute to the aforementioned literature by
making a case for applicability and designing a model for implementation.
1.4: Field Research Problems

The aim of the dissertation is to explore public and private sector strategy. This has been done
by carrying out eight interviews within two organisations. The first organisation (Organisation A) is a
public sector organisation and a set of four interviews were carried out with public sector managers and
consultants. The second organisation (Organisation B) is a private sector organisation and another set
of four interviews were conducted with private sector managers and consultants.
The field research was limited to semi‐structured interviews which, in itself, may be problematic
and there was no opportunity to conduct a survey of employee opinion on strategic management/TQM,
their observed opinion on their organisation’s management failures and successes and, most
importantly, on the possibilities of implementing TQM paradigms in the public sector. The researcher
sought to overcome this particular problem, or limitation, through reference to secondary case studies
on the successful implementation of TQM in public sector organisations.
Another problem which the researcher confronted while conducting the field research was the
subjectivity versus objectivity of the respondents. Despite the fact that the interviewees were, without
exception, very helpful and pleasant, often trying to give as complete an answer as possible to the
questions posed, it was difficult to determine whether these responses were objective or not. It was
incumbent upon the researcher, therefore, to ensure the validity of the responses.
Finally, the interviewee bias issue was another problem. The researcher had to purposely
detach himself from the context in order that he may later analyze the primary data from a detached
perspective and not allow his own findings and opinions to tamper with either the direction of the
interviews, influence the responses of the interviewees or impinge upon the primary data findings.
1.5: Dissertation Outline

The dissertation will be comprised of seven chapters. Following the introductory chapter, which
outlines the nature of the study, Chapter 2 and 3 will present reviews on related literature on
contemporary management strategies, public versus private organisations and the tools, mechanisms
and strategies of best practices business models. The focus shall be on TQM and, Chapter 3, will be
devoted to defining it, outlining its theoretical precepts and discussing its implementation. Chapter 4
will present and defend the dissertation’s selected methodology. Chapter 5 will present the results of
the field research while Chapter 6 will present a guideline for the successful implementation of TQM in
the public sector and offer a detailed discussion and debate of the research results. Finally, Chapter 7
will conclude the study through an articulation of the research findings, a discussion of the implications
of these findings and the presentation of a set of recommendations.
1.6: Summary
As the current chapter has sought to explain, the dissertation shall focus upon management
strategies and paradigms in both the public and private sector, highlighting the differences therein. The
argument, however, is that the disparity between management strategies is not justified and if private
sector management strategies and models were to be applied in the public sector, productivity and
performance efficiency and effectiveness, not to mention efficient allocation and usage of resources
would be maximized. As Dent, Chandler and Barry (2004) explain, contemporary management practices
are predominantly geared towards the maximization of organisational efficiency through the
implementation of performance measurement and excellence tools and strategies. The implementation
of these models within the public sector has, over the past decade, contributed to the raising of
productivity levels by at least 15‐20%, in addition to which they have functioned to eliminated resource
wastage by anywhere from 40‐90% (Dent, Chandler and Barry, 2004; Moore, 2004). While the private
sector has exploited these models, strategies and tools, the public sector has, in the main, not.
Consequently, and as Moore (2004) maintains the public sector is largely denied the performance
betterment and productivity maximization tools afforded to the private sector. The argument, thus, is
that were the public sector to implement and exploit contemporary management practices widely used
in the private sector, performance, productivity and, efficiency levels would all experience varying
degrees of increase. Through a qualitative approach, focusing on the experiences of one public and one
private sector organisation, this argument shall be supported.
The following chapter presents a review of the relevant contemporary literature on the selected
topic, with particular focus on total quality management as the optimal management paradigm.
Chapter 2 - Contemporary Management Practices: Organisational

Development, Structure and Contemporary Management Practices
2.1: Introduction
Within the context of an ever‐increasingly competitive global business environment and highly
stringent consumer quality requirements, the predominant goal of contemporary management
strategies, paradigms and practices has become quality management, defined as dynamic
responsiveness to consumer needs, shifting market patterns and consumer/customer satisfaction
(Ahire, Landeros and Golhar, 1995). Across the industrialised world, private sector organisations have
conceded to the value of quality management programmes. This is evident in the fact that the greater
majority of private organisations in both the UK and the West have either implemented, are in the
process of implementing or are researching the implementation of, quality management programmes
(McAdam, Reid and Saulters, 2002). While some public sector organisations and government entities
have made a similar commitment to quality management programmes, the greater majority have not
(Lawrie et al., 2004). The consequence of the private sector’s adoption of quality management
strategies, tools and paradigms and the public sector’s failure to do so is that the latter is operating at
lower efficiency levels than the former (Daley, 2001; Rosenbloom et al., 2001). The comparatively poor
performance of the public sector, as measured through strategic business outcomes, has fortified the
call for the public sector’s adoption of strategic management tools, including those furnished by TQM
(Rosenbloom et al., 2001; Johnson, 2006). The public sector, in brief, needs to adopt managerial
approaches which are comparable to those employed by the private sector.
To assert the imperatives of the public sector’s adoption of management paradigms, tools and
strategies commonly associated with the private sector, does not constitute support for the blind
transference of management models. Instead, it implies the importance of designing paradigms
through explicit reference to an organisation’s particular characteristics. Given that the public sector
often emerges as the very antithesis of the private sector, as shall be discussed in the upcoming section,
insofar as it is mechanistic, formal and centralised, compared to the organic, informal and decentralised
nature of the private sector, blind cross‐sectoral transference of management paradigms would not be
successful. Private sector management strategies, tools and paradigms cannot be transferred to the
public sector with the expectation that implementation will be either successful or seamless. Instead,
they must be adapted to the characteristics and needs of both the sector itself and the organisation in
question. Adaptation, as shall be discussed through the literature reviewed in this chapter need focus
on a large array of organisational characteristics, from organisational growth stage to prevalent
decision‐making models.
Following an articulation of the differences between public and private sector organisational
structures and prevalent management methodologies, the literature reviewed in this chapter shall seek
the exposition of the importance of growth stage consideration, the value of participative decision‐
making and the imperatives of utilising strategic management tools. While public sector management
virtually eschews the entirety of the stated, not only is there no valid reason for doing so but, it is
contrary to the precepts of scientific management.
2.2: Public and Private Sector Organisational Management

The plethora of organisational types, sizes and activities has necessarily complicated
management philosophy. Contemporary management practice has stepped away from the òne size fits
all’ management paradigm, theorising that `best practices’ is inextricably dependant upon the design of
management models which are influenced by a number of variables. Among these variables are the size,
structure, business processes, industry and sector of the organisation in question and, most importantly,
the organisation’s growth stage (Churchill and Lewis, 1983; Scott and Bruce, 1987). As explained by
management and organisational development scholars, contemporary management philosophies, such
as total quality management, lend to the articulation of a best‐practices paradigm, or excellence model,
precisely because they consider all of the stated variables during the model design, planning and
implementation phases (Seghezzi, 2001).
Recent estimates suggest that at least 60% of all UK private sector organisations have
implemented, are actively engaged in the implementation of, or are planning the implementation of
total quality management models which have been designed with specific reference to, and
consideration of, all of the articulated variables (Lawrie et al., 2004; Dent, Chandler and Barry, 2004).
The public sector, however, still lags behind and, in general term, has betrayed a reluctance to engage in
the restructuring of their management models, the redesigning of their business strategies and the
reorganisation of their structural composition. Insofar as management scholars are concerned, the
aforementioned reluctance is somewhat unconsidered and largely unjustifiable (Flynn, 2002). Certainly,
they admit to the existence of fundamental variances between private and public sector organisations
but maintain that structural and sectoral disparities do not constitute a valid obstacle against the design
and adoption of a best practices, excellence model or total quality management paradigm (Flynn, 2002;
Dent, Chandler and Barry, 2004).
The above stated does not seek the contestation of the fact that there are differences between
the public and the private sector and that these differences must be reflected in management strategies
and paradigms. However, it does dispute the prevalent assumption that the applied management
paradigms and strategies need be almost divergent. Such divergence is expressed in the predominant
tendency for public sector organisations to eschew the exigencies of updating and reworking their
management strategies and paradigms towards greater consistency with their external environ. This
has culminated in the latter’s persistent adoption of highly formalised and extremely centralised
management strategies and organisational structures, rendering the organisations in question
vulnerable to eventual atrophy (McKevitt and Lawton, 1994; Rosenbloom et al., 2001).
2.2.1 Characteristics of Public Sector Organisations

Management scholars have determined that public sector organisations are largely modelled
after the traditional bureaucratic organisational structure, as influenced by Weber (Gibson, 1966; Cane
and Thurston, 2000; Dent, Chandler and Barry, 2004). The implication is that all of the four components
of organisational structure—labour division, departmentalisation, span of control and scope of decision‐
making—are shaped by bureaucratic‐traditionalist managerial theory. This, according to numerous
management scholars, has only served to offset an organisation’s inherent capacity for flexible response
to changing external conditions and has, in the long run, resulted in the formulation of mechanistic and
atrophying organisations (Gibson, 1966; Ford and Slocum, 1977; Cane and Thurston, 2000; Flynn, 2002;
Dent, Chandler and Barry, 2004).
As explained by Flynn (2002) among others, labour division within the public sector organisation
is invariably highly specialised. Task specialisations are clearly articulated and each employee has a
specific set of job functions, clearly set out in his/her job description, which he/she must operate by
(Bourgeois, 1984; Bourn and Bourn, 1995; Flynn, 2002). While the advantages of specialisation and
clearly articulated job descriptions are practically too numerous to articulate, the disadvantages are
enormous. Certainly specialisation implies that employees are often matched to jobs according to their
skill‐sets and explicit job descriptions mean that employees always have a clear understanding of the
tasks they are required to perform and know the boundaries of their professional responsibilities
(Bourgeois, 1984; Bourn and Bourn, 1995; Flynn, 2002; Mctavish, 2004). Excessive specialisation,
however, as is often the case with private sector organisations means that employees cannot function
beyond the parameters of their jobs and are devoid of the proactive, problem‐solving skills which are
deemed integral to contemporary organisational success (Bourgeois, 1984; Bourn and Bourn, 1995;
Flynn, 2002; Mctavish, 2004). Quite simply, employees are confined to the limits of the skills that they
brought with them upon joining the organisation, and on which basis they were hired, and their job
descriptions.
As early as the 1960’s, management scholars engaged in the critique of public sector
management, maintain that the functional departmentalisation trend typical of public sector
organisations only serves to compound the nature of the obstacles towards efficient and effective
organisational functioning (Gibson, 1966; Ford and Slocum, 1977; Kearney and Berman, 1999; Flynn,
2002). The grouping of employees according to their professional skill‐sets and their job descriptions
has its advantages. The most obvious of these, naturally, is departmental efficiency. The disadvantages,
however, are the invariable tendency for the evolution of narrow departmental visions and the
formation of communication and operational disconnects between the various departments (Gibson,
1966; Ford and Slocum, 1977; Kearney and Berman, 1999; Flynn, 2002). Within the context of an
organisational structure which hardly facilitates extra‐departmental communication, cooperation and
organisational cohesiveness, organisational goals are often sacrificed for departmental ones (Gibson,
1966; Ford and Slocum, 1977; Kearney and Berman, 1999; Flynn, 2002). The resultant disconnect
prevents department heads and employees from embracing a vision other than the immediate
departmental one.
As may be deduced from the above, the traditional organisational structure typical of public
sector entities is geared towards extreme centralisation of control and authority. Decision‐making ends
towards the autocratic, with the command chain flowing downwards. Employees are virtually excluded
from the decision‐making process and final decisions are confined to top management. The public
sector organisation is, thus, additionally distinguished from the private sector by its vertical hierarchical
structure (Mctavish, 2004; Dent, Chandler and Barry, 2004).
The traditional bureaucratic, centralised and highly formalised character of public sector
organisations is problematic because it gives rise to mechanistic organisations which are highly
vulnerable to atrophy, compounded with the probability of their being rendered irrelevant by the
market/sector in which they operate. Bourgeois (1984) agrees and adds that the tendency of public
sector organisations to devolve into mechanistic ones, largely consequent to extreme specialisation and
centralisation, constitutes one of the more telling signs of organisational atrophy. Mechanistic
structures, implying task repetition, inflexibility and centralised control, render an organisation
incapable of responding to external environmental changes or emergent demands. The organisation
functions according to a predetermined set of business strategies and tasks which employees execute in
abidance with a rigid blueprint (Bourgeois, 1984; Dent, Chandler and Barry, 2004; Mctavish, 2004). The
mechanistic process by which such organisations function, may mean that business processes and tasks
are executed with a high degree of efficiency but, as Kearney and Berman (1999) emphasise, not with
effectiveness. They are not effective because they do not address the reality of the surrounding
external environment, do not influence it and are not influenced by it.
As deduced from the literature reviewed in the above, public sector management and
organisational structure are inconsistent with the requirements and criteria of best practices. They are
inflexible, hence unresponsive to external environmental forces and demands and, accordingly are
atrophying structures which are increasingly incapable of survival within a highly competitive and ever‐
changing business/market environment.
2.2.2 Characteristics of Private Sector Organisations

There is a wealth of literature on private sector management strategies and on the
characteristics of private sector corporate entities. As much of the dissertation will focus upon private
sector management theory, the literature reviewed in this section will be limited to an elucidation of the
characteristics of private sector companies in immediate comparison to public sector ones.
Organisational development and industrial management scholars, Birkinshaw and Hagstrom
(2002) maintain that it is erroneous to assume that private sector organisations can be categorised
under one general heading and, subsequently, allotted the same set of structural, organisational and
strategic characteristics. Certainly, and in the most general of terms, it is possible to describe private
organisations as flexible and decentralised vertical structures which rely on specialisation but equally
focus on diversified skill sets (Birkinshaw and Hagstrom, 2002). It is further possible, as Coglianese and
Nash (2005) point out, to define private organisations’ decision‐making process/strategy as a largely
participatory one. This, however, provides only a general framework for the characteristics of private
organisations and should not obscure the fact that there exists management, strategic and structural
differentials within this matrix.
The differentials, or variances, which visibly exist between private sector firms is the key to their
success. As Erridge, Fee and McIlroy (2001) explain in this regard, the majority of private sector firms
custom‐design their management styles and strategies for greater consistency with their own internal
environmental structure, concomitant with the nature of their external environment and, most
importantly, with the market in which they operate. Few, if any, successful private sector companies
undertake the blind adoption of existent management formats but prefer, instead, to actively engage in
the design of its model (Erridge, Fee and McIlroy, 2001).
Concurring, Kearns (1995) adds that even as they preserve the outlined structural framework
and ensure that selected management models support and promote shared decision‐making,
decentralisation and varied skill‐sets, the more successful of the private sector organisations design the
particularities of their management strategy in consideration of their growth stage. The implication
here is not just that individual private sector organisations are continually evolving and are continuously
engaged in the re‐articulation of management and organisational strategies and policies for greater
consistency with their growth stage (Kearns, 1995). They are, in other words, designed for flexibility.
Having offered a brief review of the predominant characteristics of private sector organisations,
as would allow for their situating vis‐à‐vis public sector ones, the subsequent sections shall review
literature on points raised herein. These are organisational growth stages, decision making and
strategy. The rationale for their discussion lies in the fact that they comprise some of the more
influential factors in the design of both private sector management strategies and TQM paradigms. In
brief, and as shall be clarified through the literature reviewed in subsequent sections, there is no òne‐
size fits all’ management paradigm, as Bourn and Bourn (1995: 128) so succinctly phrase it. Instead,
what are loosely referred to as management paradigms should be regarded as frameworks which
provide organisations with the guidelines requisite for the design of a management paradigm which
immediately addresses their needs, requirements and characteristics. Within the context of the stated,
TQM emerges as a framework, not a paradigm which provides organisations with the tools and
strategies required for the design of a TQM management paradigm with `strategically fits’ into the
organisation and is optimally consistent and considerate of its needs (Bourn and Bourn, 1995).
Numerous factors must be considered when designing this model, among which are growth stages and
decision‐making and communications models. These shall be discussed below.
2.3: Growth Stages and Challenges

Organisational development scholars have forwarded multiple business growth models. Among
these are the (Scott and Bruce, 1987) industry, large business, small business (e.g. Churchill and Lewis,
1983) and general growth models (e.g. Greiner, 1972).
Greiner's five‐stage model (1972; 1998), is the more popular of the business growth models.
Greiner (1972) views growth as a series of evolutionary periods of growth followed by changes forced by
crises. Apart from these two factors, evolution and revolution, Greiner (1972) identifies three other key
dimensions to organisational growth. These are the size and age of the organisation and the growth
rate of the industry it is in.
Table 2. 1: Greiner's Growth Phases

Phases Creativity Direction Delegation Coordination Collaboration
Description The birth stage Period of Growth evolves New Emphasis on
of an sustained from successful coordination strong
organisation. growth under application of a systems interpersonal
able, directive decentralised achieve more collaboration.
leadership. organisational efficient
structure. allocation of
resources.
Focus Creating a Efficiency of Expansion of Consolidatio Problem
product and a operations. market. n of solving and
market. organisation. innovation.
Characteristic Informal Centralise Decentralised Line staff Matrix
s organisatio d and organisational and organisatio
nal functional structure product n
structure organisatio Top-level groups Participativ
Managemen nal executives Top e
t style is structure manage by managem manageme
entre- Directive exception ent seen nt style
preneurial manageme Control as Control
and nt style system: reports watchdog system:
individualist Control and profit Control mutual
ic system centres system: goal setting
Control based on Individual plans & Team
system standards bonuses investment bonuses
based on and cost centres
market centres Communicatio Quick
n from top is Profit problem
results Salary and sharing
infrequent solving
Rewards merit and stock through
related to increases Acquisitions options team action
ownership More Many Reduced
Informal formal functions size of head
com- communic centralise office
munication a-tion d at head
office

In commenting upon his original model, Greiner (1998) begins by explaining that while it is primarily
based upon industrial and consumer goods organisations, it is applicable to all organisation types. Even
as they admit that the phases are not strictly delineated and that corporate success is largely
consequent to skilful leadership, a winning strategy and consumer satisfaction, they maintain that most
of those organisations which do not go through these growth phases either ‘die’ or experience growth
stagnation (Greiner, 1998). It is interesting to note that, in their discussion of public sector
organisations, McKevitt and Lawton (1994) refer to Greiner’s growth stages to argue that public sector
organisations are trapped within a single growth stage and on the brink of atrophy. Mechanism has
rendered a significant percentage of public sector organisations inherently incapable of expressing the
dynamic responsiveness to external environmental conditions which propels movement from on growth
stage to the next (McKevitt and Lawton, 1994).
Entrepreneurs, however, prefer the Churchill and Lewis model (1983) as it addresses the failure
of organisational growth models to accurately reflect the reality of all businesses. Preference for this
model largely emanates from the fact that it concedes that not all companies experience all growth
stages. In addition to that, this model maintains that company size is usually measured in terms of
revenues (but not complexity or diversity).
The Churchill and Lewis model measures organisational size, diversity and complexity, and
embraces the five management factors: managerial style, organisational structure, extent of formal
systems, major strategic goals and the owner’s involvement in the business. They concentrate on the
early, perilous days when raising cash and delivering product are regular threats. Their theory contends
that rapid expansion creates disequilibrium between corporate capabilities and needs.
Table 2. 2: Churchill & Lewis’ growth stages

Stages Existence Survival Success Take-off Resource

Maturity
Description Initial stage in Growing the Important A period of The company
which the workable decision to rapid growth. has arrived. It
existence of the business entity make: expand has the
organisation is into a the company advantages of
challenged. profitable (‘G’ for size, financial
organisation. growth) or resources and
keep it stable managerial
and profitable talent and
(‘D’ for should
disengage). maintain the
entrepreneurial
spirit.
Focus / Obtaining Relationship D: maintaining Growth. Return on
strategy customers and between profitable investment.
delivering the revenues and status quo.
product/service. expenses. G: get
resources for
growth.
Characteristics Simple Simple Functional Divisional Line and
organisation organisation organisation organisation staff
al structure al structure al structure Formal organisation
Management Supervised and systems are Extensive
by direct supervision managemen maturing formal
supervision Formal t style More systems
Formal systems are D: distance is Ownership
systems minimal Basic created and
minimal to Strong formal between the managemen
nonexistent relationship systems owner and t are
The owner is between Business the business separated
the business owner and and owner (owner is
business move apart often
G: replaced as
Formal managing
systems are director)
developing
Owner is
actively
involved in
the business
Challenges Remaining Generation of D: How to grow Consolidate
alive cash for the Maintaining rapidly and and control
(developing a short-term profitability finance that financial
customer base (survival) and and adapting growth. gains.
and delivering long-term to changing Can the owner Eliminating
what was (financing environment delegate inefficiencies
contracted for). growth). G: responsibility and
Maintaining to improve introducing
profitability, managerial budgets,
financing effectiveness? strategic
growth, hiring planning etc.

the right whilst
people with an retaining
eye to the advantages of
future. small size.

Organisations are usually in one of the stages described by Churchill and Lewis (1983), with it
being incumbent upon an organisation’s leadership to identify the precise growth stage they are at.
Identification of the growth stage is important because a company’s stage of development determines
which managerial factors need to be dealt with and integrated into the operative management
paradigm. However some organisations exhibit characteristics particular to more than one growth
stage, resulting in an imbalance of factors can create serious problems for the entrepreneur (Churchill
and Lewis, 1983).
The Scott and Bruce model (1987) is an amalgam of various growth models, combined with the
theorists’ working experiences with small, growing businesses. As pertains to small business growth
stages, it draws from Churchill and Lewis (1983), but from Greiner (1972; 1998) with respect to the
necessity of resolving end of stage crisis prior to moving to the next stage. Scott and Bruce (1987)
define their model as a diagnostic tool for companies to determine their growth stage, thereby allowing
anticipation of crises and enabling proactive response.
Table 2. 3: Scott & Bruce's Growth Stages

Stages Inception Survival Growth Expansion Maturity

Description Main values Company is Organisation Search for more Company is still
driving the established as a should be equity partners to growing but is
organisation are workable profitable and finance moving out of the
those of the business entity. growing. expansion. definition of
founder. small enterprise.
Focus Obtaining Revenues and Managed Financing Expense control,
customers and expenses. growth, growth and productivity and
economic ensuring maintaining niche marketing
production. resources. control. if industry is
declining.
Characteristics Industry: Industry: Industry: Industry: Industry:
emerging, emerging, growth, new growth, growth,
fragmented fragmented competitors shakeout shakeout or
Organisationally Simple Functional, Functional, mature /
unstructured organisationa centralised decentralised declining
Management: l structure organisationa organisational Decentralised,
direct Management: l structure structure functional /
supervision, supervised Management: Management: product
entrepreneurial supervision, delegation, decentralised, organisational
and entrepreneuri coordination, professional, structure
individualistic al and entrepreneuri administrative Management:
Systems and administrativ al Systems and decentralised,
controls: simple e Systems and controls: watchdog
bookkeeping, Systems and controls: budgeting, Systems and
eyeball control controls: accounting sales and controls:
Negative cash simple systems, production formal control
flow bookkeeping, simple reports, systems,
Investments personal control delegated management
mainly in plant control reports control by objectives
and equipment Cash negative Positive cash Positive cash Cash generator
/ breakeven flow, flow, small Investments in
Investments reinvested dividends maintenance of
in working Investments Investments in plant and
capital in working new operating market
capital and units position
extended
plant
Most likely Emphasis on Overtrading, Entry of The distance Although not
crises profit – trying to leading to larger of top considered to
generate a uncontrolled competitors. management be a crisis, the
positive cash growth. Need to from the founder will be
flow. Increased decide ‘action’ – the under pressure
Administrative complexity of whether to entrepreneur from investors
demands – expanded compete by now has the to think about
formalisation of distribution expanding role of company’s
systems and channels. into new watchdog & future, i.e. his
record keeping. Competition markets and planner which or her
Increased and pressure products or is against his succession.
activity and its on prices by nature.
demands on increase; new differentiatio The need for
time – the financing n. external focus
demands on the needs to be The demand driven by
manager’s time attracted. of expansion intensified

become Pressures for into new competition.
excessive and information – markets or
there is need to need for products –
delegate. formalised this will
control stretch
systems and managerial
budgetary and financial
control. resources.
Financing
expansion,
maintaining
control.

As tabulated, the Scott and Bruce (1987) model particularly important insofar as the design of
organisation‐specific management paradigms are concerned. It is important to recall that Scott and
Bruce (1987) define their growth model as a diagnostic tool. The implication here is that an
organisation’s leaders can exploit it to identify the particular growth stage they are at, and the
challenges they expect at each of these stages.
In proposing an alternate growth model, Kazanjian (1988) did not dispute or seek the
invalidation of preceding models. Instead, he sought the design of a more industry‐specific growth
model. As such, he investigated the problems specific to particular growth stages in new technology
ventures, drawing a set of assumptions which he tested by asking the CEOs of 105 new technology
ventures to rate a number of problems and identify their companies’ growth stages. Kazanjian (1988)
found that problems can overlap in adjacent stages but, in all stages, the problems of strategic
positioning, sales‐marketing and people predominated over others.
Table 2. 4: Kazanjian’s Growth Stages

Stages 1. conception & 2. commercialisation 3. growth 4. stability

development
Description The stage before Developing the product Period of high The organisation
the formal creation or technology for growth as the has reached a level
of the organisation. commercialisation. The product sells well, of growth that is
organisation has been demand may consistent with that
formally established and exceed of the market.
(seed) funding has been expectations.
obtained.
Focus Invention and Learning how to make Produce, sell and Development of a
development of a the product work well. distribute in volume second-generation
product. and attain product.
profitability.
Characteristics Structure and Discrete Functional Reduction of
formality organisational organisation with span of control
nonexistent functions centralised (decision making
Activity defined Owner / few partners decision making delegated to
and directed by dominate the venture Need for functional
founder(s) increased directors)
Employees directly
Informal involved / witness all control, Bureaucratic
communication decisions management principles;
information, standardised and
Communication face- planning and formalised rules
to-face budgeting and procedures
Emergence of Formal planning
financial and and project
administrative management
systems systems
Dominant Strategic Sales and marketing Sales/market Strategic
problems positioning problems share growth positioning
Resource Resource acquisition Organisational Profitability
acquisition issues Internal controls
Technology Future growth
development base
Securing Resource
financial acquisition
resources
Technology
development

Commonalities are detectable in the early growth stages of organisations and derive from:
phases 1 and 2 of Greiner’s model (creativity and direction), stages 2 and 3 of Churchill and Lewis’ model
(survival and success), stages 2 and 3 of Scott and Bruce’s model (survival and growth), and stages 3 and
4 of Kazanjian’s model (growth and stability). These commonalities pertain to six factors.
3 Organisational structure. More functional organisational structures must evolve alongside
growth.
4 Systems and controls. Increasing size and complexity compels the greater formalisation of
organisational systems and controls.
5 Profitability. In the earlier stages survival is dependant upon profitability, but established
companies may withstand periods of loss.
6 Management style. Management styles are entrepreneurial, individualistic and directive or
coordinated and based on functional supervision, depending on organisational size.
7 Position of the founder‐owner. While the founder‐owner’s organisational and personal
objectives play an important role, his/her position changes as the organisation grows. Growth
compels the adoption of a less personalized managerial style, pressuring founder‐owners to hire
professional managers and adopt an alternate managerial style.
8 Cash. Fast‐growth companies may be profitable, but are often cash‐short. Hence, funding is
needed to support that growth and to finance long‐term investments.
Hambrick and Crozier (1985) studied the challenges confronting 74 firms in the information
processing and health care industries. Firm selection was based on a significant continuous growth for
five consecutive years. Due to the perusal of different strategies for dealing with challenges, following
that five year period, some companies showed declining results (‘stumblers’) while others continued to
grow (‘stars’). The primary purpose of this study was the identification of some of the more
fundamental of the challenges confronting high growth companies. The importance of identifying,
understanding and knowing how best to confront these challenges was identified as critically important
by the researchers insofar as all of the stated allows companies to devise management strategies which
aim towards stability and continued growth (Hambrick and Crozier, 1985) .
As pertains to the challenges, the first identified by Hambrick and Crozier (1985) pertains to the
problematics of instant size. As the researchers found through their case study approach, rapid growth
leads to instant size increase, despite the organisation’s being ill‐equipped for that. There are numerous
adverse consequences to instant size. First among these is loss of cohesion, concomitant with
significant influx of new managers and employees, leading to disaffection and disorientation. The
second is that instant size companies are threatened by inadequate skills. Quite simply stated,
managing a 100‐person firm, as opposed to a 1000‐person organisation, requires a different managerial
skill set. The third is inadequate systems. The implication here is that the decision making process must
evolve as rapidly, to avoid communications and decision making breakdowns (Hambrick and Crozier
1985).
According to the conclusions reached by Hambrick and Crozier (1985), the second challenge ties
in with the tendency of high‐growth companies to experience a sense of infallibility. This means that
decision makers tend to remain committed to a course of action with which they have had prior
favourable experience, even as environmental turbulence and competitors’ rapidly changing strategies
to overtake their new competitor, demand change. Two negative outcomes have been identified. The
first is internal turmoil. This means that rapid growth expands the amount of information to be
processed and decisions to be made, resulting in internal turmoil and deteriorating decision‐making
quality. The second is extraordinary resource needs. The implication here is that rapidly growing
organisations tend to be cash starved, straining the organisation, impacting strategy, enforcing
managers to ply multiple roles and employees to work longer hours, negatively affecting morale and
increasing burnout risk (Hambrick and Crozier, 1985).
Hambrick and Crozier (1985) identify six strategies for overcoming the challenges identified and
discussed. The first strategy maintains that the CEO envisions the organisation as large before it’s
becoming so, and prepares the firm for the next stage of growth through reorganisation, while mentally
and emotionally preparing employees for a different setting. The second strategy holds that once the
future organisation is envisioned, team‐building can commence. A personnel and management
development programme must be implemented to prepare people for the future, while the quality of
people hired and their ability to fit into the organisation remains of paramount importance. The third
strategy focuses on saving and reinforcing the organisational culture. The argument here is that a
strong organisational culture is important, and should be reinforced through symbols which remind
people of the firm’s success. The fourth strategy highlights the importance of managing dynamic
tensions within an organisation. Change‐induced tensions must be confronted by modifying older
structures and adopting new processes and language, which supplement successful current ones. The
fifth strategy focuses on structural smallness; successful organisations tend to have very flat
organisational structures. The last strategy is simply termed `pay for performance and argues that an
incentives system helps ensure that employees work hard and positively respond to change (Hambrick
and Crozier, 1985).
As the above reviewed literature has sought to highlight and clarify, the management strategies
which an organisation pursues must be based on a clear understanding of the organisation’s growth
stage and the problems associated with each, concomitant with the relevant problem‐solving or
challenge‐confronting, strategies. Irrespective of the management paradigm implemented within an
organisation and regardless of whether it belongs to the private or public sector, organisational
development and management scholars maintain the imperatives of framing decisions and strategies
within the context of the organisation’s growth stage.
2.4: Strategy
There is wealth of literature about strategy, strategic management and strategic planning, but a
lack of consensus on what strategy is and how to ‘do’ strategy. The classical approach to strategy argues
that it is a rational and deliberate process in which realised and intended strategies match (De Wit and
Meyer, 1999; Mintzberg and Waters, Chapter 1 in Segal‐Horn, 1998; Whittington, 2001). The
evolutionary approach, defining strategy as a creative and emergent process, occupies the other end of
the spectrum and emerged as a critique of the classical approach (De Wit and Meyer, 1999; Mintzberg
and Waters, Chapter 1 in Segal‐Horn, 1998; Whittington, 2001).
Nineteen‐eighty's strategy literature focused on the relationship with the external environment.
According to Rumelt (1998) industry factors only explain 9 to 16 per cent of variations in profits whereas
firm specific factors account for 44 to 46 per cent. Hence, the emergence of the resource based view on
strategy and its focus on the organisation’s resources and its capabilities. Understanding the
relationships between resources, capabilities, competitive advantage and profitability is integral to
developing a strategy that ensures sustainable competitive advantage (Grant, 1998).
With respect to the formulation and implementation of strategy, emergent approaches occupy
either end of the spectrum (De Wit and Meyer, 1999). The organisational leadership perspective
suggests that the firm’s leader is responsible for selecting and implementing strategy and is in full
control of the organisation and developments within. Conversely, the organisational dynamics
perspective contends strategists have hardly any control over developments within the organisation (De
Wit and Meyer, 1999).
According to Beaver and Prince (2004) strategy development is often, erroneously, viewed as a
rational, two‐dimensional process of formulation and implementation. In reality strategy formulation
and implementation are complex, interactive processes, influenced by management values, politics and
organisational cultures.
Despite a proven relation between planning and growth, it is difficult to link strategy with
business performance because defining and measuring performance is problematic (Beaver and Prince,
2004). Nevertheless, business planning improves decision making quality (Hussey, 1998). Baker et al.
(1993) argue that a formal written business plan is advantageous for three reasons. Firstly, it
encourages writers and editors to critically rethink goals and objectives. Secondly, they comprise a
useful media of internal and external environmental communication. Finally, they can serve as a control
mechanism to monitor progress and make course corrections.
According to the CEOs surveyed in Baker et al.’s (1993) research, strategic planning’s gains are:
Profitability 94% of companies reporting improvement
Marketing / product mix 93%
Industry leadership 93%
Decision making 93%
Communication and unity 93%
Motivation 92%
Operations management 92%
Allocation of resources 91%
Controls 91%
Asset growth 88%
While profitable companies prepare business plans, profitability measures do not reveal a
strong linkage with strategic planning (Baker et al., 1993).
Joyce and Woods (2003) find that as organisations become larger, the lack of a strategy building
and monitoring process may become restrictive (Joyce and Woods, 1983). This is consistent with
Churchill and Lewis’ (1983) growth model. However, and as Bryson (1988) emphasises, while the
presence of a clearly‐defined strategy process is integral to efficient operation, strategy should be
defined in broad terms. In other words, and as also emphasised by Mumford (2000) strategy should be
regarded as a broad framework but not be treated as a meticulously defined guideline for organisational
action. Were it to become such, the organisation’s capacity for flexible response to emergent intra and
extra‐environmental forces and influences will be severely restricted.
2.5: Decision Making

Decision making can be defined as a process that starts when information becomes available that
indicates a potential problem and runs till the implementation of a chosen solution. The importance of
adequate decision making increases (Keuning and Eppink, 1993):
As the activities of an organisation become more complex;
As the decisions tie the organisation down for a longer period of time;
As involvement and participation play an increasing role in decision making.

Generally, decision making can be seen as a process which revolves around problem definition, the
development of alternatives, the assessment of the consequences of applying each of the developed
alternatives and, finally, the making of a choice/decision (Keuning and Eppink, 1993).
Making a choice between the different alternative solutions means that one needs to have
criteria on which to base this choice. In addition, there will be a number of preconditions that need to
be met. If the results of two alternatives are the same and all preconditions are met, one needs to have
a look at the level of uncertainty involved in the alternatives and the organisation’s objectives. The
alternatives need to be linked to the organisational objectives and the objectives need to be prioritised
in order to be able to decide on the ‘best’ alternative (Keuning and Eppink, 1993).
Broadly speaking, there are three methods for making a decision (Keuning and Eppink, 1993):
1. Decision tree; the different alternatives and their consequences are visually presented, if desired
with the likelihood per alternative.
2. Decision matrix; on the one side of the matrix the alternatives are indicated, on the other side the
factors that potentially affect the outcomes of the alternatives. Each of these factors is given a
weight depending on their relative importance. The ‘value’ of an alternative is the product of the
scoring of an alternative and the weighting.
3. Game theory; this assumes that every problem has two dimensions: the choice between alternatives
and a number of situations or reactions. For each alternative in every given situation an expected
value or outcome is determined. The choice between alternatives can be based either on
maximising the minimum result or on reduction of the opportunity costs in the case of choosing the
wrong alternative.
Keuning and Eppink (1993) identify three factors as bearing a direct and immediate
influence on decision-making. The first of these is the structure of the organisation. It is
imperative to consider the way the organisation has been divided into departments, the level of
(de)centralisation and the level of involvement of advisory board members and others in the
decision making process. The second is the quality of communication. The implication here is
that errors in communication can negatively affect the quality of decision making. It is
important that there are adequate and open communication channels, communication takes place
in a timely manner and great care is taken when interpreting information or messages. The third
and final factor is the motivation of employees. It is imperative, as the researchers argue, to
consider an individual’s motivation (or objectives) plays an important role in decision making.
The organisation should strive for the employee’s motivation / objectives to be aligned with the
organisation’s objectives (goal congruence) for instance by developing an appropriate
performance system (Keuning and Eppink, 1993).
Three levels of decisions can be distinguished (Keuning and Eppink, 1993): strategic,
organisational and operational decisions. Strategic decisions affect the whole company. Organisational
decisions change the structure of an organisation (e.g. roles and responsibilities, organisational
structure). Operational decisions concern day‐to‐day activities and have routine characteristics. The
following matrix indicates the different types of decisions and their characteristics.
Table 2. 5: Decision Types and Characteristics

Strategic Organisational Operational

Problem Determining the Choosing the most Optimum use of
relationship between the adequate organisational resources
organisation and its structure
environment
Characteristics Centralised Developing Decentralised
of decisions Highly uncertain capabilities Relatively high level
One-off character Conflicting demands of certainty
from strategic Repetitious
Consequences innovation and
difficult to reverse existing activities Problems present
Problems do not arise themselves
automatically automatically

Another factor influencing the way decisions are made is the relative importance of one’s own
objectives compared to the objectives of others. Of course once a decision has been taken, someone
(or more than one person) needs to take responsibility for the implementation of the solution.
One of the major challenges facing growing organisations is that of changing from an informal,
centralised business into a formal and structured organisation. A key dilemma is how to get clarity and
accountability without rigidity and loss of creativity and motivation. Gilmore and Kazanjian (1989)
concentrated on the developmental aspects of decision making during the growth stages of new
ventures. They argue that the clarity of the decision making process is a critical issue for growing
organisations. Generally speaking the decision making characteristics of a growing company change
from:
informal to formal
centralised to decentralised
non‐specialised to specialised
short time horizon to long and short time horizon
as these organisations move from their early stages to later, more mature stages.
The literature reviewed in the above has sought to clarify the interrelation between decision‐
making and strategy, ultimately highlighting decisions as the strategic selection of a specific option.
Making the right decision is not just integral to an organisation’s growth and business performance but
further influences organisational stability.
2.6: Summary
The purpose of the foregoing literature review was to articulate the differences between the
public and he private sectors, on the one hand and to outline the criteria for the selection and design f
management strategies, on the other. As the literature reviewed suggested, effective and efficient,
goal‐oriented organisational performance is primarily predicated on decentralisation and flexibility. The
organisational entity needs to be structured in such a way as would allow participatory management
and a two‐way of information. This enables the arrival at infinitely more informed and realistic
decisions, strategies and policies. Besides that, flexibility has emerged as a key predicator of success;
wherein organisations have to be flexible enough to redesign management strategies according to
requirement, develop management paradigms which are consistent with the organisation’s growth
stage and decision‐making frameworks which meet the demands of the situation at hand. Through a
review of the academic literature on all of the stated management concepts, the chapter has sought to
demonstrate that the outlined concepts are simply consistent with scientific management precepts and
should not, in any way, be regarded as peculiar to private sector management.
The next chapter shall build upon the aforementioned through a review of the literature on
contemporary management theory, with particular focus on total quality management. The intent of
the forthcoming chapter is to expose the best practices management model most widely used in the
private sector for the purpose of later arguing, not just the advantages and possibilities of its
implementation in the public sector but, the exigencies of such implementation.
Chapter 3 - Contemporary Management Practices: The Conceptual

and Theoretical Fundamentals of TQM
3.1: Introduction
Tracing its roots to an economically ravaged post‐war Japan, Total Quality Management (TQM)
is popularly perceived of as a comprehensive management paradigm whose primary goals are customer
satisfaction, and a high degree of organisational flexibility as would ensure continued and timely
responsiveness to external environmental developments and demands (Ross, 1994; Beer, 2003). It is
deliberately designed to motivate organisational dynamism as opposed to mechanism and, thus,
functions as a prescription against the atrophy which public sector companies and those in their later
growth stages are particularly vulnerable to (Ishikawa, 1985; Ross, 1994; Hodgetts and Luthans, 1997;
Beer, 2003).
TQM is a comprehensive management philosophy which is primarily founded upon an
understanding of the fluid nature of the external environment and the exigencies of organisational
capacity to respond to those changes in such a way as would maintain customer satisfaction, thus
loyalty, organisational competitiveness, thus market share, and superior overall performance (Leonard
and MacAdam, 2002; Rahman, 2004). Not only does its successful implementation offset the potential
for organisational atrophy and transform formerly mechanistic organisations into dynamic ones but, it is
adaptable to, and adoptable in, both private and public sector companies.
3.2: Definition of TQM

Saylor (1996) states that the definition of TQM is contained within its appellation: Total Quality
Management. Proceeding from within the parameters of the stated, the definition of TQM is as follows:
• Total: Within the definitional parameters of TQM, the meaning of the word total
operates on two different kevels. In the first place, it refers to the totalising perspective
that this managerial approach takes towards the concept of organisation. Total, in
other words, refers to the totality of the organisation, as in all the units and subunits
that comprise it, maintaining that the attainment of operational efficiency and
effectiveness is dependant upon the performance of all the units and subunits within.
On the second level, total refers to the totality of the organisation’s human resources
and personnel, emphasising that the responsibility for attaining quality rests with each
and every person in the organisation and not just with management (Saylor, 1996). The
term total, therefore, references the comprehensive view that this management
philosophy has of an organisation and its contention that the attainment of excellence is
dependant upon the operation of each unit and subunit within and the role that each
person within the organisation plays.
• Quality: Within the context of the TQM philosophy, quality does not simply refer to the
final output but to all steps involved in the production of that output and the business
processes requisite for the maintenance of quality output. The attainment of quality
output, according to this particular managerial philosophy, is incontrovertibly linked to
the organisation’s understanding customer needs through constant market and
consumer research and on continually adjusting organisational operation to meet those
needs and satisfy expectations (Saylor, 1996). Quality here is identified as the
penultimate organisational aim, insofar as its attainment and subsequent sustenance is
the predicator of organisational success, consumer/customer loyalty and the protection
of existent market shares, not to mention their expansion.
• Management: Within the framework of TQM, management does not simply refer to the
control exercised over the business processes implemented for the attainment of
quality or even to the management of the organisation per se but, to the role that top
management plays in order to incite and motivate quality performance and the drive
towards excellence. The management component of the appellation references top
management’s responsibility to design and implement the business processes, maintain
both project management and performance measurement models, utilise strategic
planning and statistical tools to ensure the articulation of realistic organisational goals,
the fulfilment of those goals within a well‐defined schedule and, above all,
management’s function as a model of, and drive for, total excellence of quality (Saylor,
1996).

Harvey and Brown (2001), organisational development scholars and researchers, define Total
Quality Management as “an organisational strategy of commitment to improve customer satisfaction by
developing procedures to carefully manage output quality” (p. 336). While conceding to this as an
undeniable oversimplification of the complexity of that managerial, industrial engineering and
organisational development construct that is TQM, Harvey and Brown (2001) contend that this
definition is not just one that has attained universal pedagogical consensus but one which accurately
identifies the central aim of TQM as customer/consumer satisfaction.
Proceeding from the above stated definitions for TQM, one may surmises that the construct
embraces both a management philosophy and paradigm. In fact, this is precisely the definition of TQM
forwarded by Agus (2002). As he writes, TQM may best be understood as an approach to organisational
management excellence founded upon the understanding of organisations as living organisms. When
organisations are perceived of in such a manner, departments within are not simply viewed as
interconnected but as co‐dependent and inextricably connected parts of a greater whole with the health
and superior performance of that whole, ultimately dependant upon the optimal performance of all
units therein. This particular definition of organisations furnishes the infrastructural base of the TQM
philosophy (Agus, 2002).
The above stated definitions for TQM are largely uncontested but they remain general. A more
accurate understanding of TQM, as can only be attained through the provision of more detailed
definitions, hinges upon a critical review and discursive analysis of its componential elements and the
variables contained within each.
3.2.1 Defining Principles

As may be deduced from the above stated definitions, TQM references a number of interrelated
principles. These are conformance to quality determined specifications, adherence to the requirements
established by the outlined by the defined quality standards, fitness for use, avoidance of loss and
minimisation of operational waste, the satisfaction of consumer demands and, more ideally, the
exceeding of consumer/customer expectations (Reeves and Bednar 1994). The identification of the
aforementioned interrelated principles, and the articulation of the componential elements comprised
within each has determined the imperatives of articulating a managerial philosophy, concomitant with a
revision of the existent scope of managerial practices, in order to accommodate the stated principles. It
is within the context of the stated expansion and rearticulated managerial approach/philosophy that
TQM has, as Juran (1992) emphasises, evolved into a comprehensive management system which, part
from embracing variant management approaches, programmes and multitudinous strategic tools, has
selectively borrowed from the paradigms governing industrial engineering and organisational
development.
At the core of the TQM model are the three principles of quality management: customer focus,
continuous improvement, and teamwork. As noted by Dean and Bowen (1994) and Blackburn and Rosen
(1996), TQM can be characterised as a philosophy of management that includes three fundamental
principles that should be incorporated into the task activities of all members of an organisation. The first
and most important of these TQM principles is customer focus. This means that the primary goal of the
organisation is to deliver goods and or services that satisfy the needs of the customer. Attaining
customer satisfaction is believed to increase the profits of the organisation by decreasing costs through
fewer returns, and by increasing revenue through customer loyalty (Ittner and Larcker 1996).
The TQM principle of customer focus influences the work activities of employees because it
requires that employees anticipate customers' expectations. Because not only external purchasers of
the firms' products and services, but also internal employees who receive partially finished goods and
services, are considered to be customers, each employee needs to be aware of the reactions of both
external and internal customers to the work operations controlled by him or her. If necessary, he or she
must use this information to change those operations. In other words, the TQM principle of customer
focus emphasises that the customer is the key factor in determining standards and in measuring
performance (Cardy and Dobbins 1996).
A second TQM principle is that of continuous improvement, which emphasises the constant
review of administrative and technical processes to find better ways of delivering goods and services.
This constant review imposes a broad scope of activities on workers and, usually, a significant increase
in the amount of decision making required of them. Cardy and Dobbins (1996) point out that in TQM,
"Workers are trained in the use of statistical techniques and use these as tools to determine if a process
is 'in control'. In effect, the workers themselves have the means and responsibility for determining if the
production or service process is stable . . . “(p. 6). Underlying the principle of continuous improvement
are these assumptions: (a) the varying functional systems of the organisation are interdependent; thus,
improvement anywhere in the organisation results in greater customer satisfaction; and (b)
improvement of these systems is always possible.
A third major TQM principle is teamwork, which is collaboration in the performance of work.
Teamwork means that the focus of all employees' activities is a common organisational goal of quality,
rather than intermediate goals appropriate to only one organisational sub‐group (Olian and Rynes 1991;
Saraph, Benson, and Schroeder 1989; Spencer 1994). In terms of work activities, teamwork requires
sharing of information among members, collaborative decision making, and agreement about the
performance measures used to evaluate the quality of work. Teamwork has been thought of as
including not only employees, but also suppliers and customers (Dean and Bowen 1994).
As noted by many writers, the three principles of TQM (customer focus, continuous
improvement, and teamwork) serve as the values, goals, and norms of the organisation (Cardy and
Dobbins 1996; Riordan and Gatewood 1996). In other words, these three principles should act as an
organisational philosophy that employees can use to guide their work‐related decisions and behaviours.
Hence, it is important for the employees to perceive that the three principles of TQM are present within
their work environment.
3.3: Theoretical Underpinning

TQM is, as Easton and Jarrell (1998) maintain, a comprehensive organisational
management system which is based upon the integration of several managerial perspectives,
approaches and theories into one, in acknowledgement of the complexity of organisational
structures themselves. However, the quasi-comprehensive organisational management approach
forwarded by TQM does not imply that its adoption may support abandonment of strategic
planning and project management tools (Zbaracki, 1998; Bacdayan 2001; Longo, 2000).
Certainly, TQM, insofar as it is predicated upon strategic management, statistical rigour, project
management and performance measurement, embraces the tools particular to each of the stated.
However, that does not mean that it should replace strategic planning or project management, as
has often happened. Instead, it should compliment them (Zbaracki, 1998; Bacdayan 2001;
Longo, 2000).
Literature on TQM confirms the above stated and establishes it as a management
philosophy which, rather than forward a novel management theory, discriminately embraces
several management and organisational development theories and constructively exploits their
strengths and tools for the formulation of a single, totalising management philosophy: TQM. In
fact, according to Shingo (1986) the value of TQM lies in the fact that it seeks to build upon the
existent body of management theories rather than, as is the customary approach, invalidate and
replace them. Savage (1990) concurs, adding that TQM often escapes concrete and precise
definition because it is an amalgam of numerous theoretical approaches. These theoretical
approaches, as clarified by both Imai (1986) and Ishikawa (1985) are the system management,
strategic planning, project management, performance measurement, goal-setting and statistical-
based approaches. Each of these shall now be defined and reviewed as a means of clarifying and
framing the theoretical parameters of TQM.
3.3.1 Total Systems Theory

TQM theoreticians, practitioners and scholars maintain that, as a management philosophy, TQM
is inherently founded upon the total system perspectives theory. TQM, in other words, proceeds from
the theoretical parameters of the total systems approach but extends beyond it. Determination of the
validity of the aforementioned necessitates a brief review of the literature on the total systems theory.
Kast and Rosenzweig (1972), organisational management scholars, define total system theory as
an inherently scientific approach to organisational management, immediately drawing from established
and incontrovertible biological concepts and the physical sciences. As they note, the biological and
physical sciences proceed from the premise that units within the whole cannot be treated in isolation
but even when studied and analysed in and by themselves, must always be defined as part of a greater
whole. In other words, units within play a specified and unique role particular to them but they execute
that role and concomitant responsibilities as part of a greater process and larger organisational function.
It is their inclusion within the greater whole that endows their function and responsibilities with
importance and value. This approach, as Kast and Rosenzweig (1972) need be transferred to
management sciences if organisations are to function, not just to an optimal level but, function
efficiently and effectively.
Concurring with the above, Chen (1975) argues that the total system approach to organisational
management is a scientifically validated acknowledgement of the fact that an organisation cannot
function at any degree of efficiency were the units within disconnected from one another. An
organisation, as a whole, has a clear and specified function and is operationally guided by a set of clear‐
cut objectives and goals. The attainment of those goals or even the capacity of the organisation to
function as a whole is inextricably dependant upon the adoption of a total systems approach. Such an
approach enables the treatment of each and every organisation as a unique, but whole, organism,
ultimately allowing for the formulation of management paradigms, objectives and strategic goals which
consider the organisation’s unique culture, the external context of its operations, the culture within
which it is located, the characteristics of its human resources and managerial talents. This approach, as
explained, allows an organisation, not only to articulate a management model which is customised to its
particular needs and characteristics but which is based on a comprehensive evaluation and
consideration of the intra‐ and extra‐organisational environments. It further allows for a scientifically
informed intra‐organisation departmental unification and harmonisation with each carrying out the
specified functions which serve the organisation as a whole (Chen, 1975).
Mealiea and Lee (1979) assert that the total systems approach stands out as an organisational
management philosophy which acknowledges the co‐dependency between excellence in organisational
performance and functioning and intra‐ and extra‐organisational integration. In other words, the total
systems approach is founded upon an integrative precept which proceeds from an understanding of the
inherently interconnected and mutually dependant relationship between macro and micro‐
organisational levels (Mealiea and Lee, 1979). That relationship, or the rationale behind the total
systems theoretical approach is depicted in the below figure.

Figure 3. 1: A Total Systems' Model of the Organisation's Macro-Micro Elements

Source: Mealiea and Lee (1979, p. 338).
Proceeding from the above cited definitions for, and rationale behind, the total systems theory;
numerous TQM and total system theorists have maintained the existence of an inextricable link
between the two. Goyal and Gunasekaran (1990) note that the total system approach lends to the
formulation of dynamic organisations, capable of instantaneous organisation‐wide response to extra‐
environmental developments and changes consequent to the fact that their management paradigm is
founded upon an acknowledgement of the co‐dependency between micro and macro organisational
elements and intra and extra environmental variables and characteristics (Goyal and Gunasekaran,
1990). The stated is consistent with the TQM philosophy insofar as the former is predicated on the
belief that quality, partially defined as the satisfaction of consumer requirements and needs. In order to
attain the capacity for dynamic response, as outlined by TQM philosophy, an organisation must embrace
a total systems management approach (Goyal and Gunasekaran, 1990).
Proceeding from the premise that TQM embraces the fundamentals of the total systems
theoretical approach, Flood (1995) and Rwelamila and Hall (1995) argue that it is precisely because it
embraces a total systems perspective which, in the final analysis, determines the articulation of
management paradigms which are customised for each and every organisation, that TQM emerges as an
adaptable management philosophy. However, rather than assume that this means that TQM is a
malleable management construct and can withstand implementation in any given organisation and
sector, management and organisational development scholars have emphasised the imperatives of
adaptation (Manz and Stewart, 1997; Walton, 1997; Sashkin and Kiser, 1993, Weick, 1979).
TQM does not call for cross‐organisational conformity nor does it overwhelm and subsume an
organisation’s culture. Instead, it works from within the parameters of the organisational culture and
from within the matrix of its existent human resources and managerial talents and competencies to
affect change from within (Westphal, Gulati and Shortell, 1997; Easton and Jarrell, 1998; Reed, Lemak
and Montgomery, 1996). The implication here is that TQM is not only an organisational management
paradigm but a strategy for internal and autonomous organisational change, in the sense that it
motivates change from within rather than forcing it from without.
Proceeding from the premise that TQM is a malleable and fluid organisational management
construct, Proudlove, Vadera and Kobbacy (1998) maintain that it can be implemented within any
organisational context. Concurring, Reed, Lemak and Montgomery (1996) add that while this is an
incontrovertibly valid statement, the fact remains that whether or not the adoption of TQM enhances
organisational performance and has a markedly positive effect on efficiency and effectiveness is
ultimately dependant upon whether or not the organisational development and management change
professionals overseeing the implementation process had design a TQM paradigm which is immediately
based upon the organisation’s unique internal environmental characteristics. If its organisational
structure, operative management paradigm, human resource capacities and limitations, and available
extra‐human resources are all taken into account and are used to inform the TQM paradigm under
design, the potential for success is exceedingly high (Reed, Lemak and Montgomery, 1996; Westphal,
Gulati and Shortell, 1997; Easton and Jarrell, 1998; Spencer, 1994; Zbaracki, 1998). In other words, TQM
withstands cross‐organisational implementation but only if it is customised to address an organisation’s
unique characteristics. Insofar as TQM embraces the paradigmatic precepts particular to total systems’
theory, it is a customisable and thus, cross‐organisationally adaptable, management paradigm.
3.3.2 Strategic Planning

Strategic management, defined as “a disciplined effort to produce fundamental decisions and
actions shaping the nature and direction of an organization’s activities within legal bounds” (Bryson,
1988, p. 26), is an integral componential element of the TQM philosophical and theoretical paradigms.
TQM fundamentally derived from the exigencies of the formulation of organisational operation plans as
which subscribe to the organization’s capacities, are realistic within the context of its resources and
which ultimately ensure, not just the articulation of realistic and achievable goals but which establish a
plan for the realisation of those goals. The interrelationship between strategic planning and TQM is such
that the distinction between them is often blurred (Bryson, 1988).
While not going so far as to claim a blurring between strategic planning and TQM, Cummings
and Worley (2001) largely concur with the above stated, adding that strategic planning and its entire
arsenal of management tools and processes are an integral part of TQM’s strategy for establishing and
sustaining quality and managerial efficiency. In order to better understand the implications of the stated
and the extent to which strategic planning has become an indivisible part of the TQM philosophy, it is
necessary to define the latter and relate it to the former construct.
According to numerous strategic planning and management theorists, the interrelationship
between the stated and TQM emerges from their mutual recognition of the exigencies of designing and
formulating organisational wide plans and outlining the strategies for their efficient and effective
attainment. Quite simply stated, and as acknowledged by both TQM and strategic planning theorists,
the successful business organization needs to outline its strategic goals, deadlines for attainment and
strategies for accomplishment, in addition to holding accountable those who fail to accomplish the
particular goal for which they have been named responsible (Dutton and Duncan, 1987; Dymsza, 1984;
Miller and Cardinal, 1994; Robinson and Pearce, 1988; Wissema et al., 1981). The inference here is not
just that strategic planning and TQM are guided by the recognition of similar imperatives but that the
capacity of the former to satisfy the objectives of its initial theorisation, total quality management, is
partially consequent to its adoption of the tools forwarded by strategic planning (Cummings and Worley,
2001).
The above stated definition or strategic planning clarifies the fact that it functions as one of the
more important of TQM’s foundational bases, further clarifying the complexities of both TQM and
strategic planning. However, to the extent that strategic planning entails near‐precise articulation of
organizational goals, implying the commitment of valuable human resources to their realization by
specified deadlines, necessitating the deployment of both project management and performance
measurement tools, as a means of measuring progress and evaluating the degree of efficiency with
which employees execute the strategic plan, some have argued that it is definitely more trouble than it
is worth (Mitzenberg, 1989).
Mintzberg (1994) has constructed a rather comprehensive argument against the feasibility of
strategic planning. Such an argument contends that both the concept and founding rationale contain
their own negation consequent to two inherent weaknesses. Firstly, it is claimed that the concept itself
escapes concrete and focused definition. Secondly, Mintzberg (1994) argues that the implications and
requirements of strategic planning hardly lend themselves to effective organizational practices/business
management. While one may concede to Mintzberg’s (1994) argument that effective management
strategies and plans need to be flexible and responsive to internal and external environment practices,
his conceptualization of strategic planning as inherently flawed due to its perceived inflexible
parameters, is incorrect. As Miller and Cardinal (1994) explain, accurate understanding of strategic
planning reveals that while it does have intrinsic disadvantages, such as the considerable time and effort
required to formulate, execute and follow up on such a plan, these are definitely outweighed by the
advantage of articulating and unifying organizational goals, as well as the centralization of energy
expenditure down those paths, specified as the most suited to realize the fulfilment of key goals.
To further elaborate upon the advantages and necessity of strategic management, reference
should be made to the fact that numerous strategic management scholars have clearly set down the
guidelines which an organization need consider when formulating an effective strategic management
model, tailor‐fit to its own unique structure, strategy and processes (Dutton and Duncan, 1987; Dymsza,
1984; Miller and Cardinal, 1994; Robinson and Pearce, 1988; Wissema et al., 1981). This guideline,
comprising several step, first advices organizations to define their expectations vis‐à‐vis the strategic
plan, articulate their goals, establish feasible deadline which balance, which take their employees’
capacities into account, and then divide and assign relevant responsibilities, according to specialty and
ability. Secondly, organizations need to consider the different features of their external environment,
how these may impact the strategic plan, and how the organization should respond to negative external
influences. Thirdly, the previous two need to be considered in light of an organization’s mission
statement and organizational culture, with subsequent reconsideration of any areas of inconsistency.
Fourthly, the organization must evaluate its strengths and weaknesses and ensure that the strategic
plan is formulated to address strengths, while resolving weaknesses. The sum total of all these steps
enables the organization to identify its strategic goals and the means by which to attain them, given
both its unique characteristics and its employees’ capacities. Therefore, if an organization formulates its
strategic plan according to the stated model, not only will it guide it towards greater effectiveness but it
will further provide it with a fair system for evaluating employees, given that their capacities were
integrated into the very structure of the strategic plan (Dutton and Duncan, 1987; Dymsza, 1984; Miller
and Cardinal, 1994; Robinson and Pearce, 1988; Wissema et al., 1981; Cummings and Worley, 2001).
As seen in the above, the very concept and rationale of strategic management is a fundamental
componential element of TQM. That does not imply that the two are interchangeable but that, in its
drive for a totalising, inherently effective and efficient management paradigm whose primary goal is the
attainment of quality, TQM has embraced strategic planning tools within its paradigmatic framework.
3.3.3 Project Management

Ravichandran and Rai (2000) maintain that project management is one of the more important
components of the TQM philosophy. Project management, defined as the coordinated management of
projects within an organisation, allowing or the independent management of individual projects but
within the larger centralized context of overall organisational management, ensures that value and
quality are maintained on an organisational wide level (Ravichandran and Rai, 2000). In other words,
project management functions as a strategy for ensuring that the projects undertaken by an
organisation are consistent with its strategic aims, do not result in the wastage of organisational
resources, are efficiently executed and, above all, are devised in response to consumer/market demands
and in accordance with consumer/market quality expectations (Ravichandran and Rai, 2000).
Concurring, Dean and Bowen (1994) add that without project management strategies and tools, TQM
would not be able to ensure either total management or quality management.
On the basis of the above, therefore, one may deduce that not only does TQM acknowledge the
value of project management but has adopted its tools s its own in order to satisfy its primary objectives
of value management and quality output within an efficient and effective organisational resource usage
context.
3.3.4 Goal-Setting
Locke and Latham (1984) identify goal setting as one of the more important of the
organisational development and management techniques embraced by TQM, with its importance
operating on two different levels. On the first level, it integrates employees into the business process
and incites organisational affinity and loyalty. On the second level, its value lies in the fact that it
constructively contributes to increased operational efficiency and the maintenance of quality and
organisational competitiveness (Locke and Latham, 1984). From within the contextual parameters of
the stated, goal setting appears to be one of the more important of the strategies by which TQM
achieves both value management and maintains quality.
In explicating the extent to which goal setting functions as an essential component of TQM,
Latham and Steele (1983) define the latter in such a way as to illustrate how its utilisation enables the
effective operationalisation of the former. The success of TQM is ultimately dependant upon the extent
to which organisational members are willing to affiliate themselves with the organisation’s commitment
to quality and efficiency on the one hand, and capable of efficiently executing their predetermined
organisational responsibilities on the other. Furthermore, and as pertains to organisations which are
adopting and adapting a TQM management model, the success of the transition is inextricably linked to
employee commitment to the management change process and their perceptions of the roles that they
need play in order to facilitate the transition and ensure that it be a successful one. According to
management scholars, if employees are to play this role, it is essential to utilise goal‐setting strategies as
would incite their motivation and participation in the process (Latham and Steele, 1983).
As may be deduced from the above stated, goal setting tools and strategies play an intrinsic role
in facilitating organisational transition to a TQM paradigm, on the one hand, and in maximising the
transition’s opportunities for success on the other. Earley, Lee and Hanson (1990) concur, adding that
insofar as it explicates the greater organisational goals on the one hand, and individual employee goals,
on the other, goal setting functions to ensure that each employee/department/unit within understands
the function that he/she/it must play in the transition to a TQM model and in the subsequent success
and efficient operation of that management model.
3.3.5 Performance Measurement and Statistical Rigor

Management, industrial engineering, and organisational development scholars contend that one
of the more important of the numerous theoretically based components of TQM is statistical rigour
(Bendell, Disney and McCollin, 1999; Zbaracki, 1998). The quantitative analysis of an organisation’s
financial and non financial performance indicators allows for the more accurate informing of an
organisation’s progression towards the attainment of its objectives, more accurate ad realistic decision‐
making processes and a continued capacity to monitor extra environmental developments and the
organisation’s position towards them, concomitant with capacity for response (Bendell, Disney and
McCollin, 1999; Zbaracki, 1998). Within the context of TQM, therefore, statistical rigour allows for, and
establishes the foundational elements and framework for, total quality management.
In a bid to integrate the conceptual parameters of statistical rigour into the TQM philosophic
paradigm, scholars have asserted the exigencies of performance measurement, even going so for as to
contend that the adoption of performance measurement strategies and processes is integral to the
adoption of a TQM model (Amaratunga et al., 2001; Neely, 1998; Fitzgerald et al., 1991; Lawrie et al.,
2004). As a method of assessing the veracity of the aforementioned assertion, this section shall review
and discursively analyse a representative body of literature on performance measurement, with the
emphasis being on the extent to which PM strategies have contributed to the formulation of
organisational environments which are inherently devoted to quality and managerial excellence. The
following review shall further demonstrate the cross‐sectoral, organisational and cultural applicability of
PM, with the rationale here being the validation of Bendell, Disney and McCollin’s (1999) contention
that the adoption of PM strategies allows for the implementation of TQM paradigms within both public
and private sectors and in both profit and non profit organisations. If this assertion is validated, the
implication would be that TQM dos not just have the potential for constructive contribution to
organisational efficiency but to governmental ones as well (Bendell, Disney and McCollin, 1999).
Performance Measurement (PM) is a process of quantifying past actions, and a way in which an
organisation could monitor and maintain its control. It is the process which ensures that an organisation
follows the organisation’s strategic plan for the fulfilment of its defined goals and objectives while,
simultaneously assessing whether or not the organisation is successfully implementing its strategy.
(Amaratunga et al, 2001; Neely, 1998; Fitzgerald et al. 1991; Lawrie et al. 2004). In those instances
where a shift in an organisation’s focus, as reflected in the componential elements of its goals and
strategies is deemed important, PM functions as the key agent for requisite change, or shift in focus
(Brignall and Ballantine, 1996).
Creating an efficient and effective PM system would enable an organisation to (Amaratunga et
al., 2001):
1. Translate its vision into measurable outcomes that defines its success, and share it among
stakeholders for transparency.
2. Provide a tool to asses, manage and improve the overall health and success.
3. Shift the focus to forward‐looking instead of backward‐looking i.e. vision.
4. Include measure of quality, cost, speed, customer service, employee alignment, motivation and
skills to provide an in‐depth, predictive PM system.
5. Replace existing assessment models with a consistent approach to PM.
A wide range of literature shows that it is necessary for governmental departments to consider
the implementation of PM systems and relate strategic planning to their long‐ and short‐term plan,
especially in developing countries.
Worrall et al. (1998), emphasis that local governments should consider performing tasks such as
strategic planning, strategic analysis, strategic choice, priority setting, budget setting, performance
management and evaluation, for a number of reasons. First, they need to expect, identify and react to
the needs of the complex social, demographic, economic and environmental problems. They are also
required to respond to the changes of customers and citizen’s expectations. Moreover, they need to
deploy effectively and efficiently the resources by the increasing “attentive and critical citizenry”.
Worrall et al. (1998), also identified that local authorities need to be “more strategic” as the resources
get tighter and they view that strategic planning in local governments must be based on “strategy as
political choice” rather than “strategy as procedural and organizational design.” Moreover, it is
necessary for government to have an alignment of policy, strategy, budgets and operational practice in
order to perform any plan.
It is important to consider implementing PM in the public sector to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of public services (Pollanen, 2005). Having PM system allow governments to restructure its
services based on results‐oriented basis. Monitoring the organisational and managerial objectives is
necessary in any organisation; PM would provide valuable feedback and it is essential to plan, control
and perform decision making; and also enhance the performance of accountability and to take
corrective actions (Pollanen, 2005). PM was mostly used for internal purposes such as program
management decision, budgeting and resource allocations, comparing actual performance against the
targeted performance and finally reporting to the officials (Pollanen, 2005).
Traditionally, the PM focus has been on financial measures such as sales growth, profits, return
on investments and cash flows (Chan, 2004). It is important to consider non‐financial measures such as
customer satisfaction, business processes and employee learning and innovation. Having non‐financial
measures would describe the organisation’s current and potential effectiveness in achieving their
objectives and strategy (Chan, 2004; Ittner and Larcker, 1998; Amaratunga et al., 2001; Brignall and
Ballantine, 1996; Hyndman, 1997). Traditional financial measures are essential but not sufficient for
performance evaluation (Ho and Chan, 2002). Performance indicators systems should be forward‐
looking and historical to identify and observe the trend on which the performance of organisation is
heading. It is also necessary to focus on external relationships, internal functions or processes and track
leading financial and non‐financial indicators.
Assessing PM through financial measures alone leads to the production of lopsided results
which inhibit the articulation of the roots of the strengths and weaknesses of performance. As directly
pertains to accounting systems, the exploitation of financial measurements for PM, while essential,
must be fortified by a consideration of the relevant non financial measurements (Ingram, Albright and
Baldwin, 2004).
Non‐financial performance measurements, when used in conjunction with the financial ones,
provide a more accurate and comprehensive picture of PM. Since PM, in the final analysis, measures
performance it is relevant to assess the flexibility of the system and quality of service (Ingram, Albright
and Baldwin, 2004). Measurement of flexibility assesses the extent to which a system is capable of
efficient, effective and timely response to environmental change, while measurement of quality of
service assesses a system’s ability to extend acceptable service (Ingram, Albright and Baldwin, 2004).
Consideration of these two non financial measurements are integral for the accurate evaluation of PM
since financial data alone cannot expose efficiency of performance or a system’s ability to interact with
its surrounding environment and respond to changes occurring within it while not sacrificing quality of
service. Consequently, a consideration of non financial measurements is integral to both accurate
assessment of performance and the integration, and deeper understanding, of the various parts of the
financial statement.
As specifically pertains to PM assessment within the public sector, Pollanen (2005) emphasizes
its exigencies. As Pollanen (2005) contends, it is a requirement to have both financial and non‐financial
PM in the public sector, because the objectives of public organisations are often non‐financial. It has
been observed that the Australian and UK governments had significantly increased the use of PM for
both financial and non‐financial measures (Kloot, 1999 and Pollanen, 2005).
PM has direct links to budgeting decision making, communication and operations. Melkers and
Willoughby (2005) examine the effects of PM information on the above‐mentioned exercises in the U.S.
local governments. They have identified that implementing PM program improves the communication
within and across the governmental departments, improved the learned discussions about the results of
the government activities and services, and adds value to the budgetary decision by providing related
information about the results, costs and activities. Based on their survey they have found out that by
using the PM program it enhanced adding value to budgeting and management decisions and they are
better of since they have started using this program. Their study also confirms the study made by Jordan
and Hackbart (1999), regarding the PM applicability to budgeting. The PM programme is greatly
applicable during the budget‐development phase and consistent throughout the process. They have
also identified that PM provides entry for citizens/customers and increased their satisfactions.
PM systems are used to monitor the implementation of an organisation’s plan and observe
when the plan is unsuccessful and how to improve it. PM draws attention on the organisation’s
objectives, measure and report the performance of the organisation and how the performance process
affects the organisational learning (Chesley and Wenger, 1999). There is also a concern that financial
measures are not sufficient for strategic decision making where a long‐term survival is linked to an
organisation’s strategy. Measuring short‐term financial results could have a dysfunctional impact to an
organisational long term strategy; therefore, a long term strategy is essential (Brignall, 1993).
There are some factors that would affect performance which should be taken into account
when managing, measuring, modifying and rewarding the performance (Mwita, 2000); and they are as
follows:
1. Personal factors: skills, confidence, motivation and commitment of the individuals.
2. Leadership factors: encouragement quality, support and guidance provided by the managers.
3. Team Factors: the quality of support by the colleagues.
4. System factors: the facilities and work systems provided by the organisation
5. Contextual (situational) factors: the changes and pressures of the internal and external
environment.
PM system promotes accountability to stakeholders; particularly in government organisations
(Kloot, 1999; Pollanen, 2005). To ensure that the organisation is managed at the best interests of all
stakeholders, PM system is vital for the managerial and internal controls. Based on a research made on
the Victorian local government; Kloot (1999), identified that all local departments have some form of
performance measurements. Moreover, PM is not only limited to accounting and budgeting, but also
with customer‐focused measures (Kloot, 1999; Ghobadian and Ashworth, 1994). PM are used to
monitor and report performance against the strategic objectives for managerial and state government
purpose as well as analyse and aid organisational learning in order to improve efficiency and
effectiveness of the local government operations. PM provides the government to change and adopt
new practices; where tightening the link between the improved managerial control and strategic
objectives will lead to improved outcomes and enhances accountability (Kloot, 1999).
On the basis of the above reviewed literature, one may determine that the earlier stated
assertion is valid: the adoption of PM strategies, concomitant with the implementation of a TQM
paradigm enhances management’s capacity to control the relevant business processes and ensure that
the organisation is, indeed, operating in accordance with the criterion established by the TQM
paradigm. It is precisely due to this that, as Cummings and Worley (2001) write, PM is integrated within
the contextual and theoretical parameters of the TQM philosophy. Not only does it enhance TQM’s
chances for success pending implementation but it effectively establishes the mechanism through which
management can statistically or quantitatively measure TQM outcomes and furnishes the statistical and
quantitative information requisite for decision‐making processes which are geared towards the
fortification and sustenance of the total quality management model implemented. It is within the
context of the stated that PM emerges as one of the more fundamental of the TQM theoretical
components.
3.4: Summary
This chapter, with which the literature review section of the dissertation concludes, has sought
to elucidate the definitional and theoretical frameworks of TQM through a review of select literature.
As has been argued throughout, TQM does not withstand precise definitions but can only be understood
in the general and philosophical sense. This is not a failing on the part of TQM theorists but deliberate
insofar as the generality of the construct facilitates it cross organisational, cross‐sectoral and cross‐
cultural transference and adaptability. This does not imply the absence of fixed constructs, principles
and theoretical precepts but their malleability. As per the stated and in accordance with the above
reviewed literature, TQM is an all‐encompassing managerial approach which borrows from, and
integrates within it, several industrial engineering, management and organisational development
theories and tools but which, at the same time, and both because of its fluidity and integration of the
total systems theory perspective, is susceptible to customisation.
The chapter has effectively addressed a number of research knowledges gaps and, in so doing,
has validated the proposed research hypotheses. The identified knowledge gaps, and the manner in
which the research has responded to them, can be tabulated as follows:
Table 3. 1: Research Knowledge Gaps

Research Knowledge Gaps Study’s Contribution
Comparative poverty of research into the Following a review of the literature on the
similarities, as opposed to the differences between characteristics of the private versus the public
the public and the private sector sector, the study reviewed and critically analysed
literature on either sector as a strategy for
outlining/exposing similarities
The import of aligning organisational growth The study reviewed the literature on the
stages with organisational management strategies relationship between organisational performance
and approaches has been thoroughly research vis‐ and growth stage‐management strategy alignment
à‐vis the private sector but not the public sector and related it to the public sector. Through this
review the study addressed the articulated
knowledge gap to the extent that it exposed the a‐
sectoral nature of organisational performance and
growth stage‐management strategy alignment. In
other words, alignment should not be confined to
the private sector and is perfectly applicable to the
public one.
While there is a wealth of research on the Following a review of the literature on TQM, the
applicability of TQM to the private sector, there is literature review established its applicability to the
little research on its potential for successful public sector on the condition that the TQM model
implementation in the public sector. in question be adapted to the public sector’s
requirements, needs and unique characteristics
TQM has been thoroughly research as regards its The study reviewed the literature on the ways
potential to maximise the efficiency and through which TQM contributes to organisational
effectiveness of private sector organisations but efficiency and maximisation of performance levels
there is a dearth of studies on the same as regards and established that the implementation of TQM
the public sector in the public sector can similarly enhance
performance levels and maximise efficiency and
effectiveness.
In addressing the tabulated knowledge gaps, the study validated its three proposed hypotheses:
H1. Private sector management strategies are applicable to the public sector.
H2. The successful implementation of private sector management paradigms to the public sector is
predicated on the customisation of models, strategies and tools to the particular requirements of the
public sector.
H3. Overall critical business performance indicators will experience a positive increase, were the
public sector to implement TQM models, embrace decentralisation, participative decision‐making and
performance measurement strategies and tools.
The next chapter shall present, discuss and justify the research’s selected methodological
approach and strategy.
Chapter 4 - Research Methodology
4.1: Introduction
This chapter aims to provide an overview of the methodological approaches and research design
selected for application to a study on public and private management strategies. In its exploration of
the phenomenon of private and public sector management strategies and paradigms, the dissertation
shall investigate the differences between the two organisational types and seek to answer the question
of why they are managed differently and whether or not public sector organisations can subscribe to
management models and strategies usually reserved for the private sector. Secondly, and in light of the
comparatively poor performance of the public sector versus the private sector, the study shall
investigate the possibilities of implementing, following adaptation, total quality management strategies
and paradigms to the public sector. Thirdly, following the analysis of primary data collected through a
set of interviews conducted with employees and management staff in a public and private sector
organisation, the dissertation shall critique prevalent public sector management paradigms/models.
Finally, a proposal for the implementation of TQM, commonly associated with the private sector to the
public sector, shall be proposed and the proposal defended through empirical evidence.
4.2: Research Background
4.2.1 Research Hypotheses

H1. Private sector management strategies are applicable to the public sector.
H2. The successful implementation of private sector management paradigms to the public sector is
predicated on the customisation of models, strategies and tools to the particular requirements of the
public sector.
H3. Overall critical business performance indicators will experience a positive increase, were the
public sector to implement TQM models, embrace decentralisation, participative decision‐making and
performance measurement strategies and tools.
4.2.2 Research Questions

Q1: Can management strategies, tools, and paradigms, traditionally associated with the
private sector be applied to the public sector?
Q2: How can TQM as a strategic management paradigm be successfully implemented in
the public sector?
4.2.3 Research Objectives

1. To study the literature on total quality management and its influence on
contemporary management paradigms.
2. To analyse the existent differences between public and private sector
management.
3. To determine whether public and private organisational structural and
sectoral differences function as an obstacle towards the implementation of
private sector management tools, strategies and paradigms to the public
sector.
4. To identify the source of the public sector’s (in comparison with the
private) poor business performance.
5. To isolate the generic differences between the public and private sector
and assess whether such differences contribute to the relative success of
the one versus the comparative failures of the other.
6. To generate a proposed paradigm for TQM implementation suitable for
the public sector.
4.3: Research Design and Research Methodology

A research methodology references the procedural rules for the evaluation of research claims
and the validation of the knowledge gathered, while research design functions as the research blueprint
(Creswell, 2003). As Sekaran (2003) further clarifies, a research methodology may be defined as
academia’s established regulatory framework for the collection and evaluation of existent knowledge
for the purpose of arriving at, and validating, new knowledge. Cooper and Schindler (1998) maintain
that the determination of the research methodology is one of the more important challenges which that
confronts the researcher. In essence, the research activity is a resource consumptive one, and must
maintain its purposeful or functional activity through the justification of resource expenditure. In other
words, given that research is ultimately defined as constructive, the resources that it utilizes must fulfil
explicit purposes and withstand critical scrutiny. Research methodology occupies a position of unique
importance. A methodology does not simply frame a study but it identifies the research tools and
strategies (i.e. resources) that will be employed, and relates their use to specified research aims. As
Sekaran (2003) suggests, its importance emanates from the fact that it defines the activity of a specified
research, its procedural methods, strategies, for progress measurement and criteria for research
success.
Within the context of the research methodology, each research poses a set of unique questions
and articulates a specified group of objectives. The research design functions to articulate the strategies
and tools by and through which empirical data will be collected and analyzed. It additionally serves to
connect the research questions to the data and articulate the means by which the research hypothesis
shall be tested and the research objectives satisfied (Punch, 2000). In order to satisfy the stated, the
research design has to proceed in response to four interrelated research problems. These are (1) the
articulation and selection of the research questions; (2) the identification of the relevant data; (3)
determination of data collection focus; and (4) the selection of the method by which the data will be
analyzed and verified (Punch, 2000).
Although research methodology and research design are distinct academic constructs, Punch
(2000) maintains the former to be more holistic than the latter and, in fact, inclusive of it.
4.3 Research Purpose

Research scholars have identified three main purposes to the research activity. These are the
exploratory, the descriptive and the explanatory purposes (Saunders et al., 2000). Patton (1990)
identifies a fourth purpose which he defines as the prescriptive objective. Proceeding from Jackson’s
(1994) contention that the researcher should identify the purpose(s) by correlating the research
questions to the research objectives, this is precisely the strategy that the current research shall adopt.
4.3.1 Exploratory
Exploratory research unfolds through focus group interviews, structured or semi‐structured
interviews with experts and a search of the relevant literature (Saunders et al., 2000). Its primary
purpose is the exploration of a complex research problem or phenomenon, with the objective being the
clarification of the identified complexities and the exposition of the underlying nature of the selected
phenomenon. In other words, and as Robson (2002) explains, exploratory research investigates a
specified problem/phenomenon for the purpose of shedding new light upon it and, consequently,
uncovering new knowledge.
The first and second research questions directly tie in with, and compliment one another.
They additionally correlate to research objectives 1-6 and are fundamentally explorative in
nature.
4.3.2 Descriptive
Punch (2000) explains the purpose of the descriptive research as the collection,
organisation and summarisation of information about the research problem and issues identified
therein. Similar to the descriptive research, it renders complicated phenomenon and issues more
understandable. Dane’s (1990) definition of the descriptive research and its purposes coincides
with the stated. Descriptive research entails the thorough examination of the research problem,
for the specified purpose of describing the phenomenon, as in defining, measuring and clarifying
it (Dane, 1990). Jackson (1994) contends that all research is partly descriptive in nature. The
descriptive aspect of a research is, simply stated, the (1) who, (2) what, (3) when, (4) where, (5)
why, and (6) how of the study.
Proceeding from the above and bearing in mind that the primary research question is
partly descriptive in nature; the research shall adopt a descriptive purpose in parts. To answer the
research question, and test the proposed hypotheses, it is necessary to ask (1) “What are the
characteristics of the public sector?” (2) “What are the characteristics of the private sector?” (3)
“What management models are commonly associated with the public sector?” (4) What are the
management models commonly associated with the private sector?” (5) “Why is there a sharp
disconnect between the management strategies of either?” (6) why cannot public sector
organisations adopt private sector management strategies and (7) how may the public sector
undertake the seamless and successful adoption of private sector management strategies?” These
questions, immediately correlate to the research objectives, are integral to the testing of the
hypotheses and are essential for the answering of the research questions. More importantly,
these questions are descriptive in nature, shall be answered through the literature review and, as
such, impose a descriptive purpose upon the research.
4.3.3 Explanatory
Miles and Huberman (1994) define the function of explanatory research as the
clarification of relationship between variables and the componential elements of the research
problem. Explanatory research, in other words, functions to highlight the complex
interrelationships existent within, and around, a particular phenomenon and contained within the
research problem (Miles and Huberman, 1994). Expounding upon this, Punch (2000) asserts that
explanatory, or causal research, elucidates upon the nature of the problem under investigation
and explains the basis for the proposed solution. It is an explanation of the complex web of
interrelated variables identified and follows directly from a clearly stated central research
hypothesis and research question.

While both research questions have an undeniably descriptive component to them, they
possess a fundamentally explorative intent. Responding to these questions necessitates the
clarification of the variable relating to organisational characteristics to those associated with
particular management models. The research questions can only be satisfactorily answered, and
the requirements of research objectives 3 and 5 can only be adequately satisfied if the
relationship between management strategy, organisational structure and sectoral characteristics
are explained. Accordingly, the research shall further adopt an explanatory purpose.
4.3.4 Prescriptive
Hair et al. (2003) defines prescriptive research as studies which purport to propose well-
defined solutions to the investigated research problem. A prescriptive research does not simply
prescribe a set of solutions or recommendations but presents a well-defined, comprehensively
explained and implementable blueprint for a specified solution. Patton (1990) contends that the
prescriptive research purpose builds upon the other purposes but extends beyond them in one key
aspect. Whereas the descriptive, exploratory and explanatory purposes focus upon facts on
ground, the prescriptive approach focuses on what should be. Research scholars, concurring,
have determined that research which embraces the prescriptive purpose tend to be more valuable
than those which eschew it, as they add to a field and expand its parameters (Patton, 1990;
Jackson, 1994; Punch, 2000; Cooper, 2003; Hair et al., 2003; Ghauri and Gronhaug, 2005).
The research hypotheses, both research questions and research objective 6 impose a
fundamentally prescriptive purpose upon the study. Quite simply, the ultimate objective of the
research is the proposal of a TQM management model which will withstand successful
implementation to the public sector. Consequently, while the research shall have undeniably
descriptive, exploratory and explanatory purposes, its ultimate purpose is prescriptive in nature.
4.4: Research Approach

The selection of the research approach is, according to Creswell (2003) a critically
important decision. The research approach does not simply inform the research design but it
gives the researcher the opportunity to critically consider how each of the various approaches
may contribute to, or limit, his study, allow him/her to satisfy the articulated objectives and
design an approach which best satisfies the research’s requirements (Creswell, 2003).
The research approach, as explained by Hair et al. (2003) embraces the quantitative
versus the qualitative and the deductive versus the inductive. Each set of approaches is
commonly perceived of as referring to polar opposites (Hair et al., 2003). Jackson (1994) takes
issue with this perception and contends that a researcher should not limit himself to a particular
approach but, instead should use a variety of approaches, if and when required by his study.
4.4.1 The Deductive versus the Inductive Approach?

Marcoulides (1998) defines the deductive approach as a testing of theories. The
researcher proceeds with a set of theories and conceptual precepts in mind and formulates the
study’s hypotheses on their basis. Following from that, the research proceeds to test the
proposed hypotheses. The inductive approach, on the other hand, follows from the collected
empirical data and proceeds to formulae concepts and theories in accordance with that data
(Marcoulides, 1998). While not disputing the value of the inductive approach, the research opted
for the deductive approach, or the `top-down,’ as opposed to the `bottom-up’ method.
Figure 4. 1: Deductive and Inductive Thinking

Deductive Thinking Inductive Thinking

Theory Theory

Hypothesis Tentative

Observation Pattern

Confirmation Observation

Source: adapted from Trochim (2001)
4.4.2 The Qualitative versus the Quantitative Approach

The quantitative tools for data analysis generally borrow from the physical sciences, in that they
are structured in such a way so as to guarantee (as far as possible), objectivity, generalizability and
reliability (Creswell, 2003). Here the researcher is viewed as external to the research and results are
expected to be constant if the study is replicated, regardless of the identity of the researcher.
Accordingly, the matrix of quantitative research techniques is inclusive of random and unbiased
selection of respondents. It is primarily used for the production of generalizable data for such purposes
as evaluation of outcomes, tending towards the near total decentralization of human behaviour. It is
such decentralization that raises criticisms amongst those who tend to exhibit preference for qualitative
tools, arguing that these offer insight into perceptions and interactions (Creswell, 2003). Accordingly,
whereas questionnaires are leading tools for the first, qualitative methods include interviews,
observations and focus groups, are designed to explicate the underlying meaning/cause behind selected
phenomenon. In other words, while qualitative tools analyze the reasons behind a particular
phenomenon, quantitative tools analyze the phenomenon itself, independent of human perceptions of
reasons why (Creswell, 2003).
As touched upon in the above, qualitative analysis usually precedes from qualitative research
techniques employing, for example, interviews. The content analysis tool is primarily employed for
thematic summarization of interview data and is very useful in reducing a large volume of interview data
into manageable themes, reflecting upon group attitudes and perceptions of certain aspects of the
organization. The second tool, force field analysis, is employed for analysis of data pertaining to
organizational change. Primarily deriving from Lewin’s change model, it categorizes data into pro and
anti‐change forces. As such, it offers the researcher an insight into the factors that work towards the
maintenance of the status quo and those that aid change (Creswell, 2003). Accordingly, one may
surmise that specific conditions demand employment of qualitative analysis tools, with those being the
availability of qualitative data and the desire to analyze the underlying attitudes and perceptions
regarding organizational structure and change, as expressed by the relevant stakeholders. In other
words, the human behavioural factor is central here.
In comparison, quantitative tools are used for the production of statistical data which
proceeds from the availability of quantitative data, essentially decontextualizing the human
factor. The first of these tools, means, standard deviations and frequency distribution is a cost-
efficient method of reducing close-ended questionnaire data into straightforward statistics,
representing the average and variability of responses, with the frequency distribution functioning
as the graphical representation of the number of times particular responses were given. This tool
reduces data to comprehensible, manageable and (ideally) objective numerical or graphical
representations (Creswell, 2003). The second tool, scatter gram and correlation coefficients, goes
a step beyond the first in the sense that it draws conclusions on the relationship between the
variables. The last tool, difference tests, measures one sample group against a baseline for
purpose of examining the differences between specific variables over a time frame (Creswell,
2003). From this we can surmise that the conditions necessitating the use of quantitative tools
includes presence of quantifiable research data and the goal of reducing that data into
straightforward statistical representations of basic facts regarding aspects in the inputs, outputs or
design components in any of the organization, group and individual levels.
The differences between the quantitative and qualitative approached are tabulated in the
following:
Table 4. 1: Distinction Between Quantitative and Qualitative Methods

Quantitative research Qualitative research
Objective is to test hypotheses that the Objective is to discover and encapsulate meanings
researcher generates. once the researcher becomes immersed in the data.
Concepts are in the form of distinct variables Concepts tend to be in the form of themes, motifs,
generalisations, and taxonomies. However, the
objective is still to generate concepts.
Measures are systematically created before data Measures are more specific and may be specific to
collection and are standardised as far as the individual setting or researcher; e.g. a specific
possible; e.g. measures of job satisfaction. scheme of values.
Data are in the form of numbers from precise Data are in the form of words from documents,
measurement. observations, and transcripts. However,
quantification is still used in qualitative research.
Theory is largely causal and is deductive. Theory can be causal or non-causal and is often
inductive.
Procedures are standard and replication is Research procedures are particular and replication
assumed. is difficult.
Analysis proceeds by using statistics, tables, or Analysis proceeds by extracting themes or
charts and discussing how they relate to generalisations from evidence and organising data
hypotheses. to present a coherent, consistent picture. These
generalisations can then be used to generate
hypotheses.
Despite Punch’s (2000) advice that a research’s value is inevitably maximised should it
exploit both approaches, this research shall confine itself to the qualitative approach. Selection
of the aforementioned was primarily imposed upon the research through its adoption of the
interview approach and because qualitative data analysis allows for a deeper examination of
observable behavioural trends and, as emphasised by Robson (2002) allows for the capturing of
complex meaning. It was, thus, that the qualitative approach was selected in comparison to the
quantitative.
4.5: Research Strategy

Robson (2002) identifies three research strategies, or plans for responding to the research
question. These are the experimental, the survey and the case study strategies. A researcher may
select one, or even all three of these strategies, depending on the requirements of the research
itself and the nature of the study. Naturally, and as Yin (1989) concurs, scientific researches
exploit the experimental strategy while the social sciences tend towards the survey and the case
study strategies. The current research shall adopt the conceptual model approach, as discussed
and defined by Yin (1989).
According to Yin (1989) conceptual models are particularly useful for the collection of
well-defined information and its later discussion and analysis. Most often used when two
phenomenon are being compared and contrasted, in this case organisations A and B, the selected
approach requires that the researcher frame, or organise his/her data, into a modular format. The
resultant conceptual model, while having been formulated on the basis of the collected primary
data, enables the mapping of a phenomenon and for its theoretical analysis. In other words and
as further explained by Yin (1989) this approach allows for the explanation of facts through
theory, the expansion of knowledge through the clarification of the relation between reality and
theory and, most importantly, is ideally suited for the comparison of two entities.
The nature and concerns of the current research have led to the determination of the
imperatives of extensively exploiting the conceptual model approach. The research shall focus
on the critique and examination of two organisations, data on which was collected through
primary research. Organisation A is a public sector entity, a County Council and, Organisation
B is a private sector corporation, a financial institution. Primary data, as earlier noted, was
collected through extensive interviewing.
4.5.1 Qualitative Sampling

When selecting a sample for a qualitative survey, a different set of priorities must be
considered. Each qualitative survey that is conducted is almost similar to an individual scientific
research. Sample size is not important, rather the establishment of observable patterns in the data is.
According to Patton (1987), “The sample should be large enough to be credible, given the purpose of
evaluation, but small enough to permit adequate depth and detail for each case or unit in the sample”
Qualitative samples tend to be purposive, rather than random (Crabtree and Miller, 1999).
Purposive sampling, or criterion‐based selection, (Miles and Huberman, 1994) bases the selection of
study settings and participants on features and characteristics that will enable the researcher to gather
in‐depth information on the areas of research interest. This form of sampling is therefore purposeful
and strategic (Crabtree and Miller, 1999), with considerations of convenience and ease of access to
study situations and participants given only secondary importance. Typical case sampling, in which cases
that are representative of a larger group are selected for detailed study, is a particular type of purposive
sampling that is relevant to the present study (Patton, 1987).
Since qualitative research is not focused on statistical significance, there is no requirement that
samples are of a sufficient scale to achieve this (Denzin and Lincoln, 2000). Sample sizes need to be kept
reasonably small, in order to do justice to the rich evidence provided by qualitative studies and to make
best use of the resources available for intensive research (Ritchie and Lewis, 2003).
Within the context of the present study, sample size was primarily determined by that which
was realistically available to the researcher. Accordingly, following a series of correspondences with
top management staff at both Organisation A and Organisation B, the researcher was able to arrange
four interviews with four top management employees at either organisation.
At Organisation A, two department managers were interviewed for 15 minutes each on 19th
January, 2006 and 21st January 2006, as was a strategic planning consultant for ten minutes on 23rd
February, 2006. Finally, a public sector manager was interviewed through email on 18 March 2006;
At Organisation B, and as far as was possible, the researcher replicated the interviewee format
used for Organisation A, in order to allow for valid cross‐case comparison. A fifteen minute interview
was conducted with the organisation’s Financial Strategy Consultant on 24th January, 2006 as was a 15
minute interview with the Director of Finance on 11th February, 2006. A third and fourth face‐to‐face
interviews were very difficult to arrange s two email interviews were carried out instead. On 26th
March, 2006 an email interview was conducted with one of the organisation’s executive managers, as
was an email interview with its management consultant on 29th March, 2006.
These top management‐level employees, a total of eight, or four for each of organisation A and
Organisation B form the study’s sample size.
4.5.2 Qualitative Data Collection

Cooper and Schindler (2005) warn the business researcher against approaching the
research with a specified data collection method in mind. Instead, the researcher should first
identify the type and nature of the required data and then select those collection methods which
are best suited to the collection of the identified data types. While Ghauri and Gronhaug (2005)
largely agree with this advice, they nevertheless assert that the researcher must limit his selection
of data collection methods, not to the type of data required, but to the collection methods
available to him. For example, it is simply not feasible for the researcher to undertake the
collection of primary data across several countries, for example, even if the nature of the
required data has determined this to be the optimal collection method. It is necessary for the
researcher to compromise between the available data collection methods and the methods
optimally required by the needed type of data (Ghauri and Gronhaug, 2005).
For the purposes of this research and given that both primary and secondary data is
needed, three data collection methods will be used. Apart from the desk-based data collection
method traditionally associated with secondary data collection, primary data will be collected
through the adoption and expansion of semi-structured interview methods.
There is no single way to conduct a field study and a combination of methods e.g. unstructured
interviewing, direct observation, semi‐structure or structure interviewing can be used (Merriam, 1998).
The researcher, however, limited himself to the semi‐structured in‐depth interview method.
The rationale behind choosing in‐depth interviews was clear. Firstly, and as pointed out by
Merriam (1998), in‐depth interviews allow the researcher to crosscheck the survey results and to
explore the social realities behind the identified trends (Merriam, 1998). Secondly, and as pointed out
by Ritchie and Lewis (2003), in‐depth interviews allow the researcher to gain a deeper insight into the
phenomenon he/she is studying. Lastly, and as Denzin and Lincoln (2000) emphasise, in‐depth
interviews lead to the generation of insightful stories, rather than statistical information and permit a
better understanding of organisational complexity (2000).
The researcher has followed the recommendations of Saunders et al. (2000), who state
that, interviewers should adopt a range of different interviewing styles, so as to maximise
interview effectiveness and not restrict themselves to following the interview framework rigidly.
Where an interview exposes issues of interest relevant to the assessment of project management
capability, the interviewer should be free to pursue such lines and, as a result, not all questions in
the pro-forma interview framework necessarily require being covered in all interviews.
Saunders et al. (2000) maintain that interviews make it possible for the researcher to
explore other, although critically related, themes and enrich the available research data. The
researcher discovered that this was, indeed, true. The interviews carried out for this study made
it possible to explore other themes and further enriched the data. In cases where respondents
allowed, tape recordings were made, and this had the advantage of enabling the interviewer to
pay more attention to the discussions, rather than concentrating on note taking. In many cases,
however, the researcher found the respondents unwilling to allow the interview to be tape-
recorded and, in those cases, the researcher had no option but to rely on note taking.
According to Patton (1987), “Analysis is the process of bringing order to the data, organising
what is there into patterns, categories and basic descriptive units. Interpretation involves attaching
meaning and significance to the analysis, explaining descriptive patterns and looking for relationships
and linkages among descriptive dimensions”.
For the purpose of this thesis, the initial step was to conduct “within case analysis”. Within case
analysis typically involves detailed write‐ups for each case. These write‐ups are often simply pure
descriptions, but they are central to the generation of insight, because they help researchers to cope
early in the analysis process, given the typically insurmountable volume of data that they will face
(Eisenhardt and Bourgeois, 1988). The advantages of this method are that it allows for the unique
features of each case to emerge before trying to generalise patterns.
Besides the within‐case analytical approach, the research also made use of the cross‐case
approach. As based on the interviews, models for each organisation were constructed. Those models
were subsequently compared and contrasted with their counterpart from the other organisation. In
other words, the within‐case approach lent to the models that were compared through the cross‐case
approach.
4.5.3 Qualitative Data Handling

The handling of qualitative data is comprised of several steps. These are the interview strategy,
the transcribing procedure and the data analysis and coding methodology used. In all of these, the
researcher abided by the guidelines suggested by Miles and Huberman (1994). This section shall explain
these procedures and processes, thereby clarifying the method by which the primary data was collected
and later analysed.
4.5.3.1 Interview Strategy

The interviews were mostly directed towards clarifying the management strategies used in
private and public organisations. Emphasis was placed on the differences and similarities between the
two in order to determine whether or not inherent structural differences determined variances in public
and private sector management strategies.
At an early stage, the researcher had determined that since the study was focused on
management strategies, interviewees were to be drawn from the top‐management pool at one public
and one private sector organisation. The organisations were subsequently selected and contact was
initiated between the researcher and the potential interviewees. Four interviewees from each
organisation were chosen; with selection determined both by the respondent’s position in the
organisation and his/her consent.
As stated, four members from Organisation A, a County Council, consented to the interview.
These were two department managers, one public sector manager and one strategic planning
consultant. Three were interviewed at their place of work, with interviews lasting 15 minutes and one
through email.
In relation to Organisation B, a private sector financial institution, the same interviewing format
applied to Organisation A was followed. Four respondents were interviewed, three at their place of
work with interview durations being 15 minutes and one through email. The respondents were the
Director of Finance, the Financial Strategy Consultant, an Executive Manager and a Management
Consultant.
Without exception, all eight interviewees conditioned their consent upon confidentiality. They
insisted that the names of their organisations and theirs, let alone specific policies and strategies, be
kept completely confidential. The researcher consented and assured all eight that confidentiality was
going to be respected and that transcribed copies of the interviews were to be provided to them.
At the outset, and following the advice of Miles and Huberman (1994) the researcher
thoroughly familiarised himself with the topic of the interviews. As Miles and Huberman (1994) write,
interviews can only be constructive and fruitful should the interviewer have substantial prior knowledge
of the topic of investigation. The preliminary research and readings which the researcher conducted in
preparation for the study and most especially the research done for, and the writing of, the two
literature review chapters, proved invaluable in this respect.
In deciding upon the interview format, or strategy, the researcher decided that a structured
approach would be too rigid and would prevent the researcher from interacting with the interviewees
and asking follow‐up, spontaneous questions. It would also prevent the interviewees from
spontaneously adding their own remarks and observations. Similarly, an unstructured approach was
judged as unfeasible because it is simply too loose. If followed, the interview could very well get off
track. Accordingly, a semi‐structured approach was decoded upon as it would both ground the
interview and ensure that it remained on topic, while allowing both interviewer and interviewee the
spontaneity requisite for the posing of follow up questions or the adding of explanatory remarks and
comments.
4.5.3.2 Transcribing
All but two of the eight interviews were tape‐recorded with the permission of the interviewees.
The other two were email interviews and, therefore, provided in writing. As pertains to the tape‐
recorded interviews, the researcher initially considered giving the tapes to a third party, professional
transcriber. Recalling, however, Miles and Huberman’s (1994) advise against this and their contention
that the researcher need transcribe his/her own interviews in order to familiarise him/herself with
them, the notion of a professional transcriber was dismissed.
Even though the transcribing process was extremely time‐consuming, it proved an invaluable
activity (Interview Transcripts are in Appendix 1). By personally transcribing the interviews, the
researcher was able to develop a high degree of familiarity with the interview material, recollect some
of the issues and comments that interviewees had made but which had been forgotten, and detect
underlying meanings which had been missed during the interviews themselves. In addition to that, the
personal transcription of the interviews allowed the researcher to sharpen his awareness of the issues.
In brief, by following Miles and Huberman’s (1994) advice regarding transcription of interviews,
the researcher was able to acquire a more insightful understanding of the phenomenon under
investigation.
4.5.3.3 Coding
Miles and Huberman (1994) as do several researcher scholars (Patton, 1987; Merriam, 1998;
Sekaran, 2003), insist that following their transcription, interviews must be coded. Coding facilitates
later analysis of the data and ensures both the accuracy and relevancy of the analysis. In other words,
the coding process contributes to the quality of the qualitative data analysis (Miles and Huberman,
1994).
Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest that coding be guided by both the research’s conceptual
framework and research questions. The implication here is that the researcher need identify and define
his key terms, precisely clarify what he/she is looking for and know why he is looking for particular
terms.
Following the articulation of the research’s conceptual framework and the compilation of the
key terms, the interview transcripts were coded in accordance with the Miles and Huberman (1994)
guidelines. Firstly, a list of start codes, derived from the research’s conceptual framework was
developed. Secondly, using the protocol’s list of questions, codes were developed from each of these
questions.
Two levels of coding were used. In the first level of coding, and also abiding by Miles and
Huberman’s (1994) guidelines throughout, the transcripts were critically reviewed and marginal remarks
were made. These remarks were, in essence, reactions to ideas and issues raised. Following from that,
descriptive codes were generated, allowing for categorisation and summarisation of the mentioned
remarks. The primary purpose of the first level of coding was the summarisation of segments of data.
Following the above, the researcher engaged in the second level of coding, referred to as
pattern coding by Miles and Huberman (1994). This involved analysing the data produced by the first
level of coding for the purpose of their grouping into tight thematic constructs or sets.
Although the coding process was time‐consuming, just as the transcription process, it proved
invaluable. Apart from the fact that it has reduced the interview transcripts to manageable data which
withstands thorough analysis, the coding process allowed the researcher the opportunity for a closer
and infinitely more thorough reading of the interview data.
4.6: Credibility and Quality of Research Findings

Ultimately, the data collected is used to inform the research findings. If the data is not
verifiable, the implication is that the findings are potentially suspect. Accordingly, it is
incumbent upon the researcher to validate his/her findings (Sekaran, 2003). Beyond that, Miles
and Huberman (1984) contend that it is equally important for the researcher to evaluate the
quality of his/her data prior to its exploitation.
4.6.1 Reliability
A study is reliable only if another researcher, using the same procedure and studying the
same phenomenon, arrives at similar, or comparable, findings (Sekaran, 2003). Accordingly, it
is important that the researcher maintains a comprehensive protocol of his study, in case others
may be interested in checking its reliability (Sekaran, 2003).
Even with the best of intentions in mind, the researcher is often confronted with a variety
of variables which may impinge upon the reliability of his findings. If he is partly drawing
conclusions on the basis of interview data, it could very well be that respondents were biased or,
simply not in the mood to answer the questions with any degree of interest. It is not uncommon
for respondents to simply tick a response to an option on a questionnaire for example, without
reading or considering it (Sekaran, 2003). Accordingly, research scholars advise researchers to
carefully select their respondents, ensure that they are, indeed, willing participants in the study
and will answer the questions with the minimum degree of bias (Hair et al., 2003). To ensure
that this, indeed, is the case, when in-putting the questionnaire data, the researcher should
carefully read through them to ensure that there are no logical flaws and that the responses given
by any one respondent are not contradictory (Hair et al., 2003). In addition, and to better ensure
reliability, the researcher should schedule interviews at the respondent’s convenience and ,
further, when distributing questionnaires, should give participants several days to answer. By
pursuing this advice, the researcher would, at least, be minimising the chances that the interview
be rushed and incoherent (Hair et al., 2003).
To enhance the reliability of the current research, the cited advice shall be considered and
meticulously applied.
4.6.2 Validity
Saunders et al. (2000) contends that a research is valid only if it actually studies what it
set out to study and only if the findings are verifiable. There are three methods for establishing
validity. As Saunders et al. (2000) explains, construct validity entails the establishment of
accurate operational measurements for the research’s core concept. This is done by establishing
a chain of evidence throughout the data collection process; by verifying key information through
the use of multiple sources of information; and by presented informants with a draft of the study
for review. Besides establishing construct validity, social science researches need also establish
external validity by testing the applicability of the findings to external case studies (Yin, 1989).
While conceding to the importance of external validation methods, they are beyond the
scope of the current research. Consequently, the research shall seek the verification of its
findings through construct validation.
4.6.3 Quality
Considering that the primary data gathered and subjected to qualitative analysis will be
extensively used to inform research and produce conclusions, Miles and Huberman (1994) insist
that it is incumbent upon the researcher to review the quality of his/her qualitative data prior to
its actual utilisation.
First of all, when engaged in data gathering and later qualitative analysis, the researcher
need exercise complete objectivity. He/she must distance himself/herself from the research and
not influence respondents towards answers which are consistent with the research hypotheses
and must not subject the data to a qualitative analysis process which would deliberately influence
the production of results which validate the hypotheses. The researcher must be both objective
and honest to ensure the quality of both the data and its analysis (Miles and Huberman, 1994).
Secondly, the researcher need exercise transparency regarding the data gathering and
analyses stages. As asserted by Miles and Huberman (1994), researchers can only fulfil the
criteria for transparency by making his/her interview notes available and by clarifying the
qualitative data analysis process used and making the analysis notes and procedures available.
These notes should clearly explain the qualitative analysis procedure used and how the
researcher arrived at his/her findings. Availability implies transparency and allows readers/other
researchers to judge the integrity of the analysis and procedure themselves. As emphasised by
Miles and Huberman (1994) the exercise of transparency helps ensure the quality of the data and
its subsequent interpretation.
Thirdly, quality also hinges upon the fluidity of the interpretation and whether or not it is
clearly presented and related to the rest of the argument. Quality qualitative data analysis and
interpretation should be clearly and coherently presented and need fit into the totality of the
argument (Miles and Huberman, 1994).
In order to ensure the quality of the data gathered and the quality of its subsequent
qualitative analysis, the researcher has applied the advice offered by Miles and Huberman
(1994). Interview questions were set according to the requirements of the research questions and
not in accordance with the conclusions that the researcher hoped to reach. Furthermore,
throughout the interviews, the researcher exercised objectivity and did not impose, or influence,
any particular answers upon the interviewees. This may be confirmed through the interview
transcripts which the researcher, conceding to the importance of the transparency criterion, has
made available in Appendix 1. The qualitative data analysis process, or the coded interview
analysis process used, also in concession to the transparency requirement, is available for review
in Appendix 2.
Finally, the researcher has sought the clear, comprehensive and coherent presentation of
data analysis in Chapter 6. The data analysis is relevant to the dissertation as a whole and flows
with the general argument.
In brief, recognising the importance of the quality requirement, as explained by Miles and
Huberman (1994), the researcher has applied the methodology suggested by them for the
guarantee of both the quality of the data gathered and the quality of the interpretation.
4.7: Summary
As may have been deduced from the above, the research will adopt a conceptual model,
qualitative and deductive methodological approach. Selection, as the research purpose sought to
argue, was primarily determined by the very nature of he research hypotheses, questions and
objectives. Furthermore, the researcher determined the imperatives of such in-depth analysis as
would allow the identification of behavioural trends and patterns while, at the same time,
enabling the exposition of the root causes of the stated. There is no claim here that there are no
limitations to this approach and the researcher concedes to the value of quantitative analysis.
However, given the parameters of the research’s scope, concomitant with time and resource
constraints, it was decided that the defined methodological approach would best satisfy the
articulated objectives and respond to the research questions.
From within the matrix of the stated methodological approach, the next chapter shall
review the results of the interviews, primarily focusing on the presentation of the conceptual
model for both Organisation A and B, as based on the interview data.

Table of Contents .......................................................................................... 2

List of Figures ............................................................................................... 5
List of Tables ................................................................................................ 6
Statements and Declaration ........................................................................... 7
Abstract ....................................................................................................... 9
Chapter 1 - Introduction and Overview ......................................................... 10
1.1: Introduction ......................................................................................... 10
1.2: Importance of Topic ............................................................................. 10
1.3: State of the Field .................................................................................. 11
1.4: Field Research Problems ....................................................................... 11
1.5: Dissertation Outline .............................................................................. 12
1.6: Summary ............................................................................................. 12
Chapter 2 - Contemporary Management Practices: Organisational Development,
Structure and Contemporary Management Practices....................................... 14
2.1: Introduction ......................................................................................... 14
2.2: Public and Private Sector Organisational Management ............................. 15
2.2.1 Characteristics of Public Sector Organisations..................................................16
2.2.2 Characteristics of Private Sector Organisations ................................................18
2.3: Growth Stages and Challenges .............................................................. 19
2.4: Strategy .............................................................................................. 29
2.5: Decision Making ................................................................................... 30
2.6: Summary ............................................................................................. 34
Chapter 3 - Contemporary Management Practices: The Conceptual and Theoretical
Fundamentals of TQM ................................................................................. 35
3.1: Introduction ......................................................................................... 35
3.2: Definition of TQM ................................................................................. 35
3.2.1 Defining Principles .................................................................................................37
3.3: Theoretical Underpinning ...................................................................... 39
3.3.1 Total Systems Theory ...........................................................................................39
3.3.2 Strategic Planning .................................................................................................43
3.3.3 Project Management .............................................................................................45
3.3.5 Performance Measurement and Statistical Rigor .............................................46
3.4: Summary ............................................................................................. 51
Chapter 4 - Research Methodology ............................................................... 53

4.1: Introduction ......................................................................................... 53
4.2: Research Background ........................................................................... 53
4.2.1 Research Hypotheses ...........................................................................................53
4.2.2 Research Questions ..............................................................................................53
4.2.3 Research Objectives..............................................................................................54
4.3: Research Design and Research Methodology .......................................... 54
4.3 Research Purpose........................................................................................................55
4.3.1 Exploratory .............................................................................................................55
4.3.2 Descriptive ..............................................................................................................56
4.3.3 Explanatory ............................................................................................................56
4.3.4 Prescriptive .............................................................................................................57
4.4: Research Approach ............................................................................... 57
4.4.1 The Deductive versus the Inductive Approach? ...............................................58
4.4.2 The Qualitative versus the Quantitative Approach ..........................................59
4.5: Research Strategy ................................................................................ 61
4.5.1 Qualitative Sampling .............................................................................................62
4.5.2 Qualitative Data Collection...................................................................................63
4.5.3 Qualitative Data Handling ....................................................................................65
4.6: Credibility and Quality of Research Findings ............................................ 68
4.6.1 Reliability ................................................................................................................68
4.6.2 Validity ....................................................................................................................68
4.6.3 Quality .....................................................................................................................69
4.7: Summary ............................................................................................. 70
Chapter 5- Presentation of Results ................................................................ 73
5.1: Introduction ........................................................................................ 73
5.2: Conceptual Model 1: Organisation A....................................................... 74
5.2.1: Conceptual Model 1 .................................................................................................75
5.2.6 Results.....................................................................................................................80
5.3: Conceptual Model 2: Organisation B ....................................................... 81
5.3.6 Results.....................................................................................................................87
5.4: Summary ............................................................................................. 87
Chapter 6- Discussion .................................................................................. 89

6.1: Introduction ........................................................................................ 89
6.2: Organisational Preparedness ................................................................. 89
6.2.1 Growth Stage .........................................................................................................91
6.2.1 Decision Making .....................................................................................................95
6.2.2 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................97
6.3: The TQM Model .................................................................................... 98
6.3.1 The Foundations of Successful TQM Implementation .....................................99
6.4: Impact of TQM on Organisational Performance ..................................... 106
6.4.1 Employee Satisfaction.........................................................................................106
6.4.2 Service Quality .....................................................................................................107
6.4.3 Customer Satisfaction .........................................................................................108
6.5: Conclusion ......................................................................................... 109
Chapter 7 - Conclusion .............................................................................. 111
7.1: Contributions of the Research.............................................................. 113
7.2: Implications of the Research ............................................................... 114
7.2.1 Implications for Theory .......................................................................................... 115
7.2.2 Implications for Public Sector Organisations ...................................................... 117
7.2.3 Implications for Future Research ......................................................................... 119
7.3: Limitations of Study ............................................................................ 120
7.4: Final Conclusion ................................................................................. 121
References ............................................................................................... 122
Chapter 5- Presentation of Results
5.1: Introduction
On the basis of the interviews conducted with management‐level employees at both
Organisation A and Organisation B, conceptual models for each of these organisations were drawn up.
These models, a total of ten or five for each organisation, are the focus of this chapter.
As may be inferred from the above, this chapter presents the results of the interviews
conducted. There are several purposes to doing so. The first is to clarify the operative organisational
models for each of the organisations studied. The second is to test the earlier stated theoretical
assumptions pertaining to public versus private sector organisational structures and business processes.
The third is to determine whether or not, as earlier hypothesized, public sector organisations are
operating below potential due to their inherently static, centralised and formalised structure. The
fourth and final purpose is the evaluation of the validity of the earlier stated hypothesis pertaining to
the implementation of private sector management strategies, models and tools in public sector
organisations.
Following the presentation of a brief background on either organisation, the results of the
interviews will be presented in the shape of conceptual organisational models, alongside a discussion of
all, within the parameters of the chapter’s stated purposes.
5.2: Conceptual Model 1: Organisation A

Organisation A is a County Council and, as such, belongs to the public sector. It is comprised of
several departments and has numerous, although well‐articulated, functions. In essence, its functions
can be divided into five categories. These are adult social services, including the provision of residential
care services for those over 16; child services, which includes the extension of social care and education
for those under 16; transport and environment services, as in the maintenance of roads, the provision of
public transport and the management of the county environment; corporate and economic services,
which embraces responsibility for trading standards, registrar offices, libraries and economic
regeneration; and the management of the council’s budget and the auditing of its finances.
As may be deduced from the above overview of the council’s functions, it is responsible for
ensuring that the county’s needs are met, whether on the social, political or economic levels.
Councillors within are further responsible for ensuring that the council provides the community with
services that meet the needs and requirements of its residents. This means that the council has to work
closely with its community.
The council’s work functions and responsibilities are multi‐layered and complex. Efficient and
effective operation, not to mention the allocation and exploitation of available resources, is inextricably
linked to the organisation’s structure and its management model/paradigm.
The four interviews which were carried out with management‐level employees at Organisation
A sought the determination of the council’s capacity to efficiently fulfil its assigned function and
effectively execute its communal responsibilities. As noted, the council’s capacity and potential to do so
are either facilitated or limited by its organisational structure and management paradigm.
Consequently, the researcher used the interviews to map out Organisation A’s conceptual organisational
models. These models are presented in diagrammatic form in Appendix 2, and are individually discussed
below.
5.2.1: Conceptual Model 1

Contrary to theoretical assumptions concerning the structure of public organisations, reviewed
and discussed in Chapter 2, Organisation A was discovered to be decentralized, not centralised;, and
dynamic, rather than inert. This is adequately illustrated in Figure 1, Appendix II.1.
Organisation A’s conceptual model is as complex as is the very nature of the council’s job
functions and responsibilities. As such, the model reveals a tendency towards the informal and the
decentralised, as a direct outcome of the imperatives of continued organisational learning, teamwork,
open intra‐organisation and extra‐organisational communication and motivation, or positive intra‐
organisational morale. In further commentary upon the stated, it is imperative to note that
Organisation A’s capacity to execute its functions is dependant on intra‐organisational collaboration,
cooperation and information exchange. The organisation, however, occupies a space whose
characteristics are constantly shifting, changing and developing. The dynamic nature of this space, and
the ever‐changing face of Organisation A’s external political, economic and social environment has
rendered effective and efficient organisational performance somewhat complicated. Quite simply
stated, effective and efficient operation is predicated on open extra‐organisational communication and
the formulation of strategic plans and objectives which are simultaneously defined by both the
organisation’s available resources and community needs.
The conceptual model (Fig. 1, Appendix II.1) illustrates Organisation A’s awareness of the
importance of intra‐ and extra‐organisational communication, organisational learning and employee
training. Awareness has motivated the embrace of support structures which facilitate open and
effective communication, training and organisational learning, teamwork and extra‐departmental
collaboration and cooperation and employee motivation, learning, and mutual respect. The conceptual
model, in fact, illustrates the centrality of each of the stated variables and factors in organisational
operation and the execution of its business processes.
To return to the issue of decentralisation and informality, considering that it conflicts with
theoretical precepts regarding public sector management, the conceptual model demonstrates that it
has been imposed on Organisation A by the imperatives of open and effective communication. Quite
simply, and as determined by the earlier reviewed literature, centralised and formalised organisations
are rendered such by the highly structured nature of intra‐organisational communication and the
tendency for such communication to be limited to the top to bottom direction. Within the matrix of
such organisational conceptual models, bi‐directional flows of communication and information are as
rare as is continued responsiveness to external environmental changes and demands through
improvisation and reformulation of strategic objectives success (Bourgeois, 1984; Bourn and Bourn,
1995; Flynn, 2002; Mctavish, 2004). However, the illustrated conceptual model provides an alternate
picture, depicting a public sector organisation which is focused upon open and effective communication,
as can only be attained through intra and extra‐organisational bi‐directional flows, as well as one which
abides by a decision‐making model that is reliant upon the aforementioned communications flow,
teamwork, inter‐departmental collaboration and cooperation, research and knowledge.
Basically, the variance between theoretical assumptions regarding public sector organisational
structures and Organisation A’s conceptual model may be explained in terms of the very nature of
organisation A’s activities and purposes. Quite simply, and as gleaned through the four interviews
carried out with Organisation A management‐level employees, the organisation is an inherently public
one. Its work functions, business process and responsibilities are shaped by its communal surroundings
and extended, in the form of public services, to that same community. The implication here is that in
order to fulfil its multiple functions as a County Council, Organisation A must maintain very strong
communication ties with its external environment and, in fact, merge with that environment. As such, it
cannot and does not operate in isolation and does not have the option of succumbing to organisational
inertia, as have many public sector organisations (Cane and Thurston, 2000; Flynn, 2002; Dent, Chandler
and Barry, 2004). It is precisely due to this, the imperatives of open and effective communication, that
Organisation A’s conceptual model reveals it to be somewhat at odds with the traditional public sector
organisational conceptual model.
5.2.2 Conceptual Model 2

As discussed in the above, through the overall organisational conceptual model, Organisation A
is to a large extent, a decision‐making organisation. It is a governmental executive and administrative
body, wherein both strategy and decision‐making assume unique importance consequent to their public
effect and consequences. Within the context of the stated, and as illustrated through Appendix II.1,
Figure 2, the decision making process is informed by numerous variables and factors and informs, itself,
organisational strategy and strategy implementation.
As depictured in Figure 2, Appendix II.1, the decision making process is immediately informed
and shaped by available information, collected through extensive research and communication with the
external environment and is characterised by its comprehensiveness and timeliness. In turn, the
decision‐making process informs and shapes the organisation’s goals and objectives. Within the matrix
of this conceptual model, and as illustrated, the decision‐making process assumes unique importance
and in many cases, the decisions made are treated with confidentiality until such a time when the
organisation determines the release of the information/decision. In addition to that, decisions are both
innovative and based on improvisation, as determined by both the situation at hand, the context of the
decision and available organisational resources.
Decision‐making is immediately linked to strategy implementation and organisational
performance through strategic planning. The core of both decision‐making and strategy
implementation is, in other words, strategic planning. The former is, itself, shaped by the decision‐
making process and is inherently dependant upon all of external environmental analysis, forecasting and
external information, or data collected from the external environment. All of the stated, and as per this
particular conceptual model, combine to ensure that strategic planning is relevant to the demands and
nature of the external environment and is the outcome of a comprehensively informed process.
Strategic planning and all that was invested into it, in turn, leads to strategy selection and
strategy implementation, directly influencing organisational performance. In relation to strategy
selection, and as explained by strategic management scholars, it is a process which is almost entirely
governed by decision‐making. Not only does the decision‐making process lead to the articulation of the
more viable of the strategic options which an organisation has at a specific time and within a specific
context but strategy selection implies the exploitation of available decision‐making tools, mechanisms
and models for the identification of the most viable and feasible of the available strategic options (Segal‐
Horn, 1998; Whittington, 2001; Beaver and Prince, 2004). The same applies to strategy implementation
insofar as the implementation stage is preceded by the selection of the most effective and feasible of
the available implementation models. Consequently, and as depicted in the conceptual model, decision‐
making is a central activity which immediately influences organisational performance.
It should be noted here that the entire process, as described in the above, requires the
involvement of various levels of employees or organisational members, from the highest levels of
leadership to the lower levels of management. It is, as such, simultaneously decentralising and unifying.
It is a decentralised process because it involves the directional, supervisory and managerial input of
various levels of organisational members and unifying because the success of the process is predicated
on these various levels acting together and independently towards a common organisational goal –
strategy selection and implementation as would enhance performance.

Conceptual Model 3 (Figure 3, Appendix II.1) directly builds on the above Conceptual Model 2
but focuses on the inter‐relational aspects of strategic planning and decision‐making. As depicted in the
model, the success of the strategic planning process is predicated on the presence of a working
environment which is supportive of both teamwork and organisational commitment. Organisation A
fosters such a working environment through the exploitation of employee motivational strategies as
would positively enhance morale, through a focus on mutual respect between organisational members
and the building of cooperative, cross‐organisational working relations. Such a working environment
facilitates teamwork, just as it does teamwork commitment.
Teamwork figures strongly in Organisation A’s business processes. As earlier noted through the
discussion on Conceptual Model 1, Organisation A has numerous complex responsibilities and work
functions. The success of these functions, or even the capacity to execute them, is dependant on
collaboration and cooperation between departments, whether for the purpose of information
exchange, joint strategy or expertise and experience. Such collaboration and cooperation often take the
form of cross‐functional teams. The successful operation of these teams, itself integral to the efficient
and effective functioning of the organisation and strategic planning, is immediately influenced by the
very nature of the working environment. Insofar as Organisation A is concerned, and as illustrated in
Figure 3 (Appendix II.1) the working environment facilitates teamwork, just as does the very nature of
the organisation’s activities.
Organisation A further possesses teamwork support structures. For example, the organisation
invests in employee training and highlights the imperatives of decentralisation and open
communication. Training provides organisational members with the tools and skills requisite for the
successful execution and management of various organisational functions/projects/strategies.
Decentralisation provides organisational members and teams with the necessarily independence
required for decision‐making, strategy testing and problem‐solving. Open communication strengthens
organisational commitment, cross‐departmental cooperation and collaboration.
Needless to say, and as illustrated in Figure 3 (Appendix II.1), all of the above informs the
decision‐making process, just as it does strategic planning, ultimately ensuring the selection and
identification of realistic and achievable organisational goals and targets, as would positively enhance
overall organisational performance.

Conceptual Model 4 (Figure 4, Appendix II.1), focuses on the diagrammatical representation of
colleagueship within Organisation A and the influence that such colleagueship exerts upon the decision‐
making and strategy formulation processes.
As illustrated in Figure 4 (Appendix II.1) and as briefly mentioned in the above, the relationship
between organisational members is founded upon mutual respect, cooperation and collaboration with
that, in turn, positively influencing employee morale. In fact, the interviews conducted with managerial‐
level staff at Organisation A (Appendix I.1), emphasised the extent to which employee input is valued,
considered and respected.
The relationship between colleagues within Organisation A directly influences decision‐making
processes and outcomes which, in turn, influence strategy formation. It need be noted that within the
context of the stated relationship, colleagueship and the elevation of employee morale levels are
fortified through information exchange, meetings, support for creativity and innovation, emphasis on
rationality, the highlighting of autonomy and problem solving, reasoned and rational risk‐taking and
improvised discretion. All of the stated inform the relationship between employees and the
organisation and between employees themselves while, at the same time, contributing towards more
informed, rational and innovative/creative decision‐making, problem solving and strategy formation.
While, as illustrated in this particular Conceptual Model, strategy formation is an outcome, or a
process informed by all of the above stated, it unfolds within a well‐defined matrix. This matrix or
framework is shaped, delimited and informed by the organisation’s mission, objectives, available
resources and resource allocation strategies, strategy types, strategy options and opportunities, level of
organisational responsiveness to intra and extra‐organisational forces and intra‐organisational creativity
and innovation levels.
While the above, together with the conceptual model itself, may lend to the conclusion that the
decision‐making and strategy formation processes are unnecessarily complicated, this is not true. As
clarified through the interviews (Appendix I.1), the responsibilities which this organisation owes to its
community in its function as a council, defines it as a decision‐making and strategy formation and
implementation entity. Its performance is evaluated in accordance with the impact that its decisions
have on the community/public an, as such, substantive amounts of time, effort, research and resources
are expended into the decision‐making process. Consequently, the decision‐making process is, by
necessity, complex and comprehensive.

Conceptual Model 5 (Figure 5, Appendix II.1), highlights the variables that influence and
determine the effectiveness of Organisation A’s strategic planning. As illustrated in this model,
effectiveness is ultimately delimited by the resources available to Organisation A, defined as time,
people and money, the level of intra‐organisational enthusiasm and motivation, and the characteristics
and nature of intra and extra‐organisational interaction. Needless to say, resources determine strategy
options, whereby availability immediately classifies some strategies as feasible and realistic and others
as unrealistic and unfeasible consequent to the absence of the requisite resources for implementation,
testing and research. Similarly, the level of intra‐organisational motivation and enthusiasm impinge
upon the degree of decision‐making creativity, innovation and viability. Finally, levels of intra‐
organisational interaction shape the extent to which the decision‐making process is based on all
relevant available information as well as the extent to which it realistically withstands successful
implementation. Similarly, the nature and extent of extra‐organisational interaction determines
whether or not decisions made are relevant to the context of application, as in whether or not they
address a need.
As further illustrated in this conceptual model, the effectiveness of strategic planning influences
the policy formulation process, just as it does the quality of decision‐making and organisational
performance. The policy formulation process deserves special mention because of the effort that
Organisation A expends into ensuring its viability and effectiveness. Quite simply stated, besides being
influenced and shaped by the effectiveness of strategic planning and all that goes into it, it is further
fortified and influenced by the operation of intra‐organisational activity centres whose primary unction
is policy formulation.
It need further be noted that while Organisation A tends towards the informal and the
decentralised, as repeatedly stated in the above, the strategic planning process is both centralised and
formalised. The rationale behind the centralisation and formalisation of this process is to ensure that
the planning process is controlled, limited to the organisation’s objectives and goals and realistic within
the context of its available resources.
5.2.6 Results
While the results of the interviews shall be discussed in further detail in succeeding chapters, a
brief remark is necessary. The interviews and the conceptual models, which they informed, at least
within the context of Organisation A, disputed much of what has been earlier theorised about public
sector organisations. Except within the context of particular functions and processes, the organisation is
largely decentralised and informal, characterised by open communication, extra‐departmental
collaboration, and dynamic responsiveness to the demands and needs of its external environment.
What remains to be seen is whether or not Organisation A can benefit from the implementation of
private sector managerial strategies and paradigms, such as TQM and whether, indeed, it needs to
consider a change in managerial paradigm or not. Even though the organisation appears to be applying
decision‐making models and strategy formulation paradigms which are most commonly associated with
the public sector, the fact remains that its performance and operations can substantially benefit from
the reformulation of management paradigms towards TQM. As it currently stands, Organisation A only
makes limited, although constructive and important, use of private sector management strategies and
tools, with the argument being that its successful utilisation of those tools indicate that private sector
management strategies withstand successful implementation in the public sector and if implemented,
will positively enhance public sector organisational performance.
5.3: Conceptual Model 2: Organisation B

Organisation B is a private sector financial institution whose management model derives from
total quality management and, as such, is heavily reliant on strategic management, micro and macro‐
organisational management, continued performance evaluation and organisational learning, employee
motivation, commitment and teamwork. In comparison to Organisation A whose performance is
evaluated through the political, economic and social consequences of its decisions and strategies upon
the community it services, Organisation B’s performance is measured through its financial performance,
customer satisfaction levels, capacity for realistic, although competitive, short, medium and long term
planning and the extent to which it satisfies its short, medium and long term goals and its market share.
Further in comparison to Organisation A which has multiple work functions and is engaged in
numerous types of activities, Organisation B’s activities and work functions are limited to the financial
sector. Strategy, therefore, as well as organisational objectives is clearly delineated.

Conceptual Model 1 (Figure 1, Appendix II.2) depicts the overall organisational business
processes, activities and the manner in which they tie to, and influence, one another. On the basis of
this diagram, which was mapped out using information provided by the interviewees, Organisation B
emerges as both centralised and formalised.
While there is a high level of intra‐organisational collaboration and communication, all of which
informs the decision making and strategy formulation processes, top management and leadership are
ultimately responsible for the articulation of the organisation’s objectives, goals, budget and future
aspirations. However, it need be stressed that leadership and top management make these decisions
on the basis of available information pertaining to the market within which they operate and the
organisation’s available resources
Organisation A is strictly departmentalised. Each of its departments has its own functions,
objectives and goals which must be fulfilled within the limits of the resources available to the
department and within a specified time‐frame. Department goals and objectives feed into overall
organisational goals and objectives, in the sense that each department has its own defined
responsibilities in the attainment of the aforementioned. Needless to say, and despite clear
departmentalisation, the implication here is that there is inter‐department collaboration, cooperation
and exchange of information.
There is a clear chain of command within each department, as there is within the organisation
itself. In essence, Organisation B is a strategic management‐oriented organisation, in the sense that
while lower and middle level employees provide considered feedback and play an integral role in the
attainment of organisational goals, they do so through their direct supervisors/managers and within the
context of their departmental identity. Decisions, the selection of strategies and their implementation is
the responsibility of top management and leadership which, in order to determine the most
appropriate, feasible and realistic strategies, frequently meet.
On the basis of the above, and as illustrated through Figure 1 (Appendix II.2), Organisation B is
clearly a tightly/centrally controlled one. Whether or not this impinges upon performance is yet to be
determined.

Figure 2 (Appendix II.2) provides a diagrammatic representation of Organisation B’s
organisational structure, highlighting centralisation. As illustrated, consequent to centralisation of
structure and, in turn strengthening such centralisation, top management is primarily responsible for
decision‐making. Top management reaches decisions on the basis of the organisation’s future
aspirations, objectives and goals and financial constraints, including departmental resource allocation.
Decisions, in other words are framed by the stated considerations, information of which is limited to top
management until such a time when it is publicised. The decision making process which, as stressed, is
governed by top management, gives rise to strategic initiatives and ultimately to strategic planning. It
need be noted here that limitation of the stated to top management does not imply that non‐
management level employees are marginalised. Non‐management level employees provide feedback
and play an integral role in the selection of strategy and subsequent implementation in departmental
meetings. Top management goes into strategy meetings with this in hand and, accordingly, represents
the department at these meetings and, by extension, departmental employees. In other words, non‐
management level employees are not marginalised but their input, contribution and role is formalised in
order to allow for more efficient and effective organisational performance.
Continuing from the above, Figure 2 (Appendix II.2) clearly indicates that top management
frequently meets whether to articulate strategic options, decide upon strategy, implement strategy or
evaluate performance. The implication here is that the organisation is involved in the continued
assessment of its strategy and performance in relation to the attainment of organisational objectives
and targets. Therefore, despite centralisation, the organisation remains highly flexible and responsive to
external environmental changes, as evidenced in that it exploits performance reviews, market data,
organisational financial performance and stock market activity to evaluate and review current strategy
and articulate alternative, corrective ones. Centralisation and formalisation, therefore, imply neither
organisational inertia nor marginalisation of non‐management level employees contrary to popular
theoretical assumptions.

Conceptual Model 3 (Figure 3, Appendix II.2) focuses upon department level processes and how
they feed into overall organisational strategies and objectives. Proceeding from the finding that,
contrary to theoretical assumptions, Organisation B is a centralised and formalised one, the implication
here is that the organisation is strictly departmentalised. Naturally, this necessitates a closer look at
departmental processes from the conceptual perspective.
As illustrated in Figure 3 (Appendix II.2) while departments are interconnected and ultimately
work towards the satisfaction of organisational goals and objectives, each department has its specific
function and its own set of strategic objectives. Working from the overall organisational objectives and
aims, each department has a specific role and function to play in the overall process and a fixed set of
resources, both financial and non‐financial, and time‐frame within which to execute its allocated tasks
and satisfy its strategic objectives. Accordingly, and operating within the matrix of available resources,
departments regularly undertake performance measurements, leading to the production of financial
analysis reports which, in turn, informs both strategic planning and decision‐making.
In relation to strategic planning and decision‐making, it is important to emphasise that
consequent to centralisation, departmental decisions and strategies are delimited by the organisation’s
own strategic plans and objectives. Within that context and within the parameters of the department’s
responsibility within overall strategy, departments are responsible for devising the optimal strategies
and means by which to fulfil their strategies/objectives, within the limits of allocated time and
resources. Therefore, reference to strategic planning, implementation and decision‐making here is
limited to the departmental level.
As further illustrated through Conceptual Model 3, departments function with relative
autonomy and as independent units which have specific action commitments and strategic objectives
which must be fulfilled on the basis of inside departmental knowledge and within the framework of
available departmental resources. Departments, however, are ultimately units within a larger
organisation and are inseparable from this organisation, wherein they are bound by the duties and
responsibilities articulated by that organisation as well as the strategic objectives and goals assigned by
it.

Conceptual Model 4 focuses on the extent to which management tools and techniques,
alongside intra and extra‐organisational information influence strategic planning and, ultimately
organisational performance. It should be noted that this conceptual model sheds light on both
organisation‐wide and departmental operations.
On the departmental level, this conceptual model (Figure 4, Appendix II.2) clarifies the fact that
information and management techniques are central to the success of strategic planning. In brief, using
inside information, alongside relevant extra‐departmental information, department managers utilise
management techniques and tools to facilitate intra‐departmental knowledge, understanding and
awareness of the department’s current strategies and objectives. The aforementioned information,
alongside management tools and techniques combine to fortify the requisite intra‐departmental
knowledge of assigned tasks and responsibilities as would best inform strategic planning on the
departmental level. Following from strategic planning, departments are then responsible for clarifying
their strategic choice which, in turn, directly influences performance and is the basis upon which
performance is measured (strategic choice, as in goals are measured against performance, as in what
has been achieved). This necessitates the department’s constant undertaking of periodic performance
assessments with the assessment outcomes used to inform another stage/level of strategic planning,
strategic outcome and performance.
On the organisation‐wide level, Conceptual Model 4 clarifies the operation of strategic
managements within Organisation B. Using information pertaining to the organisation’s position within
the market and further exploiting within‐organisation information on long‐term strategic goals and
extra‐organisational market information, Organisation B adjusts management techniques and tools
accordingly. It further shapes organisational learning and knowledge towards harmonisation with the
referenced information‐sets and as such, endows organisation members with the skills, knowledge and
tools required for implementation of those strategies which have been decided upon in light of the
stated information. The implication here is that Organisation B is committed to constant development,
evolution and learning, continually adjusting itself towards proactive and constructive response to
emergent market information and the organisation’s position therein.
As further clarified through Figure 4 (Appendix II.2), the organisation exploits the above defined
internal and external information in the strategic planning process. Prior to that, however, the strategic
planning process is largely defined by the organisation’s resources, its resource allocation strategy and
its investment in production decisions. Within the matrix of that general definition, the referenced
external and internal information works to further clarify the process. Following from strategy planning
clarification, the organisation embarks upon the strategic choice process which then determines
organisational performance.
Conceptual Model 4, as clarified in the above, is applicable to departmental and organisational
operations within Organisation B. It highlights the extent to which the organisation emphasises the
imperatives of information, knowledge, training and strategic management for assurance of positive
financial and non‐financial performance indictors.

The final model, Conceptual Model 5 (Figure 5, Appendix II.2) articulates all that which goes
into, shapes and informs the strategy making and planning process. The process, as depicted in the
model, is tightly controlled, characterised by creativity, strategic thinking and guided by an
understanding of strategic issues and the position, performance and strategy of competitors. Beyond
that, the process is strictly framed by a well‐thought out and researched time‐horizon and the defined
strategic actions within are similarly timed and ordered.
The model, as presented, underscores the fact that Organisation B follows a total quality
management paradigm. While, as earlier stated and emphasised through the discussion of the other
models, the organisation is structured towards timely and flexible response to emergent market
conditions and changes in the external environment/market, strategic planning is a comprehensively
informed process into which the organisation heavily invests resource, time and energy. It is interesting
to note that TQM scholars advise precisely that, emphasising that the strategic planning process must
be approach from both a total quality and a systems management approach, insofar as it shapes an
organisation’s direction and indubitably influences overall performance (Chen 1975; Gitlow, 2000;
Jackson, 2000; Kast and Rosenzweig, 2000).
Having mentioned that Organisation B’s strategic planning process is informed by both TQM and
systems thinking, it is necessary to elaborate upon and defend this statement. Firstly addressing the
relationship between TQM and systems’ thinking, several management scholars have contended that
systems thinking a core component of TQM and most of the latter’s core concepts have been integrated
into the former. These include a similar understanding of and respect for the value of feedback and an
identical emphasis on goal seeking (Gitlow, 2000; Kast and Rosenzweig, 2000; Jackson, 2000; Zairi,
2002). In an effort to defend the earlier noted stated, these concepts shall now be explained in relation
to Conceptual Model 5.
In Conceptual Model 5, as in the previous models, the import of feedback to the functioning of
Organisation B was repeatedly highlighted and emphasised. Feedback, within the parameters of this
model, and as defined by both systems’ thinking and TQM embraces all extra and intra‐organisational
information relevant to performance, market position and competitive analysis. Feedback is that which
allows an organisation to map out its position within the market and outline its future goals, expressed
in terms of potentially attainable position (Collins, 2001). The conceptual model discussed here
indicates that feedback, whether as in the outcome of performance measurement, the result of
competitive analysis or the identification and understanding of strategic issues, directly shapes strategic
planning. From the theoretical perspectives of both TQM and the systems approach, strategic planning
cannot proceed and cannot hope to succeed if it is not informed and shaped by feedback. Quite simply
stated, feedback grounds an organisation and allows it to articulate a strategy making methodology
which is consistent with the organisation’s capacities, as in human and non‐human resources, its market
position and its potential position (Collins, 2001). Insofar as Conceptual Model 5 highlights the
dependency of strategy making on specified information‐types, it depicts Organisation B’s commitment
to a management paradigm which is based upon TQM and systems thinking.
Further exploration of the model indicates that feedback/information is ultimately exploited for
identification and clarification of the organisation’s goals. Strategy, whether strategy making or strategy
implementation, refers to the identification of the organisation’s goals and the selection of those which
are most realistically attainable, as well as to the articulation of the means by which these goals will be
attained (strategy implementation) (Hart and Banbury, 1994). Performance, within this context, is
measured through an analysis of achieved goals versus goal‐objectives (Krohmer, Homburg and
Workman 2002).
If the above explained part of the diagram (goal‐seeking) is analysed from the perspectives of
TQM and systems thinking, one again, one finds that Organisation B’s conceptual model, hence
management paradigm, draws from TQM and systems thinking. Goal‐seeking, as represented in Figure
5 (Appendix II.2), is one of the core concepts of TQM and systems’ thinking (Collins and Porras, 1994;
Rwelamila and Hall, 1995; Flood, 1995; Reed, Lemak and Montgomery, 1996; Manz and Stewart, 1997;
Westphal, Gulati and Shortell, 1997; Easton and Jarrell, 1998; McMullen, 1998; Gitlow, 2000; Kast and
Rosenzweig, 2000; Jackson, 2000; Collins, 2001; Zairi, 2002; Paine, 2003). As Collins and Porras (1994)
explain, an organisation, as the case with any living organism, has multiple goals and purposes.
However, unlike the case with living organisms whose components and subcomponents are usually
geared towards the fulfilment of the same set of goals, business organisations are vulnerable to the
chaos and inefficiency that may arise, consequent to conflicting goals and objectives. Organisations are
ultimately comprised of departments which have their own priorities, goals and strategies, not to
mention their own performance measurement indicators to worry about. The implication here is that
individual departments may have conflicting goals, visions and strategies. In order to ensure inter‐
departmental coordination and cooperation as opposed to confrontation, it is incumbent upon the
organisation to, not only clearly articulate its goals and outline the strategies for the harmonisation
between them and their realisation, but to coordinate between departmental goals and aspirations and
the organisational ones. In other words and as further confirmed by Collins (2001), the drive towards
excellence and quality is partially predicated on the organisation’s capacity to coordinate and harmonise
between the organisation’s multiple goals, on the one hand, and between organisational goals and
those of its departments, on the hand (Paine, 2003).
The importance of Conceptual Model 5 (Figure 5, Appendix II.2) derives from the fact that it
identifies Organisation B as a goal‐seeking business entity which is committed to performance
excellence through a systems approach implementation of TQM.
5.3.6 Results
On the basis of the four interviews carried out with consultants and management‐level
employees at Organisation B, the researcher was able to produce the five conceptual models which
were discussed in this section of the chapter. While the findings shall be explored in detail in Chapter 6,
it is interesting to point towards some of the more interesting ones. As illustrated in the above,
Organisation B is centralised, formalised and departmentalised. The literature reviewed in Chapter 2 on
private and public sector organisations attributed these characteristics to public sector management
strategies and paradigms and attributes the organisational inertia to which the public sector is
vulnerable to, to these characteristics. However, and a least within the context of Organisation B, these
characteristics were identified within a private sector organisation and have contributed to the
increasing dynamism and performance excellence of the organisation, and not to its stagnation.
Consequently, the findings, thus far, appear to dispute the theoretical assumptions highlighted in the
literature reviewed on public and private sector organisations.
5.4: Summary
Using interview data to produce five conceptual models for each of the case studies, this
chapter has presented these conceptual models and analysed their implications. While the findings
have only been briefly touched upon here, they shall be explored in greater detail in the next chapter,
with the purpose being the testing of the hypothesis. However, at this point, one may safely ascertain
the validity of the hypothesis. Private sector organisations, even if centralised, formalised and
departmentalised, utilise management strategies and paradigms which contribute to performance
excellence and aid an organisation in the articulation of realistic objectives, in the execution of well‐
thought out strategy planning and implementation processes and, ultimately, in the attainment of its
short, medium and long‐term objectives. Should public sector organisations utilise these same
management paradigms and techniques, with the focus here being on TQM, they can, similarly, attain
their potential. In brief, the results, thus far, confirm the validity of the hypothesis and attest to the fact
that there are no obstacles in face of the public sector’s adaptation and adoption of total quality
management models, traditionally associated with the public sector and customarily linked to the
latter’s superior performance.
Chapter 6- Discussion
6.1: Introduction
The literature reviewed thus far, and the eight interviews carried out with top‐level
management at both Organisation A and Organisation B, have come out strongly in favour of the
hypotheses. There exist no fundamentally inherent differences between the public and the private
sector as would disallow the former from the adaptation and adoption of private sector management
strategies and paradigms. Not only that but, private management models and strategies, consequent to
their greater focus on the customer satisfaction and financial/non‐financial business performance
indictors, furnish tools and methodologies which facilitated the more effective and efficient
governance/management of business entities (Collins and Porras, 1994; Collins, 2001). Private sector
management tools, strategies and models have, as asserted by numerous scholars, established their
superiority over those management strategies and tools which are customarily associated with, and
applied in, the public sector (Benson, Saraph and Schroeder, 1991; Applebaum and Batt, 1994; Collins
and Porras, 1994; Bou and Beltran, 2005). Ample empirical evidence has been provided by countless
scholars in validation of that claim (Collins, 2001).
Two questions impose themselves at this point. The first is whether or not private management
tools, strategies and paradigms can be implemented in the non‐profit and administrative sector of the
public sector, as is the case with Organisation A. The second is whether successful implementation
implies transference or adaptation?
Using the above stated questions as the guidelines for the current chapter’s discussion, the
focus here shall be upon the rationale behind the exploitation of private sector management strategies
within the context of the public sector and the methodology for successful implementation.
The chapter shall be broken down into three main sections. The first section will focus upon the
correlation between organisational growth stages and the successful management of organisations,
whether public or private, profit or non‐profit. The second section will analyse and discuss the factors
upon which the successful implementation of private sector management models, specifically, TQM, in
the public sector is predicated. The third, and final section, shall discuss the reasons why TQM should
be implemented in the UK public sector.
6.2: Organisational Preparedness

The efficient and effective management of the public sector is predicated on the discarding of
management strategies traditionally associated with it and on the adoption of those popularly
associated with the private sector (de Bruijin, 2003). This is the thrust of de Bruijin’s argument which,
despite sounding both bold and radical, is amply proven throughout his study on successful versus
failing public sector management paradigms. Successful public sector organisations are, in the vast
majority of cases, discovered to have implemented private sector management paradigms and, most
specifically, TQM. Failing public organisations are, on the other hand, those which have insisted on the
maintenance of traditional public sector management paradigms (de Bruijin, 2003). As may be inferred
from de Bruijin’s (2003) discussion on public sector management, the traditional/atypical public sector
management model is an inherently bureaucratic one which insists on the maintenance of a pyramidical
hierarchical structure and a top‐down command and communications approach. Before building upon
this line of thought, however, it is necessary to point out that if the described is a traditional public
sector management model; Organisation A is far from traditional.
The traditional public sector management model, as defined and described by de Bruijin (2003)
is hardly one which can either promote or sustain organisational success. To avoid generalisation,
however, it is important to concede to the impossibility of validating a claim to the effect that all public
sector organisations that adhere to management strategies associated with the public sector are bound
to experience failure. Despite that, empirical evidence suggests that the transition from public to
private sector management strategies enhances efficiency and effectiveness (Flynn, 2002; Ford and
Slocum, 1977; de Bruijin, 2003; Flynn, 2002; Dent, Chandler and Barry, 2004).
Some, as reported by Flynn (2002) have maintained that the inherent divide between the public
and the private sector, implying the existence of fundamental conceptual differences, prohibit the
successful adoption of private sector management paradigms by the public sector. There are no such
conceptual obstacles and if there is a divide, as Dent, Chandler and Barry (2004) assert, it is limited to
differences in activities and functions. Conceptual differences, on the other hand, are imposed upon
either the public or the private sector from without and, more specifically, by management paradigms.
In other words, differences arise between the two because the management paradigms traditionally
implemented in either are very different.
Public sector organisations can, and should, adopt management paradigms traditionally linked
to the private sector. However, to ensure the success of the transition from one management paradigm
to the other, it is imperative to prepare the public sector organisation in question for the transition. In
emphasising this, Flynn (2002) maintains that preparedness comes in the form of aligning the growth
stage with communication strategies and human resources capabilities, among others, and on
evaluating operative decision‐making and project management strategies and reforming them in such a
way as would render the organisation more accepting of private management strategies (Flynn, 2002).
Public sector organisations can adopt private management strategies and, would benefit from
doing so. To ensure, however, the successful transition from public to private management strategies,
organisational preparedness should be evaluated and, if found lacking, a number of steps have to be
executed. These steps, or methods for preparing a public sector organisation for the successful
implementation of private sector management strategies, shall be discussed below.
6.2.1 Growth Stage

In numerous publications, studies and researches, organisational development and
management scholars have asserted, and established through both empirical and theoretical evidence,
the importance of identifying and defining an organisation’s growth stage prior to devising and
implementing a new management paradigm (Gilmore and Kazanjian, 1989; Greiner, 1998; Kelly, 2004).
An organisation’s growth stage, rather than its affiliation with the public or the private sector,
determines the form of the management paradigm which would best address its needs and facilitate its
attainment of its potentials and objectives. The importance of defining and identifying growth stages
will now be related to Organisation A.
Organisation A, as can be determined through reference to the previous chapter, is in Greiner’s
(1998) `direction’ growth stage, Churchill and Lewis’ ` (1983) success‐growth’ stage and Scott and Bruce
(1987) and Kazanjian (1988), `growth’ growth stage. Its growth stage has been identified through a
consideration of its functional organisational structure, its basic but improving systems and controls and
its relatively informal management style. The cited researchers, despite differing labels for this
particular stage of growth, have determined that organisations experience `growing pains’ at this
particular growth stage (Kazanjian, 1988). Growing pains, themselves, give rise to a number of problems
which need to be considered when designing and implementing a mew management paradigm. As
pertains to Organisation A, and bearing in mind that it is being used in this context as an example of a
public sector organisation and is not the focal point of this study, four growing pain symptoms or
challenges are evident.
6.2.1.1 Communication
Organisations at the `direction’ (Greiner, 1998), `success‐growth,’ (Churchill and Lewis, 1983)
and `growth’ (Scott and Bruce, 1987; Kazanjian; (1988), stage tend to suffer from inefficient
communication. This is because the organisation, as an entity, is at the stage where it has expanded
beyond the framework of its earlier communication systems/methods/strategies. Insofar as
Organisation A is concerned, the interviews established that it had an open and informal communication
system. On the surface, this would not presuppose the existence of a communications problem but
closer analysis indicates otherwise.
As noted in the previous chapter, Organisation A is a complex entity, involved in a variety of
political, economic and social work functions. By necessity, therefore, it is strictly departmentalised.
Departmentalisation, in itself, is not a problem but strict departmentalisation can be a source of inter‐
organisational communications problems (Ford and Slocum, 1977; Flynn, 2002; Dent, Chandler and
Barry, 2004). In fact, studies on UK public organisations have determined that one of the primary
obstacles to efficiency and the realisation of full potential lie in the adverse effects of strict
departmentalisation on inter‐organisational communications. As Flynn (2002) explains, strict
departmentalisation, even within the context of public organisations which have a seemingly òpen’ and
informal system of communications, departments tend to be open only with information they decide
has organisation‐wide significance but are not open with information per se. The implication here is
that departments decide, from their viewpoint and in accordance with their priorities and interests, the
type of information that they will share and the context of sharing (Flynn, 2002). When such decisions
are left to individual departments, more often than not, the result is the impression, rather than reality,
of òpen’ communications.
In the absence of genuinely open and efficient communications, management failures are a
common problem, as are the maldistribution of resources and failure to operate at a level consistent
with potential. Within the context of the stated, the introduction of management reforms, let alone the
adoption and adaptation of a new management paradigm, is problematic (Dent, Chandler and Barry,
2004). In fact, Ford and Slocum (1977) and Flynn (2002) have, using empirical and theoretical evidence,
independently determined that prior to the public sector’s adoption of private sector management
methodologies/paradigms; it needs to redesign its inter‐organisational communications methods and
channels towards an optimal fit with its current growth stage and its medium and long‐term projected
growth levels.
On the basis of the above, and as confirmed by Dent, Chandler and Barry (2004), it is evident
that the communications channels and systems operative within a public sector organisation must be
redesigned prior to the introduction and implementation of private sector management methods. Even
in instances when the communications system is classified as òpen’ and efficient, it is thus only in
comparison to the public sector in general but, hardly so in comparison to the private sector (Cane and
Thurston, 2000; Dent, Chandler and Barry, 2004). It is, hence, apparent that there are no conceptual
obstacles to the implementation of private sector management strategies in the public sector but that
the communications systems, channels and methods prevalent in the public sector can function as an
obstacle to successful implementation and operationalisation.
6.2.1.2 Human Resources

Considering that human resources are the backbone of an organisation and are one of the
primary forces behind organisational growth, Foss (2005) maintains a direct correlation between
organisational capacity for successful transition from one growth stage to another, and the quality of its
human resources. Further expanding upon the relation between growth stages and human resources,
Price (2004) asserts that the survival of each growth stage, let alone successful transition to the next
stage, is predicated on the presence of a workforce/HR force which possesses the particular skill sets,
knowledge and experiences required by each particular stage of growth. The challenge here, therefore,
lies in ensuring that the HR force progresses and advances in skills and knowledge in a way that is
parallel to, and consistent with, the organisation’s progression through growth stages (Price, 2004).
Organisations at the `direction’ (Greiner, 1998), `success‐growth,’ (Churchill and Lewis, 1983)
and `growth’ (Scott and Bruce, 1987; Kazanjian, (1988), suffer most from a disconnect between its HR
force and stage of maturity. This is one of the reasons why growing pains have been associated with
this particular growth stage (Price, 2004). This particular growing pain must be addressed prior to the
organisation’s adopting an alternate management paradigm.
To address and overcome the challenge presented by the disconnect between HR and growth
stage, organisations need to precisely articulate their present and projected work activities and
functions and identify the employee skill sets required for the efficient and effective execution of these
functions (Chandler et al., 2005). Thereafter, the organisation in question needs to engage in the
retraining and education of its workforce towards the acquisition of the skills and knowledge required
for the identified growth stage (Chandler et al., 2005). In other words, and to better prepare a public
sector organisation for the implementation of private sector management strategies, the capabilities
and skills of its human resources must be aligned with its growth stage.
6.2.1.3 Systems and Processes

At the time of their foundation, an organisation’s systems and processes, or their strategy for
doing business, is designed to correspond with current requirements. As organisations evolve, it is
assumed that their systems and process undergo parallel evolution, whereby organisational
requirements and systems and processes are at a continual `fit’ (Bhatia, 2004). Organisational
development and management scholars, however, assert that research and studies have uncovered a
wealth of empirical evidence which that suggests otherwise. In a significant number of cases,
organisations expand beyond the capacities of their systems and processes with the consequence being
a breakdown in efficiency and effectiveness (Mehta, 1989; Burnes, 1992; Liu, 2004; Bhatia, 2004). This
is most evident at the `growing’ stage wherein an organisation has reached the limits of its current
sustainable growth capacities and needs to expand those capacities in order to move onto the next
stage (Mehta, 1989; Burnes, 1992; Liu, 2004; Bhatia, 2004). The question now is how does any of this
relate to the public sector’s adoption of private sector management strategies?
Liu (2004) explains the relationship between systems and process at a particular growth stage
and the transition from one management paradigm to another. Systems and processes, as he defines it,
refers to the manner in which the organisation internally conducts its business, inclusive of which are
the resource allocation, the communication and decision‐making methodologies, in addition to the
means by which it determines and its goals and designs its short, medium and long‐term objectives (Liu,
2004). Should organisational requirements and needs be at a disequilibrium with its systems and
processes, communication flows, decision‐making and policy implementation strategies will tend
towards the inefficient and ineffective (Liu, 2004). Within the context of the stated, it is virtually
impossible for an organisation to make the successful transition from one management paradigm to
another. Successful transition is partially predicated on the ability of internal systems and processes to
pave the way for the transition, implement the model and communicate are fundamentals across the
organisation (Liu, 2004). Hence, systems and processes must be aligned with an organisation’s
requirements, as determined and defined by its particular growth stage, prior to the implementation of
an alternate/different management paradigm.
The implications of the discussion on systems and processes in relation to growth stages are
clear. Prior to its making the transition from public sector to private sector management paradigms, a
public sector organisation must align its processes and strategies with its current growth stage so that
the former can both sustain and support the transition. For example, were Organisation A to commit to
the transition to TQM, it need first analyse its current business processes, systems and strategies with its
identified growth stage, with the objective being the determination of the presence, absence or extent
of alignment. As earlier stated and as may be inferred from both the interview data and the conceptual
models that they gave rise to, Organisation A is at the direction stage of growth. The implication here is,
and as may be inferred from organisational growth literature, it is at the point where it will either make
the transition to the next stage or will remain locked in this stage and atrophy (Churchill and Lewis,
1983; Scott and Bruce, 1987; Kazanjian, 1988; Greiner, 1998). The potential for successful transition, as
in continued growth, versus atrophy is determined by the extent to which Organisation A’s systems and
processes are aligned with its current, directional growth stage.
The available interview data, as may be confirmed through a review of both the interview
transcripts and the conceptual models for Organisation A, lends to the assertion that the organisation’s
systems and processes are not as closely aligned to its growth stage as should be.
Organisation A is a complex entity which, by definition of its nature as a County Council, is
deeply involved in a vast array of communal political, economic and social projects and issues.
Involvement is on both the administrative and the executive levels, implying that the organisation’s
leadership and top management is responsible for both making decisions (devising and designing policy
and the implementation, or enforcement, of those decisions on the community‐wide level. In order to
fulfil these responsibilities and execute its numerous functions, Organisation A’s systems and processes
are evolving, parallel to its increasing complexity of functions and structures; moving away from the
defined traditional public organisation model to one which increasingly borrows from private
management strategies (decentralised, informal and tending towards dynamism). However, at this
particular juncture, its growth stage is not as closely aligned with its systems and processes as should be.
In brief, it may be at the directional growth stage but its systems and processes are showing
characteristics of both the directional and the delegational growth stages. It is, thus, that the
organisation is increasingly decentralised, informal and comparatively dynamic (features of the
delegation growth phase) even as it remains at the directional stage. The implication here is that it
adopted features of the delegation stage but retained the structure and the majority of the features
particular to the direction phase. The highlighted misalignment does not emerge as a significant
problem but, nevertheless, prior to its adopting a TQM model, the areas of misalignment must be
precisely identified and strategies for creating and implementing alignment must be devised and
enforced. Only when its systems and processes are completely aligned with its growth stage can the
organisation adopt a TQM model.
In light of the study’s focus, which is the implementation of management models traditionally
associated with the private sector to the public sector, the interrelationship between growth stages and
systems and processes takes on a special significance.
6.2.1 Decision Making

Although some scholars have argued that decision‐making models should correspond to
organisational growth stage, the majority have determined that decision‐making models should
correspond to an organisation’s general requirements (Keuning and Eppink, 1993). In other words,
organisations should not abide by a fixed decision‐making model but should train in the usage of a
variety, allowing the selection of any one model to be determined by the type of decision being made
and the context within which it is being made requirements (Keuning and Eppink, 1993). The argument
here is that organisations should not follow a fixed decision‐making model.
Insofar as public organisations are concerned, there is an overwhelming tendency to abide by a
fixed decision‐making model/strategy (Gilmore and Kazanjian, 1989). Using Organisation A as an
example, one finds that despite the relative transparency and efficiency of its decision‐making strategy,
this observation holds true. Decision‐making follows an established model which neither allows for
autonomous decision‐making at the employee level for problem‐solving reasons nor for decision‐making
flexibility when and as needed. These are important considerations since, as Gilmore and Kazanjian
(1989) emphasise, without some degrees of employee‐level autonomous decision‐making and decision‐
making flexibility, organisations are bound to be reactive, rather than proactive. In other words, they
will tend towards the belated reaction to crisis through problem‐solving decision‐makings rather than
proactively make the decisions needed to preclude the potential development of minor problems to
crisis‐levels.
As important as the decision‐making strategy (ies) implemented within an organisation is (are),
decision‐making models assume an even more unique importance when discussions turn towards the
transition from one management model to another. Bhatia (2004) maintains the validity of the asserted
through reference to two facts. Firstly, the decision to undergo a management model transition process
is an extremely complex one and involves an endless list of sub and sub‐sub decisions which need to be
made on the team and individual‐employee levels and not just on the managerial ones. Therefore, to
ensure that the transition process is successful and proceeds without significant implementation
problems, the circle of decision‐makers has to be widened considerably; it has to be expanded to
include employees and not just managers. However, the requisite expansion can only be undertaken if
employees are offered some kind of decision‐making training and are given a solid understand of the
various decision‐making strategies particular to the organisation in question. Such knowledge and
training will help ensure that decisions made on the individual, or non‐managerial employee level, are
sound and, above all, considerate of the organisation’s interests and consistent with its general strategy.
Secondly, the process of transition from one management paradigm to another is replete with
both foreseeable and unforeseeable problems. Problems, as Bhatia (2004), explains, are critical
situations which require the making of prompt, and sound, decisions in order to dissipate. Furthermore,
each problem, or problem‐type, articulates the problem‐solving/decision‐making model which it would
most effectively and constructively respond to (Bhatia, 2004). The implication here is that decision‐
making models correspond to decision‐types and contexts. Considering that in light of problematic
nature of the management model transition stage, it is evident that seamless and successful transitions
need to be preceded by organisational training, not only in the art and strategy of decision‐making but
in the exploitation of a variety of decision‐making models/strategies in order to resolve problems, as
and when they arise, through the decision‐making model dictated by the situation itself (Bhatia, 2004).
Consequently, prior to its adoption of private management strategies, implying the transition from one
management model to another, public sector organisations need to engage in the expansion of their
decision‐making parameters and in the training of both management and employees in the use of these
models. This applies to Organisation A as available interview data effectively underscored the fact that
decision‐making, although participatory, is confined to management‐level employees.
6.2.2 Conclusion
What has transpired from the above discussion on the interrelationship between organisational
growth stages and particular business processes and strategies, is that alignment is critical to the success
of any management paradigm transitions. The fact that an organisation belongs to the public sector
does not, in itself, presuppose the failure of attempts to implement private sector management
paradigms in it. Instead, success and failure are partially determined by the degree of organisational
preparedness, discussed here in terms of alignment between growth stages and key strategies.
Consequently, and as has been discussed thus far, private sector organisations can substantially
maximise their chances for the successful transition from public to private management models should
they identify their growth stage and work towards the creation of an alignment between the former and
their communications, human resources and systems and processes strategies/characteristics.
Apart from working towards the creation of an alignment between their growth stages and
certain organisational processes, it is further also imperative that organisations learn the art and
principles of decision‐making prior to their transition from one management paradigm to another. As
has been explained in the above, the transition process often brings a host of problems to the surface,
some foreseeable and others not. These problems can easily be resolved if the organisation’s members
are well‐practiced in various decision‐making strategies and models, allowing them to apply/implement
the strategy/model most ideally suited to the nature of the problem/decision, at hand. Beyond that, the
fact that the transition‐process is one that involves numerous decisions and calls for new ones to be
made throughout the process, further emphasises the importance of organisation’s adopting a number
of proven decision‐making models prior to its embarking upon the process.
The point here or thrust of the argument is that while there is nothing to prevent public sector
organisations’ adopting private sector management strategies, it is imperative that organisations be
prepared for doing so. Lack of preparedness constrains the public sector organisation’s capacity to
successfully implement that model. It is this, not any fundamental conceptual variances between the
private and the public sector which lead to the failure of the implementation process. It is, thus, that
public sector organisations must undertake the outlined steps to prepare for the adoption of a private
sector management model prior to their actually embarking upon the process.
In reference to the field study data and upon examination of the conceptual models for both
Organisation A and B, one notes that the differences between the two are not such as would facilitate
Organisation B’s adoption of TQM and mitigate against Organisation A’s adoption of the same. In fact,
from the purely structural perspective, there are no barriers to Organisation A’s adoption of private
sector management strategies. The organisation in question has been revealed as decentralised,
informal and somewhat dynamic or, at least, not mechanistic. These characteristics function to facilitate
the adoption of private management strategies, leading to the assertion that they are no absolute
structural barriers to the public sector’s doing so. Certainly, there may be challenges and difficulties but
they hardly constitute insurmountable which cannot be addressed and overcome through the devising
and implementing of strategies whose collective aim is the maximisation of organisational preparedness
levels as defined and discussed.
Having argued the issue of organisational preparedness, the next section shall discuss the
benefits of such a transition and outline the factors which determine the success of the process. The
focus of the upcoming section shall be on the implementation of TQM in public sector organisations.
6.3: The TQM Model

The study does not simply propose that public sector organisations adopt private sector
management paradigms but specifically identifies TQM as the model which they should adopt. The
selection of TQM is not simply predicated on the fact that it has already proven its workability in the
public sector, including several UK public sector organisations and governmental entities (McAdam, Reid
and Saulters, 2002; Lawrie et al., 2004; Warwood and Roberts, 2004), but on the malleability of the
paradigm. TQM is malleable in the sense that, while it provides a well‐defined framework of constructs
for the attainment of total quality management, it allows for the customisation of the paradigm to the
organisation’s unique needs and characteristics (Ho, 1999). TQM, in other words, works from within an
organisation, adapting to both its culture and functions and is not imposed upon it from without. It is
precisely for these reasons, let alone its track record for success, that the study proposes
In this section of the chapter, the selection of TQM shall be further defended and the strategies
for its successful implementation in the public sector shall be discussed.
6.3.1 The Foundations of Successful TQM Implementation

The successful implementation of TQM is predicted on the utilisation of the systems approach
and on a consideration of soft critical successful factors, as shall now be discussed.
6.3.1.1 The Systems Approach

A host of management, organisational development and industrial engineering scholars have
maintained the existence of a positive relationship between the theoretical concepts proposed by the
systems approach and the success of TQM. The relationship proposed is predicated on an acceptance of
the argument that both TQM and the systems approach are intimately concerned with the development
of organisational excellence through both the embrace of a number of management strategies and
organisational development tools and programme for organisational restructuring (Goh and Tay, 1993;
Stone, 1996; McMullen, 1998; Jackson, 2000; Lau and Idris, 2001; Thiagarajan, Zairi and Dale, 2001;
Collins, 2001; Paine, 2003; Boon and Arumugam. 2004; Rausand and Hoyland, 2004; Wong, 2005). In
light of the definitions proposed for both TQM and the systems approach, the argument appears valid.
TQM, in brief, outlines a set of strategies requisite for the evolution of excellence and the systems
approach is based on the articulation of those organisational elements which inhibit the attainment of
excellence and which may be, alternately exploited towards its realisation. Therefore, it is apparent that
there is strong correlation between the goals of these two theoretical approaches.
As Jackson (2000) contends, however, the majority, if not all, management and organisational
development theories, strategies and philosophies articulate those same goals and define themselves as
models for the attainment of excellence. Therefore, the real question is why has the systems approach
been identified as the framework, or blueprint for the design and implementation of sustainable TQM
paradigms, rather than any other management approach?
Just as he raises the above question, Jackson (2000) proposes a response. The relationship that
the systems approach has with TQM is not confined to that particular management philosophy but is
one which the systems approach, more or less, shares with the majority of management theories and
models. Jackson (2000) validates this assertion by likening the systems approach to an anatomical guide
of the human body. A doctor cannot diagnose, let alone cure, health conditions without the aid of such
a guide insofar as it function to identify the possible sources of the condition, how that condition
impacts the functioning of other organs in the body and the biological processes therein and how
treatments must be, accordingly, designed and implemented. The systems approach, as Jackson (2000)
asserts is precisely such a guide. It outlines the workings of an organisation, provides a thorough guide
to the functions of the components and subcomponents therein and directs management scholars and
practitioners towards the recognition of less than optimal functioning and a diagnosis of its causal
factors. From this definitional perspective, therefore, it is not that the systems approach is uniquely
valuable to the design and implementation of TQM models but it is valuable for the design and
implementation of practically any management model, irrespective of whether it subscribes to the TQM
philosophy or not (Jackson, 2000).
Reiterating the above stated contention regarding the value of the systems approach for the
design and implementation of practically any management model, Paine (2003), nevertheless, maintains
that it is particularly suited to TQM paradigms. As may be deduced from Paine’s (2003) argument there
are two reasons for this. The first is that, in the final analysis, TQM is just a management philosophy
which argues that his adoption of a set of management principles and core concepts propels an
organisation towards performance excellence. However, and as earlier stated, be it the TQM philosophy
itself, or the Excellence Modes that arise from it, success is ultimately predicated on adaptation to an
organisation’s needs, characteristics and capacities, on the one hand, and to the characteristics of the
organisation’s external environment, on the other. In other words, the model must undergo a process
of adaptation before it is adopted and implemented. According to Paine (2003) through the utilisation
of the system’s approach, concomitant with a focus on the eleven theoretical concepts which comprise
it, management and organisational development practitioners have the benefit of a blueprint which
guides the requisite design/adaptation process. Concurring, Rausand and Hoyland (2004) add that the
application of the system approach’s diagnostic methodology can substantially contribute to the
articulation of a TQM model which is near‐perfectly adapted to an organisation’s intra and extra‐
environmental characteristics. As such, and from this perspective alone, it is apparent that the system’s
approach can, indeed, maximise TQM’s potential for success.
Paine (2003) maintains that the systems approach has a second unique value for TQM. Namely,
not only does it clarify the value of soft factors but it aids in the identification of those soft factors upon
which a particular organisation’s success is predicated. In other words, proceeding from the premise
that the success of TQM models is partially predicated on soft factors, the systems approach contributes
to the construction of the soft foundation upon which the TQM model is to be based, thereby enhancing
the opportunities for success (Paine, 2003).
As based upon the above, it is apparent that the systems approach is invaluable to the
adaptation of TQM to the needs of individual organisations, whether affiliated with the public or the
private sector and, as such contributes to its potentialities for the successful attainment of quality and
excellence. However, of greater importance is the fact that it aids in the identification of the relevant
soft factors and guides the construction of the soft foundations upon which the model is to be based.

The value of this last has been emphasised in a vast volume of literature on the interrelationship
between soft factors and the success of TQM models.
Turning to Organisation A, it is important to determine whether or not the field study data has
exposed any hard factors as would validate the above stated theoretical argument. The hard factors of
TQM success or successful implementation of TQM are (1) customer satisfaction; (2) customer driven
processes and (3) continued improvement (Baidoun, 2004). Data on Organisation A indicates that it has
evolved from a centralised to a decentralised, from a formal to an informal and from a mechanistic to a
semi‐dynamic entity because of its understanding on the importance and value of customer satisfaction.
It is constantly striving towards improvement because of its focus on customer satisfaction and its wok
processes are driven by that focus. Organisation A possesses the fundamentals of the hard construct
deemed integral to the successful implementation of TQM because of one simple fact. The
organisation, by definition of its identity as a County Council, is responsible for responding to public
demand and for satisfying this demand. To satisfy public social, political and economic demands,
Organisation A had to construct its systems and process towards the identification of customer/public
service needs and their subsequent fulfilment. It is, thus, that the hard factors of successful TQM
implementation are detectable in Organisation A, but their positive and constructive exploitation is
ultimately predicated on the design of a TQM implementation model and management paradigm which
correlates between the hard and soft factors, on the one hand, and addresses Organisation A’s unique
characteristics, on the other while being framed by a realistic assessment of available organisational
financial and non‐financial resources.
6.3.1.2 The Soft Foundations

Stone (1996), a TQM theorist and researcher, maintain that empirical studies on the successful
implementation of TQM indicate that a strong emphasis was placed on soft factors while studies on the
failure of TQM implementation invariably indicate a neglect of soft factors. The point here, as Stone
(1996) states is that soft factors have incontrovertibly established themselves, not only as integral to
the successful implementation of TQM but, but as TQM critical success factors. In other words, research
into the success of TQM models has effectively redefined non‐financial measurements from soft factors
to critical success factors.
Acceding to the above stated, Goh and Tay (1993) maintains that the reason why soft factors
comprise critical success factors within the matrix of TQM models and implementation, can only be fully
understood through a long‐term perspective on the implications of TQM. Total Quality Management is
not a static management paradigm but, insofar as its goal may be defined as a continued commitment
to quality and organisational excellence, it is a dynamic and continually evolving management paradigm.

The referenced dynamic evolution can only be attained through the selective adoption of host of soft
factors. These include employee commitment and work attitudes, the relationship between the
organisational and its external environment, the extent to which the organisation has embraced the
culture of its surroundings and has adapted itself to the geographic and human resource characteristic
of its environ, the degree to which the organisation is committed to the maintenance of customer and
market focus and the extent to which it is able to gauge, and respond to, demands (Goh and Tay, 1993).
In other words, the adoption of TQM implies, is not simply a long term commitment to quality and
excellence, but a permanent commitment. That commitment, as Goh and Tay (1993) explains, is
expressed through the embrace of soft factors and their continued monitoring.
While largely agreeing with the above, Tannock (2002) nevertheless, maintains that it is not fully
representative of the relationship between TQM and soft factors as critical success factors. Certainly,
the long‐term sustainable success of TQM is ultimately dependant upon the embrace and constant
monitoring of soft factors but, the relationship between the two runs much deeper. Quite simply
stated, TQM, as an excellence and quality management philosophy, is founded upon soft factors. TQM
principles and its fundamental components are all derived from non‐financial, or soft, factors (Tannock,
2002). Several scholars have supported this contention. This claim is evidenced in the figure below:

Figure 6. 1: Soft and Hard TQM Constructs

Source: Baidoun (2004, p. 177).
In their empirical on the implementation of TQM in the UK public sector, McAdam, Reid and
Saulters (2002) and as supported by various other studies on TQM implementation in the public sector
(Kloot, 1999; McFarlane, 2001; Melkers and Willoughby, 2005; Pollanen, 2005) emphasise that
successful implementation and positive outcomes are ultimately dependant upon an organisation’s
acknowledgement of the value of soft factors and its subsequent embrace of them. This is because, as a
management philosophy, soft factors comprise the infrastructural base of TQM. The very nature of
TQM goals, which are the attainment of quality and excellence, concomitant with the nature of the
strategies which it identifies as integral to the attainment of these goals, such as customer satisfaction
and employee commitment, are all classified as soft factors (McAdam, Reid and Saulters, 2002). The
implication is that the adoption of this management paradigm and its successful exploitation and
continued sustenance are predicted on the recognition of the value of soft factors versus hard, financial,

factors. This is because both the goals and goal attainment strategies articulated by this management
paradigm derive from soft factors.
An examination of the means by which organisations can utilise TQM concepts for the
attainment of performance excellence within the public sector, Pollanen (2005) to the conclusion
expressed in the above. As a management philosophy, TQM is unique among the vast array of existent
management theories and philosophies, because it is almost entirely funded upon the redefinition of
soft factors as strategies for the achievement of performance excellence and the attainment of both
quality and strategic organisational objectives. TQM is founded upon the recognition of the
opportunities and threats present within the extra and intra‐environmental context. Within the
parameters of the later, success may be facilitated through the adoption of fundamental socio‐cultural
precepts, such as would place the organisation in a position where it is working with the surrounding
culture and not against it. The opportunities for success may also be maximised through organisational
adaptation to the limitations and characteristics of the geographic space within which it is located and
the nature of the human resources therein. Such adaptation ensures that a organisation, not only work
within the confines of the stated, but devise its operational strategies in light of these limitations,
lending to the more effective and efficient exploitation of available resources. In other words, and as
Thiagarajan and Zairi (1997) emphasise, insofar as TQM is founded upon the imperatives, and benefits
of working with the external environment, it is fundamentally based upon soft, versus hard, factors.
Even in its exploration of the intra‐environmental determinants of success, defined as the
attainment of quality and excellence, TQM is fundamentally focused upon soft factors. In their study on
the intra‐organisational determinants of TQM success, McFarlane (2001) notes that the latter is
predicted on the capacity of top management to generate human resource commitment to, and
motivation for, the success of TQM, and their own enthusiasm for the philosophy, concomitant with
their ability to constructively express that enthusiasm through the design and implementation of a
quality culture. The intra‐organisational determinants of success, those being employee commitment,
leadership enthusiasm, human resource initiative, talent and innovative capacities, organisational
loyalty and quality culture, among others, are all classified as soft factors (Kloot, 1999; McFarlane, 2001;
Melkers and Willoughby, 2005; Pollanen, 2005). The implication, therefore, is that soft factors are the
foundations of the TQM philosophy and accordingly are the determinants of its successful
implementation.
When applying the above explained theory on the correlation between the soft foundations of
TQM and Organisation A, one finds that the organisation is hardly in a position to implement the
aforementioned management paradigm at the present time. In this, Organisation A is not an exception

nor has its affiliation with the public sector determined the impossibility of immediate successful
implementation. Instead, the implication here is that Organisation A must first proceed with an
identification of the relevant soft factors and work on building them up towards positive reception of
TQM.
Data on Organisation A indicates that while it supports participatory decision‐making and has an
open communications’ system/structure; it largely confines the stated to the top‐management and
leadership tier. The implication is that the organisational structure and processes are not supportive of
employee involvement, except within the limited confines of their departments and only through their
department manager. Employees, in other words, are not given the requisite level of autonomy for
independent problem‐solving and decision‐making. Similarly, there is little to indicate that the there is a
strong organisational quality culture, a strong and enthusiastic leadership and organisational
encouragement of innovation. The required soft factors are, in other words, relatively absent. This
means that Organisation A is not, as yet, in the position to embark upon a TQM implementation process.
That the organisation is not yet in a position to implement TQM does not mean that it cannot
implement TQM per se. For Organisation A to undertake a successful TQM implementation project, it
needs to work on the development of the mentioned soft factors. As pertains to employees and given
their centrality to both successful implementation and operationalisation of TQM, Organisation A must
embark upon an employee retraining programme as would endow its HR with such quality skills as
problem‐solving, teamwork participation and autonomous decision‐making. In addition, the
Organisation must expand the scope and range of its communications’ pattern so as to include the
feedback of lower‐level employees, given the current focus on top management and leadership.
Similarly, Organisation A need design a quality culture which is consistent with both its needs and work
functions while, at the same time, being fundamentally reflective and expressive of the precepts of
TQM. Furthermore, it must embark on an organisation‐wide quality culture acculturation process. The
point of its doing so is not just the endowment of employees with the skills required for he successful
implementation and later sustenance of a TQM paradigm but the generation of the requisite levels of
employee enthusiasm for TQM.
In discussing how Organisation A may ensure the successful implementation of TQM, the soft
factor of employee involvement and satisfaction were focused upon as an example of how to build up
the soft foundations for TQM success. Implicit in this discussion is that while the organisation may
currently lack the soft foundations necessary for the successful implementation of TQM, it can build
them up.

The interrelationship between TQM and soft factors as critical success factors is largely
uncontested. Therefore, the question is no longer whether TQM withstands successful implementation
in the public sector because empirical and theoretical evidence indicates that should it be founded on
the soft factors native to the organisation itself, implementation will be successful. Instead, the
question is why should public organisations commit to the adaptation and adoption of TQM? This
question shall be explored and discussed in the next and final section, of this chapter.
6.4: Impact of TQM on Organisational Performance

The primary objective of TQM implementation and operationalisation is positive and
measurable impact on overall organisational performance. TQM gurus have unwaveringly maintained
that consequent to TQM implementation, business performance indictors such as employee
satisfaction, quality of management, quality of goods and services, capacity of firm to satisfy its strategic
objectives within its predetermined time‐frame, customer satisfaction, sales, annual revenues, profits
and market share all experience a measurable and definitive increase (Ishikawa, 1985; Pfau, 1989;
Spector, 1997; DuBrin, 1995).
The validity of the above‐stated claim will be discussed through reference to three constructs.
These are employee satisfaction, service quality and customer satisfaction. The reason why these three
constructs were selected is because Hackman and Wageman (1995), referring to the works of Deming,
Ishikawa and Juran, identify these three as the most important and constructs for the measurement of
business performance.
6.4.1 Employee Satisfaction

Spector (1997) defines employee satisfaction as the degree to which employees are committed
to their job and maintains that measurement of this attitudinal variable is conducted through surveys
which question employees on their attitudes towards different aspects of their job.
Studies indicate that employee satisfaction is a dynamic, not a static state. It is influenced by a
variety of forces which exist from both within and without the individual employee (Baran, 1986; Lam,
1995; Cherrington, 1995; Spector, 1997). As regards the external forces, the most influential have been
identified as the relationship between the individual and the organisation, expressed in the extent t
which the organisation seeks the inclusion, rather than marginalisation, of its work force in decision‐
making, and the degree to which the organisation expresses its appreciation for is employees in the
form of promotion opportunities, benefit packages, pay structure and job security (Spector, 1997).
Studies have further indicated that employee satisfaction is a key determinant of organisational

performance and productivity. Satisfied employees are more productive and committed to their job
than dissatisfied ones.
Based upon an analysis of the variables influencing successful implementation of TQM in UK
public sector organisations, Warwood and Antony (2003) arrive at an important conclusion. Insofar that
TQM argues a definitive link between employee satisfaction, product quality, strategic business
performance and customer satisfaction; it is ideally geared towards the generation of employee
satisfaction. Quite simply stated, it defines employee satisfaction as one of the core constructs upon
which the attainment of the objectives of TQM is dependant upon (Warwood and Antony, 2003).
Consequently, TQM paradigms are inherently focused upon and geared towards the attainment of
employee satisfaction. Such satisfaction, when attained, leads to organisational commitment, enhanced
productivity and, accordingly, has a positive and measurable impact on organisational performance.
Turning to Organisation A, the available data did not prove or, in any way, suggest that TQM has
led to overall performance improvement. That does not, however, mean that the data does not allow
us to determine that if TQM were implemented, this would likely be the result. In the email interview
dated 18th March 2006, with one of Organisation A’s public sector manager, the interviewee
commented that it was their experience that decisions made on the basis of sound research (quality
information) and which was participatory in nature, in that it involved the input of both employees and
managers from without the department in question, invaluably contributed to the formulation of
policies which, upon implementation, generated satisfaction and positive comments from among
stakeholders. Similarly, in that same interview, the interviewee commented that decisions and policies
which did not follow that format often generated dissatisfaction and criticism from among stakeholders.
The implication here is clear: when the organisation pursues decision‐making and policy formulation
strategies which subscribe to a quality model (quality information and participation) its performance
improves, as evidenced and measured by increased customer/public satisfaction levels. Therefore,
while the data does not prove that Organisation A will definitely experience enhanced performance
upon the implementation of TQM, the interview data suggests that this will be the case.
6.4.2 Service Quality

Deming (1986), Juran and Gryna (1993) commence and conclude their total quality
management philosophy with the consumer, emphasising that consumer and market loyalty are
primarily determined by their perception of service quality. Quality, in other words, is judged by the
consumer and accordingly it is incumbent upon organisations to identify consumer requirements for
quality and implement them.

Within the framework of TQM, organisations are not simply geared towards the provision of
services which satisfy consumers at a particular time. Instead, the distinguishing characteristic of the
services extended by such organisations is that they are dynamic. Services are constantly being
improved and expanded for greater harmonisation with consumer tastes, emergent needs and
requirements (Prajogo and Sohal, 2004). Accordingly, through the implementation of TQM tools and
management paradigms, public sector organisations will be endowing themselves with the instruments
and systems requisite for the maintenance of continued quality of service.
Customer satisfaction is especially important for Organisation A. Recalling the fact that it is a
County Council, Organisation A’s work functions can be briefly, although simplistically, defined as the
response to communal political, economic and social needs, concomitant with the continued protection
of communal political, economic and social needs. The importance of consumer satisfaction is such that
policies and decisions are made, postponed or scratched out altogether, depending on community
reactions and feedback. This was emphasised in all four interviews. In fact, one may even go so far as to
claim that the provision of quality services is more important for Organisation A, and others like it
(County Council, government organisations/institutions) than for most others since communal
dissatisfaction with the quality of services adversely impacts upon the position of elected county officials
and the organisation’s leadership. Accordingly, the import of service quality can hardly be overstated as
relates to Organisation A.
The fact that Organisation A has already implemented some aspects and features of private
sector management can be interpreted as an acknowledgement of the importance of attaining the
expected levels of quality of services. It is, thus, that the interviewees emphasised the role of
information in the making of decisions and the formulation of policies. Decisions and policies are the
services that this organisation extends to its public and it is, thus, that relevant information is thoroughly
researched in a bid to ensure communal satisfaction with the decision/policy.
However, as conceded to by Organisation A interviewees, there is a track record for both
satisfactory and dissatisfactory decisions/policies. In order to maximise the percentage of the former
and minimise that of he latter, it is advisable that Organisation A adopt a total quality management
model.
6.4.3 Customer Satisfaction

As noted in the above, consumer satisfaction is the driving force behind the TQM philosophy
and the ultimate goal of both public and private sector organisations. Anderson et al. (1994) maintain
that there are two conceptualisations of consumer satisfactions. The first is transaction‐specific

satisfaction whereby consumer‐satisfaction is defined as a post‐purchase evaluation of the
product/good/service, measured through price versus utility, serviceability, maintainability, ease of use.
The second conceptualisation of consumer satisfaction is termed as cumulative satisfaction and is
measured according total purchase and consumption experience, taking into consideration the firm’s
past and present consumer‐specific performance (Anderson et al., 1994). Applying these two
conceptualisations of consumer satisfaction to the UK public sector, McAdam, Reid and Saulters (2002)
explain that a public sector organisation, especially one which extends social, political and economic
services, as does Organisation A, is judged on the basis of its capacity to fulfil both types of consumer
satisfaction. Not only must consumers be satisfied upon the receipt of the service but they need to be
continually satisfied with its use.
There is a direct correlation between TQM and customer satisfaction. Studies on the
implementation of TQM in public sector organisations have established that consumer satisfaction
indicators experience a positive increase following the operationalisation of the aforementioned
management paradigm (Kloot, 1999; McFarlane, 2001; Melkers and Willoughby, 2005; Pollanen, 2005).
Few, as Lawrie et al. (2004) maintain have disputed these findings: within the context of public sector
organisations, as with private sector ones, the implementation of TQM substantially increases consumer
satisfaction levels.
As mentioned in previous sections, the data gathered on Organisation A did not establish a
direct correlation between TQM and customer satisfaction. On the simplest of levels, this is because the
organisation does not adhere to a TQM model, in which instance, one cannot expect to uncover such
data. On another level, the researcher had neither the time nor the resources necessary to undertake a
population survey as would assess customer satisfaction levels with Organisation A. Nevertheless, the
data did indicate that customer satisfaction played an important role in the decision‐making process,
insofar as it is identified as the organisation’s goal and the target which most of its decisions aim
towards.
6.5: Conclusion
In conclusion to this chapter, a number of points deserve to be highlighted. The first is that
there are no structural obstacles to the implementation of management strategies and models,
traditionally associated with the private sector, in the public sector. The fact that Organisation A has
already undertaken the seamless adaptation and adoption of some private sector management
strategies, as which have allowed it a successful transition from centralisation to decentralisation,
formal to informal structures and from a mechanistic to a relatively organic structure, establishes this.
The second is that, despite absence of structural obstacles, successful implementation is predicated on

organisational preparedness and accordingly, to ensure success, public sector organisations need to
undertake a number of steps to facilitate change. The third is that, of all the contemporary
management paradigms available, TQM was selected as the most suitable for two reasons. In the first
place, it withstands customisation to an organisation’s unique characteristics and requirements. In the
second place, empirical studies on the implementation of TQM in the public sector indicate that this
management model positively influences performance. Consequently, and as this chapter has sought to
establish through a thorough discussion on the methodology for TQM implementation in the public
sector and the benefits of doing so, public sector organisations, such as Organisation A, can and should
adopt private management paradigms and, specifically, TQM.

Chapter 7 - Conclusion
The findings of the study allow for the research to conclude with the assertion that private
sector management paradigms withstand implementation in the public sector. This finding, in
itself, is extremely interesting because it is based upon a series of other critical research findings.
These findings are (1) the disconnect between the private and the public sector is artificial; (2)
the public sector, contrary to popular assumptions, even academic assertions, is not inherently
mechanistic but can be rendered such by the management paradigm imposed upon it; and (3) the
private sector is not inherently organic but may, indeed, become mechanistic as a direct outcome
of the operative management paradigm. These findings, in brief, highlight the central influence
of management paradigms on organisational structure and operations, let alone performance.
Needless to say, the study does not purport to cover all areas of similarities and
differences between the public and the private sector, nor does it offer an extensive analysis of
all contemporary management paradigms. However, that did not detract from the value of the
research and, in fact, has added to it. It has added to the value of the study insofar as it has
enabled the researcher to devote greater time, effort and space to the exploration and
investigation of the applicability of TQM to the public sector. In other words, by limiting the
scope of the study, the researcher was able to more thoroughly focus on the proposed research
questions and satisfactorily respond to them, as indicated in the table below:
Table 7. 1: Research Questions and Answers
Research Question Response Approach
Can management The literature review established Qualitative

strategies, tools, and that there were no
paradigms, traditionally insurmountable structural
associated with the private barriers to the implementation
sector be applied to the of private sector management
public sector?
strategies in the public sector

and the field study revealed that
Organisation A had, indeed,
already undertaken the
successful implementation of a
number of private sector
management tools and
strategies. Therefore, the
research’s findings were that
management strategies, tools
and paradigms, traditionally

associated with the private
sector can be successfully
applied to the public sector.
How can TQM as a The literature reviewed Qualitative

strategic management indicated that the successful
paradigm be successfully implementation of TQM to
implemented in the public either the public or the private
sector? sector was predicated on a

number of critical success factors
and variables.
1. Prior to the actual
design, let alone
implementation, of the
TQM model, it is
imperative that the
organisation in question
be thoroughly studied
for the purpose of
identifying its growth
stage, the extent to
which strategies are
currently aligned with
the identified growth
stage, and the limits of
the organisation’s
human and non‐human
resources.
2. Following the above, a
plan for preparing the
organisation for the
implementation of TQM
has to be formulated.
Such a plan will address
the means by which
available human and
non‐human resources
can be re‐shaped
towards greater support
of TQM (insofar as the
human resources are
concerned, this is
achieved through
employee training); the
strategies for aligning
growth stage with
organisational policies;
and the means by which
the identified soft critical
success factors can be
reshaped towards
greater support of TQM
(for example,
establishing a TQM
organisational culture
and acculturating
organisational members
into it).
3. Designing a TQM model
which precisely
addresses, not just the
sector within which the
organisation is situated,
but the unique
characteristics and
needs of the
organisation itself and
which, is additionally
founded on realistic
assessment of the
resources available to
that organisation.

In the following sections, with which the research concludes, the study’s contribution to
the field and its implications and suggestions for future research directions shall be explicated.
7.1: Contributions of the Research

Chapters Two and Three of the study were devoted to an in‐depth review of seminal and
contemporary academic literature on public and private sector organisational structures and
management paradigms, with specific focus upon total quality management. Apart from framing the
research’s focus, providing readers with an overview of, and background to public and private sector
management, the literature review chapters functioned to direct the research towards an in‐depth
exploration of comparatively unexplored issues within public and private sector management. This
brings us directly to the question of the research’s contribution to the field. The research has made
three contributions to the field of public and private sector management, each of which shall now be
briefly highlighted.
The first contribution lays in the discovery that public sector organisations are not, by definition,
centralised and mechanistic. The literature reviewed on the structure and characteristics of public
sector organisations invariably tended towards the classification of public sector entities as both
mechanistic and centralised. Management scholars such as Ford and Slocum (1977), Flynn (2002) and
Mctavish (2004), to name but a few have upheld the aforementioned traditional classification and, in

their studies, determined that public sector organisations were subject to inertia precisely because of
their inherently mechanistic, centralised and bureaucratic structure and processes. Given the
widespread popularity of this view, concomitant with the fact that it has remained largely uncontested
for close to three decades, the research did not initially seek its disputation. However, during the course
of the field study, involving the intensive investigation of a public and a private sector organisation, this
view was discredited. Public sector organisations are not, by definition, mechanistic, centralised and
bureaucratic, at least in those organisations studied here. This was one of the more interesting of the
research’s contributions to the field.
The second contribution draws directly from the first. Just as management and organisational
development literature has traditionally ascribed mechanistic and centralised structures to the public
sector, it has customarily classified private sector organisations as decentralised and organic (Erridge,
Fee and McIlroy, 2001). Organisational development literature, as Coglianese and Nash (2005) point
out, largely tends towards the support of this classification. Again, the field study disproved this.
Organisation B, the private sector financial institution, was revealed as centralised, not decentralised
and tended towards a highly formalised, although not mechanistic structure. Therefore, another of the
research’s contributions lay in its exposition of the generality of public and private sector organisational
classifications.
The third of the research’s contributions to the field lay in its invalidation of the division
between public and private sector management strategies and paradigms. Not only did the literature
reviewed maintain the possibility of implementing private sector management paradigms in the public
sector but the field study indicated that Organisation A had, indeed, already implemented some aspects
of private sector management tools and paradigms. As, however, much of the research’s implications
are an outcome of this finding/contribution, it shall be dealt with in the following sections, not the
present one.
7.2: Implications of the Research

The acceptance of a structural division between the public and the private sector, lending
towards the assumption that business processes in either are, by definition and necessity, markedly
different, has culminated in the continued adherence of organisations within either sector to
management paradigms which are specifically classified as public or private. The assumption of a
division or difference has, in other words, lent to the unwavering tendency of public sector
organisations to operate according to public sector management paradigms and the private sector in
accordance with private sector ones. The consequence, as Chesley and Wenger (1999) have argued is

that each sector tends to eschew the tools provided by management paradigms associated with the
other sector.
The study has sought to investigate why there is a division between the public and the private
sector. In other words, why is it that the private sector tends towards decentralised, informal and
organic structures while the public sector leans towards centralised, formal and mechanistic structures?
An investigation of the relevant literature indicated that these differences were imposed on either
sector from without. Differences, in other words, are an outcome of the management strategies,
models and tools predominantly used in either sector. These differences, in other words, did not
emerge from within the sectors themselves. They were imposed from without, primarily as a result of
preconceived notions about the private versus the public sector, and reinforced through management
paradigms which, even as they strive towards the maximisation of organisational efficiency and
performance, are designed to address sectoral characteristics (Hofstede, 1994). This means that
management paradigms are formulated with preconceived notions of the private versus the public
sector in mind and, in that way, the differences between the two are reinforced.
The question that the study asked and answered was whether or not, given the differences
between the two sectors, private management paradigms and tools could be used and implemented
within the public sector. The study’s response, which will be discussed below, has implications for
management and organisational development theory, as well as for public sector organisations,
stakeholders and future research activities.
7.2.1 Implications for Theory

The field study led to the production of conceptual models which make an important
contribution to organisational development theory. Theory, as it currently stands, largely tends towards
the support of the traditional classifications for public and private organisations. As per the stated,
public sector organisations are mechanistic, centralised and formal while private sector entities are
decentralised, informal and organic (Flynn, 2002). The one, in other words, is the antithesis of the
other.
Proceeding from the assumption that public and private sector organisations have an
antithetical relationship, organisational management theory has focused on the formulation of
management paradigms which address and operate within the context of these characteristics (Flynn,
2002). Therefore, public sector organisational management theory is focused on the articulation of
paradigms which aim towards the efficient and effective management of mechanistic, formal and
centralised organisations, just s private management theory focuses on paradigms which target organic,

informal and decentralised entities (Flynn, 2002). Within the parameters of the stated, one may affirm
that management theory has fortified differentiations betweens the two sectors and contributed to the
solidification of the assumption of the impossibility of the successful transference of public sector
management tools to the private sector and vice‐versa (McKevitt and Lawton, 1994).
Insofar as organisational structure and management theory is concerned, the study has
contributed to a new understanding of the above‐stated. A set of interviews were conducted with
public and private sector top management and consultant staff at one public and one private sector
organisation. These interviews were later analysed and conceptual models for each organisation were
produced. These conceptual models, as did the interviews themselves, revealed that the distinction
between public and private sector organisations can be incorrect and that, indeed, the one is not, by
definition, the antithesis of the other. On the basis of this theoretical implication, the study argued the
possibility of successfully transferring private sector management paradigms and tools to the public
sector.
In building upon the above stated finding, which is the possibility for successful transference of
private sector management strategies to the public sector, the study shifted focus to TQM. Total quality
management, currently distinguished by the fact that it is the leading private sector management
paradigm across the developed economies, is the one most often selected for implementation in the
public sector (Collins, 2001; Cummings and Worley, 2001). It is within the context of this discussion, the
adaptation and implementation of TQM to the public sector, that the study reached a conclusion which
bears upon contemporary management and organisational development theory. Specifically stated,
TQM does not withstand transference to the public sector and, indeed, no public management
paradigm or set of tools, does. However, given the malleability of the TQM construct, or model, and its
inherent cross‐cultural and cross‐sectoral flexibility, it withstands adaptation to the characteristics of
organisations within either the public or the private sector and subsequent adoption (Collins, 2001;
Cummings and Worley, 2001).
The theoretical implication of the above‐stated is clear. In the first place, it disputes the
customary view that the public sector need be governed through public sector management paradigms.
In the second place, it maintains that TQM is ideally suited for adaptation to and adoption by, public
sector organisations.
When discussing the potentials for the successful implementation and operationalisation of
TQM to the public sector, the study found that success was not simply predicated on adaptation but on
a host of soft and hard factors. Public sector organisations cannot simply decide to adopt a TQM
management paradigm but must prepare for it in order to maximise the potentials for successful
operationalisation (Gharajedaghi, 1999). Organisational preparedness should be assessed, the relevant
soft factors identified and then targeted within the context of an implementation model (Saylor, 1996;
Ho, 1999). In other words, once the decision to shift to TQM has been made, the organisation in
question should be thoroughly studied, not only for the identification of the critical success sot actors
but for the determination of the obstacles to implementation. Following from that, a TQM paradigm
which specifically addresses the organisation’s unique characteristics and activities should be
formulated. It is only following these two steps that the implementation process may commence.
The implications for theory, expressed in the above, are clear. While asserting that private
management strategies such as TQM can be implemented in the public sector, this does not imply that
implementation is a seamless process. Indeed, it is a highly complex one whose success is ultimately
predicated on raising the levels of organisational preparedness and on establishing a strategic fit
between the designed TQM construct model and the organisation’s unique characteristics and needs.
As evident from the foregoing overview of the study’s implications for theory, a number of
these implications bear upon public sector organisations. It is, accordingly, incumbent upon us to
overview the study’s implications for private sector organisations and managers.
7.2.2 Implications for Public Sector Organisations

It is arguable that public sector organisations and government institutions, or bodies, such as
Organisation A, are vulnerable to organisational inertia and poor performance. Comparative studies on
the performance of public sector organisations versus private sector ones have invariably proven that
the latter’s business performance levels, as measured through both financial and non‐financial
indicators, far exceeds those of the former (Collins, 2001).
Studies on the comparatively poor business and work function performance levels of the public
sector have identified management strategies and paradigms as the primary culprits (Collins, 2001). The
performance levels of public sector organisations and government entities are below expectations and
are inconsistent with potentials, not because of some obscure structural variable but because of the
operative management paradigms (Collins, 2001).
The study, once having established that the management strategies exploited in public sector
organisations (or private sector ones, for that matter) are the primary determinant of success or failure,
performance excellence or persistently low performance levels, hypothesised the possibility of the
successful transference of private sector management strategies to the public sector. Findings, derived
from both the literature review and the field study indicated that transference was not an option but
that adaptation to, and adoption by, was.
The implications arising from the above stated finding immediately impact upon government
institutions and public sector organisations.
Organisation A, as an example of a public sector organisation/government institution, did not
abide by the classical/customary public sector management paradigm or, indeed, display the
organisational structural characteristics popularly ascribed to the public sector. Instead, investigations
revealed the organisation to be decentralised, largely informal and tending towards dynamism, as
opposed to mechanism. Quite simply stated, Organisation A’s performance level and its work processes
exceeded the expectations established by the literature review. This is largely, as the study argued,
because its management strategies are partially derived from the strategies and tools
popularly/traditionally ascribed to the private sector.
Insofar as Organisation A is concerned, there are important implications to the stated. In the
first place, even though the organisation’s performance exceeds the expectations which were
established by the literature review, performance levels are not optimal nor have they attained the level
of performance excellence. In light of the Organisation’s successful implementation and use of some
private management strategies and tools, and in consideration of the positive effect of that on
performance, the implication here is that performance levels can be substantially increased were the
Organisation to adopt a private management paradigm.
Proceeding from the above and in note of both the complex nature of the organisation’s
responsibilities and the centrality of its services and functions to communal well‐being, it is incumbent
upon Organisation A’s leadership and top management to undertake the adaptation and
implementation of a TQM paradigm. Doing so will substantially enhance quality and delivery of services
and allow the organisation to better articulate its strategic objectives and attain them.
The defined implication is not limited to Organisation A but extends to include public sector
organisations in general. Public sector organisations have imposed comparative inefficiency upon
themselves and have effectively constrained their capacity to attain performance excellence through
their persistent adherence to public sector management paradigms. The implications of the research
findings to the public sector are clear. Decision‐making, the formulation of strategies, the articulation of
strategic objectives, the format of intra‐ and extra‐organisational communications and the design of the
work processes largely tend towards the inefficient and ineffective (Harvey and Brown, 2001). All this is
immediately traceable to public sector management paradigms insofar as they maintain centralisation,
mechanism, formalisation and bureaucratic structures, thereby inhibiting operational efficiency and
capacity for timely responsiveness to intra‐ and extra‐organisational forces and variables, rendering the
organisation vulnerable to inertia (Harvey and Brown, 2001).
It is incumbent upon leadership and top management in public sector organisations to depart
from the status quo, as described in the above, and commit to the implementation of private sector
management paradigms and need be held accountable for failure to do so.
As may be deduced from the above, the research findings lend to a number of implications for
public sector organisations. Firstly, failure to attain performance excellence, as measured through both
financial and non‐financial indicators, is self‐imposed by persistent adherence to public sector
management paradigms. Secondly, public sector organisations need not, by definition, be mechanistic,
centralised and formalised but are often rendered thus by management paradigms which enforce and
reinforce these structural characteristics upon the organisations in question. Thirdly, public sector
organisations can substantially improve their performance levels and attain excellence were they to
undertake a shift to private sector management paradigms. Fourthly, and lastly, public sector
management and leadership must prepare their organisations for the implementation of TQM, design a
TQM model which addresses their organisation’s unique needs and requirements and engage in the
implementation f the stated. These, in brief, are the implications that the study’s findings hold for
public sector organisations.
7.2.3 Implications for Future Research

From within the parameters of the larger topic of private and public sector management and
the methodologies by which the public sector may adapt and adopt private sector management
paradigms and tools, three research opportunities emerge.
The first research opportunity pertains to the design of a construct model for adaptation and
adoption. Dalrymple (2000) states that the greater majority of efforts to implement TQM fail, not only
because the critical success factors and the soft foundations of the TQM model in question have not
been thoroughly investigated and accounted for but, because implementation efforts do not subscribe
to a clear‐cut, proven implementation model. This argument has been echoed by a number of
researchers (Black and Porter, 1996; Madu et al., 1996; Conti, 2001; Beer, 2003; Conti, 2004).
Evident in the above is that the adoption and adoption of TQM is a complex process and is
fraught with such challenges as could pose as a serious threat to successful implementation. The
present study has argued for the implementation of TQM in public sector organisations and has outlined
the theoretical framework for implementation. Further research could pick up from this point and
design, and test, a construct model for TQM implementation in the public sector. Such an
implementation model would be highly useful as it would serve to guide and frame efforts to implement
TQM and, accordingly, maximise the opportunities for success.

The second and third research opportunities are related to the one identified and defined in the
above. The current study has made two claims which, although supported by empirical evidence,
demand further research and investigation. The first is that the implementation of TQM in public sector
organisations lend to business excellence and the maximisation of organisational performance and
efficiency. Through a case study, qualitative approach, research should investigate this claim aiming,
not just towards the determination of its veracity but, the how and why of it. Why does TQM, as
compared to any other contemporary management paradigm, enhance public sector organisational
performance? How does TQM enhance performance?
The second claim is that the successful implementation of TQM to the public sector is ultimately
predicated on an identification of the critical success factor and on the articulation of the soft
foundations of those factors (Lau and Idris, 2001). In other words, the nature of the organisation’s intra‐
and extra human and societal environments can either promote, or limit, opportunities for successful
implementation and operationalisation of TQM (Lau and Idris, 2001). The implication here is that the
identification of both soft factors and CSFs is critically important. As such, research should be carried
out into the soft and critical success factors relevant to the public sector. Such a research would provide
public sector leadership with guidelines through which they can proceed towards the identification and
definition of those factors as relates to specific organisations and entities therein. Ultimately, a research
such as this would contribute to the successful adaptation and implementation of TQM to public sector
organisations.
The three proposed research opportunities are, by no means, exhaustive. However, within the
context of this study, they have been identified as the most significant of the available opportunities. In
fact, research into the proposed areas would build upon this present study.
7.3: Limitations of Study

Even as the importance of the study was emphasised in the introductory chapter, it is necessary
to conclude with a concession to the study’s limitations. Such a concession, will apart from framing the
study in the sense that it outlines the basis upon which it should be judged upon, support the previously
stated recommendations for future research.
It is very possible that the present study be judged on the basis of that which it has not covered.
Accordingly, one need acknowledge that the study has not suggested a model for TQM implementation,
nor has it undertaken a case study approach to public sector organisations which have already
implemented TQM for determination of whether or not performance has improved. These may be
construed as limitations or weaknesses and, indeed, they are. However, the researcher could not, given

available time, resources and space have covered these issues. Accordingly, they were proposed as
future research opportunities.
Other weaknesses stem from the research’s methodological approach and its data collection
strategy. As pertains to methodological approach, the research concentrated on qualitative, rather than
a quantitative, approach and did not exploit the opportunities available through the adoption of a case
study approach. There is no doubt that had either of these two approaches been utilised, the study’s
findings would have withstood increased validation and reliability would have been better established.
As regards to the interview approach, there is, again, no doubt, that advantages were met with
disadvantages. The scope of the questionnaire was limited to eight respondents and the possibility of
interviewee and respondent bias, despite precautions taken, cannot be ignored.
Finally, and considering reliance on secondary sources, the research was further limited by the
availability of literature and the information contained therein.
7.4: Final Conclusion

Despite the referenced shortcomings or limitations, the fact remains that the study satisfied its
outlined objectives and validated its hypotheses. The position adopted by the study was that there are
“no valid obstacles in the face of the public sector’s adoption of TQM management paradigms
comparable to those prevalent in the private sector.” The literature supported this statement and the
field study, especially as relates to Organisation A which established that management strategies
popularly associated with the private sector can be used in the public sector. This was affirmed through
Organisation A’s actual use of private sector management strategies.
The findings, as shaped by both the literature review and the field study, however, did not
support the contention that there are no obstacles to successful implementation. That statement was
ultimately qualified through discussion of the soft foundation of TQM success and the steps that an
organization should take before attempting the implementation of TQM. The conclusion, reached,
therefore, is that while private sector management strategies can be implemented in the public sector
and that the public sector is not, by definition or necessity, centralised, formalised and mechanistic,
successful implementation is not guaranteed and can only occur if the organisation, in question,
prepares for the implementation of TQM as discussed in Chapter 6.

References
Agus, A. (2004). `TQM as a focus for improving overall service performance and customer satisfaction:
An empirical study on a public service sector in Malaysia.’ Total Quality Management, 15(5‐6), 615‐628.
Ahire, S.L., Landeros, R., Golhar, D.Y. (1995). `Total quality management: A literature review and an
agenda for future research.’ Production and Operations Management, 4(3), 277‐306.
Amaratunga, D., et al. (2001) `Process improvement through performance measurement: The balanced
scorecard methodology.’ Work Study, 50(4/5) 179‐180.
Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C. and Lehmann, D.R. (1994) `Customer satisfaction, market share, and
profitability: Findings from Sweden. ‘Journal of Marketing, 58, pp. 53‐56.
Bacdayan, P. (2001). “Quality improvement teams that stall due to poor project selection: An
exploration of contributing factors,” Total Quality Management, 12(5), 589‐598.
Baker, W.H., et al. (1993) ‘Business planning in successful small firms,’ Long Range Planning, 26(6), 82‐
88.
Baran, R. (1986), Understanding Behaviour in Organizations. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Beaver, G. and Prince, C. (2004) ‘Management, strategy and policy in the UK small business sector: a
critical review’ Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 11(1), 34‐49.
Beer, M. (2003). `Why total quality management programs do not persist: The role of management
quality and implications for leading a TQM transformation.’ Division Sciences, 34(4), 623‐642.
Bendell, A., Disney, J. and McCollin, C. (1999). `The future role of statistics in quality engineering and
management.’ The Statistician, 48(3), 299‐326.
Bhatia, S.K. (2004) Management of Change and Organisational Development. New Delhi: Deep and Deep
Publishing.
Birkinshaw, J. and Hagstrom, P. (2002) The Flexible Firm: Capability Management in Network
Organisations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bjerke, B. (2001) Business Leadership and Culture: National Management Styles in the Global
Economy. London: Edward Elgar Pub. Ltd.
Black, S.A. and Porter, L.J. (1996) Ìdentification of the critical factors of TQM,’ Decision Sciences, 27 (1),
1‐21.
Blackburn, R. and Rosen, B. (1996) Human resource management practices and total quality

management, in: D.B. Fedor and S. Ghosh (eds), Advances in the management of organisational
quality, vol. 1, pp. 243-298, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Boon, O.K., Arumugam, V. and Hwa, T.S. `Case studies: Does soft TQM predict employees’ attitudes?’
The TQM Magazine, 17(3), 279‐289.
Born, G. (1994) Process Management to Quality Improvement: The Way to Design, Document and Re‐
Engineer Business Systems. Chichester: John Wily and Son.
Bourgeois, L.J. (1984). `Strategic management and determinism.’ The Academy of Management
Review, 9(4), 586‐596.
Bourn, J. and Bourn, J. (1995). Public Sector Management. Dartmouth: Dartmouth Publishing Group.
Brignall, S. and Ballantine, J. (1996) Performance measurement in service business revisited.
International Journal of Service Industry Management. 7(1), 23‐30.
Bryson, J M. (1988) Strategic Management for Public and Non Profit Organizations. San Francisco:
Jossey‐Bass.
Burnes, 1992) Managing Change: A Strategic Approach to Organisational Development and Renewal.
London: Trans‐Atlantic Publications.
Cane, P., and Thurston, A. (2000) A Strategic Resource for Public Sector Management. London: Stylus
Publishing LLC.
Cardy, R.L. and Dobbins, G.H. (1996), `Human resource management in a total quality
organisational environment: shifting from a traditional to a TQHRM approach`, Journal of
Quality Management, 1, 5-20.
Chan, Y.L (2004) Performance measurement and adoption of balanced scorecard: A survey of municipal
governments in the USA and Canada. The International Journal of Public Sector, 17(2/3), p. 204.
Chandler, J. and Barry, J. (2004). Questioning the New Public Management. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Chen, G. (1975) `What is the systems approach?’ Interfaces, 6(1), 32‐37.
Cherrington, D.J. (1995), The Management of Human Resources. New Jersey: Prentice‐Hall.
Chesley, J.A. and Wenger, M.S. (1999) Transforming an organisation: Using models to foster a strategic
conversation. California Management Review, 41(3), 54‐74.
Churchill, N.C. and Lewis, V.L. (1983) ‘The five stages of small business growth,’ Harvard Business
Review, 61(3), 30‐50.
Coglianese, C. and Nash, J. (2005) Leveraging the Private Sector: Management‐Based Strategies for
Improving Environmental Performance. Cambridge: RFF Press.

Collins, J.C. and Porras, J.I. (1994) Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies. New York:
HarperBusiness.
Collins, J. (2001) Good to Great. New York: HarperBusiness.
Conti, T. (2002) `Human and social implications of excellence models: Are they really accepted by the
business community?’ Managing Service Quality, 12(3), 151‐158.
‐‐‐‐. (2004) `From infancy to maturity: Rethinking the role of ISO 9000 standards, TQM and business
excellence Models.’ Quality Congress, 58, 1‐7.
Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, P. (2005) Business Research Methods. London: McGraw‐Hill.
Crabtree, B. and Miller, W. (1999) Doing Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J.W. (2003) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method Approaches.
California: Sage Publications,
Cummings, T. G. and Worley, C. (2001) Organization Development and Change. Ohio: South‐Western
College Publishing.
Dane, F.C. (1990) Research Methods. Cambridge: Thomas brooks.
De Bruijin, H. (2003) Managing Performance in the Public Sector. London: Routledge.
De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (1999) Strategy Synthesis: Resolving Strategy Paradoxes to Create Competitive
Advantage. London: Thomson Learning.
Daley, (2001) Strategic Human Resource Management: People and Performance Management in the
Public Sector. Prentice‐Hall.
Dane, F. (1990) Research Methods. California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Dean, J.W. and Bowen, D.E. (1994), Management Theory and Total Quality: Improving Research and
Practice through Theory Development. Academy of Management Review, 19, 392‐418.
Deming, W.E. (1986) Out of Crisis. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for
Advanced Engineering Study.
Dent, M., Chandler J. and Barry, J. (2004) Questioning the New Public Management. London: Ashgate
Pub.
Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (2000) Handbook of Qualitative Research. California: Sage Publications.
DuBrin, A.J. (1995) Leadership: Research Findings, Practice, and Skills. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Company.

Dutton, J.E. and Duncan, R.B. (1987). `The influence of strategic planning process on strategic change.’
Strategic Management Journal, 8(2), 103‐116.
Dymsza, W.A. (1984) `Global strategic planning: A model and recent developments.’ Journal of
International Business Studies, 15(2), 169‐183.
Earley, C.P., Lee, C. and Hanson, A.L. (1990) `Joint moderating effects of job experience and task
component complexity: relations among goal setting, task strategies, and performance.’ Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 11(1), 3‐15.
Easton, G. S. and Jarrell, S.L. (1998) `The effects of total quality management on corporate
performance: An empirical investigation.’ The Journal of Business 71(2), 253-307.
Erridge, A. Fee, R. and McIlroy, J. (2001). Perspectives on Private and Public Sector Procurement.
Aldershot: Gower.
Fitzgerald, et al. (1991) Performance Measurement in Service Businesses. London: CIMA.
Flood, R. L. (1995). `Total systems intervention (TSI): A reconsideration.’ The Journal of the Operational
Research Society, 46(2), 174‐191.
Flynn, N. (2002) Public Sector Management. London: Financial Times Management.
Ford, J.D. and Slocum, J.W. (1977) `Size, technology, environment and the structure of organisations.’
The Academy of Management Review, 2(4), 561‐575.
Gharajedaghi, J. (1999) Systems Thinking, Managing Chaos and Complexity, A Platform for Designing
Business Architecture, Boson: Butterworth Heinemann.
Ghauri, P. and Gronhaug, K. (2005). Research Methods in Business Studies. London: Prentice‐Hall.
Ghobadian, A. and Ashworth, J. (1994) Performance measurement in local government‐ concept and
practice. The International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 14(5), 35‐51.
Gibson, J.L. (1966) Òrganisational theory and the nature of man.’ The Academy of Management
Journal, 9(3), 233‐245.
Gilmore, T.N. and Kazanjian, R.K. (1989) ‘Clarifying decision making in high‐growth ventures: The use of
responsibility charting’ Journal of Business Venturing, 4(1), 69‐83.
Gitlow, H. (2000) Quality Management Systems. Boca Raton: CRC Press LLC.
Goh, M. and Tay, G.H. (1995) Ìmplementing a quality maintenance system in a military organisation.’
International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 12(4), 26‐39.
Goyal, S.K. and Gunasekaran, A. (1990) Èffect of dynamic process quality control on the economics of
production.’ International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 10(7), 69‐77.

Grant, R.M., Shani, R. and Krishnan, R. (1994). `TQM’s challenge to management theory and practice.
Sloan Management Review, 25‐35.
Grant, R.M. (1998). `The resource‐based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy
formulation,’ in Segal‐Horn, S., ed. (1998) The Strategy Reader. Oxford: The Open University, Blackwell
Publishing.
Greiner, L.E. (1998) ‘Evolution and revolution as organisations grow’ Harvard Business Review, 76(3), 55–
68.
Hackman, J.R. and Wagerman, R. (1995) `Total quality management: empirical, conceptual, and practical
issues.’ Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 309‐342.
Hair, J.F., Jr. et al. (1992), Multivariate Data Analysis With Readings. New York: Macmillan Publishing
Company.
Hambrick, D.C. and Crozier, L.M. (1985) ‘Stumblers and stars in the management of rapid growth’
Journal of Business Venturing, 1(1), 31‐45.
Harvey, D.F. and Brown, D.R. (2001) An Experiential Approach to Organisational Development, 6th edn.
NJ: Prentice‐Hall.
Hart, S. and Banbury, C. (1994) ‘How strategy making processes can make a difference,’ Strategic
Management Journal, 15, 251‐269
Ho, S.K.M. (1999) Operations and Quality Management. London: International Thomson Business
Press.
Ho, S.K and Chan, Y.L (2002) `Performance measurement and the implementation of balanced
scorecards in municipal.’ The Journal of Government Financial Management, 51(4), 8‐18.
Hodgetts, R.M. and Luthans, F. (1997) International Management. Singapore: McGraw Hill.
Hofstede, G. (1980) Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work‐Related Values.
California: Sage Publications.
Hussey, D. (1998) The Strategic Decision Challenge. London: John Wiley & Son.
Hyndman, N. (1997) Performance targets and executive agencies: Some empirical evidence.
Management Accounting. 75(6), p.30‐33.
Ingram, Robert W., Thomas L. Albright, and Bruce A. Baldwin. (2004). Financial Accounting: A Bridge To
Decision Making. Mason, Ohio: Thomson/South‐Western.
Imai, M. (1986) Kaizen: The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success. New York: Random House Business
Division.

Ishikawa, K. (1985) Total Quality Control the Japanese Way. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall.
Ittner, C.D. and Larckner, D.F. (1996), `Measuring the impact of quality initiatives on firm
financial performance,` in: D.B Fedor and S. Ghosh, (eds), Advances In The Management Of
Organisational Quality, vol. 1., 1-38, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
‐‐‐‐. (1998) Ìnnovations in performance measurement: trends and research implications. ` Journal of
Management Accounting Research, 10, 205‐38.
Jackson, P. (1994). Desk Research. London: Kegan‐Paul.
Jackson, M.C. (2000) Systems Approach to Management. New York: Kluwer Academic.
Johnson, D. (2006) Thinking Government: Public Sector Management in Canada. New York: Broadview
Press.
Jordan, M and Hackbart, M. (1999) `Performance Budgeting and Performance Funding in the States: A
Status Assessment. ` Public Budgeting and Finance. 19(1), 68‐88.
Joyce, P. and Woods, A. (2003) ‘Managing for growth: decision making, planning, and making changes’
Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 10(2), 144‐151.
Juran, J.M. (1988) Juran on Planning for Quality. New York: The Free Press.
‐‐‐. (1992). Juran on Quality By Design: The New Steps for Planning Quality into Goods and Services. New
York: Free Press.
Juran, J.M. and Gryna, F.M. (1993) Quality Planning and Analysis. New York: McGraw‐Hill, Inc.
Kast, F.E. and Rosenzweig, J.E. (2000) `General systems theory: Applications for organisation and
management.’ Academy of Management Journal, 15(4), 447‐465. Retrieved February 11, 2006 from
Business Source Premier.
Kazanjian, R.K. (1988) ‘Relation of dominant problems to stages of growth in technology‐based new
ventures’ Academy of Management Journal, 31(2), 257‐279.
Kearney, R.C. and Berman, E.M. (1999) Public Sector Performance: Management, Motivation and
Measurement. Conn: Westview Press.
Kearns, P. (1995) Measuring Human Resources and the Impact on Bottom Line Results, Herefordshire:
Technical Communications Publishing Ltd.
Kelly, P. (2004) Problems Faced During Entrepreneurial Growth, Helsinki University of Technology.
Keuning, D. and D.J. Eppink (1993) Management and Organisation, Theory and Practice. Leiden:
Stenfert Kroese.

Kloot, L. (1999) Performance measurement and accountability in Victorian local government. The
International journal of Public Sector Management, 12(7), 565‐583.
Krohmer, Homburg and Workman 2002
Lam, S.S.K. (1995) Quality management and job satisfaction: An empirical study. International Journal of
Quality & Reliability Management, 12(4), 72‐78.
Latham, G.P. and Steele, T.P. (1983) `The motivational effects of participation versus goal setting on
performance.’ The Academy of Management Journal, 26(3), 406‐417. Retrieved February 28, 2006
from Jstor database.
Lau, H.C. and Idris, M.A. (2001) `The soft foundation of critical success factors on TQM implementation
in Malaysia.’ The TQM Magazine, 13(1), 51‐60.
Lawrie, G. et al. (2004) `Corporate performance management system in a devolved UK governmental
organisation: A case study. ` International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management.
53(3/4), 353.
Leonard, D. and MacAdam, R. (2002). `Developing strategic quality management: A research agenda.’
Total Quality Management, 13(4), 507‐522.
Liu, K. (2004) Virtual, Distributed and Flexible Organisations: Studies in Organisational Semiotics. New
York: Kluwer Academic Publishing.
Locke, E.A. and Latham, G. P. (1984) Goal Setting: A Motivational Technique That Really Works. New
Jersey: Prentice‐Hall.
Longo, CRJ (2000) ``Total quality management in the UK financial services: Some findings from a survey
in the Northeast of England.’ Total Quality Management, 11(1), 17‐23.
Madu, C.N. (1998) Àn empirical assessment of quality: Research consideration.’ International Journal of
Quality Science, 3(4) 348‐355.
McAdam, R., Reid, R. and Saulters, R. (2002) `Sustaining quality in the UK public sector.’ The
International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 19(5), 581‐595.
Manz, C.C. and Stewart, G.L. (1997). Àttaining flexibility by integrating total quality management and
socio‐technical systems theory.’ Organisation Science, 8(1), 59‐70.
Marcoulides, G. A. (1998) Modern Methods for Business Research. NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McKevitt, D. and Lawton, A. (1994) Public Sector Management: Theory, Critique and Practice. California:
Sage Publications.

McFarlane, D. G. (2001) `Managing improvement in the public sector.’ Total Quality Management,
12(7), 1047‐1053.
McMullen, T.B. (1998) Introduction to the Theory of Constraints (TOC) Management Systems. Boca
Raton: CRC Press LLC.
Mctavish, D. (2004) Business and Public Management in the UK. London: Ashgate Pub.
Mealiea, L.W. and Lee, D. (1979) Àn alternative to micro‐micro contingency theories: An integrative
model.’ Academy of Management Review, 4(3), 333‐345.
Mehta, P. (1989) Bureaucracy, Organisational Behaviour and Development. London: Sage Publications.
Melkers, J. and Willoughby, K. (2005) `Models of Performance‐Measurement Use in Local Governments:
Understanding Budgeting, Communication, and Lasting Effects. ` Public Administration Review. 65(2),
180‐191.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass Publishers.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: A Source Book of New Methods.
London: Sage Publications.
Mitzenberg, H. (1989) Mintzberg On Management: Inside Our Strange World of Organizations. New
York: Free Press.
Miller, C.C. and Cardinal, L.B. (1994) `Strategic planning and firm performance: A synthesis of more than
two decades of research.’ The Academy of Management Journal, 37(6), 1649‐1665.
Moore, Ron. (2004). Making common sense common practice: Models for manufacturing excellence.
London: Butterworth‐Heinemann.
Mumford, M.D. (2000) ‘Managing Creative People: Strategies and Tactics for Innovation’ Human
Resource Management Review Vol. 10 No. 3: 313‐351.
Mwita, J.I. (2000) `Performance management model: A system‐based approach to public service quality.
` The international Journal of Public Sector Management. 13(1), 19‐37.
Neely, A. (1998) Measuring Business Performance. London: Economist Books.
Olian, J.D. and Rynes, S.L. (1991), `Making total quality work: aligning organisations,
performance measures, and stakeholders`, Human Resource Management, 30, 303-333.
Paine, L.S. (2003) Value Shift. New York: McGraw‐Hill.
Patton, M.Q. (1990), Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. London: Sage Publications.
Pfau, L.D. (1989) `Total quality management gives companies a way to enhance position in global
marketplace, ‘Industrial Engineering, 21, 21‐27.

Pollanen, R.M. (2005) `Performance Measurement in municipalities. ` The International Journal of Public
Sector Management. 18(1), 4‐24.
Proudlove, N.C., Vader, S. and Kobbacy, K.A.C. (1998). “Intelligent management systems in
operations: A review,” The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 49(7) 682-699.
Punch, K.F. (2000) Developing Effective Research Proposals. London: Sage Publications.
Rahman, S. (2004). `The future of TQM is past. Can TQM be resurrected?’ Total Quality Management,
15(4), 411‐422.
Rausand, M. and Hoyland, A. (2004) Systems Reliability Theory: Models, Statistical Methods, and
Applications. Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons.
Ravichandran, T. and Rai, A. (2000) `Quality management in systems development: An organisational
system perspective.’ MIS Quarterly, 24(3), n.p.
Reed, R., Lemak, D.J. and Montgomery, J.C. (1996) `Beyond process: TQM content and firm
performance.’ Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 173‐202.
Reeves, C.A. and Bednar, D.A. (1994), `Defining quality: alternatives and implications`,
Academy of Management Review, 19, 419-445.
Ritchie, J. and Lewis, J. (2003) Qualitative Research Practice. A Guide for Social Science
Students and Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Ritchie, I. and Dale, B.G. (2000) Àn analysis of self‐assessment practices using the business excellence
model.’ Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, 214(B), 593‐602.
Robinson, R.B. and Pearce J.A. (1988). `Planned patterns of strategic behaviour and their relationship in
business‐unit performance.’ Strategic Management Journal, 9(1), 43‐60.
Robson, M. (2002) Quality Circles: A Practical Guide. Hants: Gower.
Rosenbloom et al., D. H. (2001) Public Administration: Understanding Management, Politics and Law in
the Public Sector. London: McGraw‐Hill.
Ross, J. (1994) Total Quality Management: Text, Cases and Readings, 2nd edn. London: Kegan Paul.
Rumelt, R. (1998) `How much does industry matter?’ In Segal‐Horn, S., ed. (1998) The Strategy Reader.
Oxford: The Open University, Blackwell Publishing.
Rwelamila, P.D. and Hall, K.A. (1995) `Total systems intervention: An integrated approach to tie, cost and
quality management. Construction Management and Economics, 13(3), 235‐241.
Saraph, J.V., Benson, P.G. and Schroeder, R.G. (1989), Àn instrument for measuring the critical
factors of quality management`, Decision Sciences, 20, 810-829.

Sashkin, M. and Kiser, K.J. (1993) Putting Total Quality Management to Work: What TQM Means, How to
Use It and How to Sustain It Over the Long Run. San Francisco: Berrett‐Koehler.
Saunders, M. et al. (2000) Research Methods for Business Students. London: Prentice‐Hall.
Saylor, J.H. (1996) TQM Simplified. New York: McGraw‐Hill.
Segal‐Horn, S., ed. (1998) The Strategy Reader. Oxford: The Open University, Blackwell Publishing.
Scott, M. and Bruce, R. (1987) ‘Five stages of growth in small business’ Long Range Planning. 20(3), 45‐
52.
Seghezzi, H.D. (2001) `Business excellence: What is to be done?’ Total Quality Management, 12(7),
n.p.
Shingo, S. (1986). Zero Quality Control: Source Inspection and the Poka-Yoke System.
Cambridge: Productivity Press.
Sekaran, U. (2003) Research Methods for Business – A Skill‐Building Approach. New York: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.
Spector, P.E. (1997) Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment, Causes, and Consequences. California:
Sage Publications.
Spencer, B.A. (1994), `Models of organisation and total quality management: A comparison and
critical evaluation`, Academy of Management Review, 19, 446-471.
Stone, C.L. (1996) Ànalyzing business performance: Counting the soft issues.’ Leadership and
Organisation Development Journal, 17(4), 21‐28.
Tannock, J. (2002) `The development of total quality management in Thai manufacturing SMEs: A case
study approach.’ International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 19(4), 380‐395.
Thiagarajan, T., Zairi, M., and Dale, B.G. (2001) À proposed model of TQM implementation based on an
empirical study of Malaysian industry.’ International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management,
18(3), 289‐306.
Walton, R. (1997). Innovating to Compete: Lessons for Diffusing and Managing Change in the
Workplace. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass.
Warwood, S. and Antony, J. (2003) À simple, semi‐prescriptive self‐assessment model for TQM.’
Quality Assurance, 10, 67‐81.
Warwood, S. J. and Roberts, P.A.B. (2004) À survey of TQM success factors in the UK.’ Total Quality
Management, 15(8), 1109‐1117.
Weick, K.E. (1979). The Social Psychology of Organisations. New York: Random House.

Westphal, J.D., Gulati, R., and Shortell, S.M. (1997), “Customisation or conformity? An
institutional and network perspective on the content and consequences of TQM adoption”,
Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(2), 366-394.
Whittington, R. (2001) What is Strategy – and does it matter? London: Thomson Learning.
Wissema, J.G. et al. (1981) `The incorporation of management development strategic planning.’
Strategic Management Journal, 2(4), 361‐377.
Wong, K.Y. (2005) `Critical success factors for implementing knowledge management in small and
medium enterprises.’ Industrial Management and Data systems, 105(3), 261‐279.
Worall, L. et al. (1998) Managing strategy in local government. The International Journal of Public Sector
Management. 11(6), 472‐493.
Yin, R.K. (1989) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. London: Sage Publications.
Zairi, M. (1997) `Business process management: a boundaryless approach to modern competitiveness,’
Business Process Management Journal, 3, 309‐342.
Zbaracki, M.J. (1998). `The rhetoric and reality of total quality management.’ Administrative
Science Quarterly, 43(3), 602-636.

Masters Dissertation Uk

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Masters Dissertation Uk

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

ThesisBlog.

com Dissertation Writing Service

The Adaptation and Implementation of Private

Table of Contents .......................................................................................... 2

3.3.5 Performance Measurement and Statistical Rigor .............................................46

Figure 3. 1: A Total Systems' Model of the Organisation's Macro-Micro Elements ........... 41

Figure 4. 1: Deductive and Inductive Thinking.................................................................... 59

Figure 6. 1: Soft and Hard TQM Constructs ...................................................................... 100

Table 2. 1: Greiner's Growth Phases ............................................................................................. 20

Table 3. 1: Research Knowledge Gaps.......................................................................................... 51

Table 4. 1: Distinction Between Quantitative and Qualitative Methods ....................................... 60

Table 7. 1: Research Questions and Answers.............................................................................. 108

Statements and Declaration

Chapter 1 - Introduction and Overview

1.2: Importance of Topic

1.3: State of the Field

1.4: Field Research Problems

1.5: Dissertation Outline

Chapter 2 - Contemporary Management Practices: Organisational

2.2: Public and Private Sector Organisational Management

2.2.1 Characteristics of Public Sector Organisations

2.2.2 Characteristics of Private Sector Organisations

2.3: Growth Stages and Challenges

Table 2. 1: Greiner's Growth Phases

Table 2. 2: Churchill & Lewis’ growth stages

Stages Existence Survival Success Take-off Resource

growth, hiring planning etc.

Table 2. 3: Scott & Bruce's Growth Stages

Stages Inception Survival Growth Expansion Maturity

manager’s time attracted. of expansion intensified

Table 2. 4: Kazanjian’s Growth Stages

Stages 1. conception & 2. commercialisation 3. growth 4. stability

2.5: Decision Making

 As the activities of an organisation become more complex;

 As involvement and participation play an increasing role in decision making.

Table 2. 5: Decision Types and Characteristics

Strategic Organisational Operational

informal to formal

centralised to decentralised

non‐specialised to specialised

short time horizon to long and short time horizon

Chapter 3 - Contemporary Management Practices: The Conceptual

3.2: Definition of TQM

3.2.1 Defining Principles

3.3: Theoretical Underpinning

3.3.1 Total Systems Theory

Figure 3. 1: A Total Systems' Model of the Organisation's Macro-Micro Elements

3.3.2 Strategic Planning

3.3.3 Project Management

3.3.5 Performance Measurement and Statistical Rigor

Table 3. 1: Research Knowledge Gaps

Chapter 4 - Research Methodology

4.2: Research Background

4.2.1 Research Hypotheses

4.2.2 Research Questions

the public sector?

4.2.3 Research Objectives

4.3: Research Design and Research Methodology

4.3 Research Purpose

hypothesis and research question.

4.4: Research Approach

4.4.1 The Deductive versus the Inductive Approach?

Figure 4. 1: Deductive and Inductive Thinking

As the activities of an organisation become more complex;

As involvement and participation play an increasing role in decision making.