The challenges for quality managers in Britain and Australia

The challenges for quality managers in Britain and Australia

The Authors
Peter G. Burcher, Aston Business School, Birmingham, UK
Gloria L. Lee, Aston Business School, Birmingham, UK
Dianne Waddell, Deakin University, Burwood, Australia

Abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to compare and contrast the career experiences and development needs of British and Australian quality managers.

Design/methodology/approach – The results of a postal survey of the careers of British quality managers are compared with Australian quality managers based on two surveys.

Findings – The study finds that quality managers in both countries brought wide functional experience to their roles. Their current jobs are major sources of intrinsic job satisfaction for both groups of managers but they utilise a very limited range of quality tools. Also British and Australian managers show little awareness in terms of their development needs for a broader background in quality.

Practical implications – The findings suggest a worrying lack of innovatory zeal amongst quality managers who appear to be more concerned with the maintenance of standards rather than taking a more dynamic approach. Thus it is argued that while quality managers bring wide functional experience to their current roles, there are many who do not appear to be at the cutting edge of knowledge in their field. Neither do the British quality managers in particular appear to be sufficiently aware of the need to address such shortfalls through professional development opportunities.

Originality/value – The roles of those charged with carrying the flag of quality in the two countries have only previously received limited research coverage. This paper, based upon empirical research in Britain and Australia, identifies issues which require the attention of senior management to ensure future competitiveness for their organisations.

Article Type: Research paper
Keyword(s): Quality management; Careers; United Kingdom; Australia; Continuing professional development.

Journal: The TQM Journal
Volume: 20 Number: 1 Year: 2008 pp: 45-58
Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN: 1754-2731

Introduction


Whether companies are aspiring to become globally competitive or are striving to maintain this position against newcomers in the market place, the need for more integrative management systems based on total quality management (TQM) has never been more central (Manglesdorf, 1999). Indeed as Slack (2004, p. 519) has argued “quality is the most important single factor affecting an organisation's performance, relative to its competitors”. Everyone in an organisation contributes to quality, thus developing quality cultures is reliant upon people as well as quality techniques (Slack, 2004). For example, Maguad (2006, p. 194) argues that one of the benefits of the ISO system has been that, “quality, which used to be the domain of the quality manager, has now become the responsibility of all personnel”.

The three variants of quality management – compliance-oriented, improvement oriented, and business-management oriented – “need to co-exist and must be managed well in order for the organisation to succeed” since whatever quality system is adopted, the model must be adapted to the specific requirements of the organisation (Maguad, 2006, pp. 192-3). Whilst most organisations recognise the need for such a co-ordinated approach, the issue remains as to the competence and leadership skills of those designated quality managers. In their study of the obstacles to TQM, Sebastianelli and Tamimi (2003) argue that the most common reason for the failure of any quality scheme is ineffective implementation, and the key to implementation is management.

As Goetsch and Davis (2006) argue, the ability of organisations to succeed in a globalised market will depend to a significant extent on the capabilities of the quality managers in terms of knowledge, skills, problem solving and teamwork. In such a dynamic business environment, “the challenge for the quality professional … is to become a ‘change master’ rather than just being a quality manager” (Maguad, 2006, pp. 200-201). The necessity of innovation and rapid flexibility is predicted as resulting in an increased reliance on technology to monitor processes, anticipate problems and implement solutions (Conti et al., 2003; Adamson, 2005).

The abilities now required of the quality manager go far beyond those of chief inspector, reflecting the need to provide advice to managers who are themselves responsible for much broader roles than in previous times (Addey, 2004, p. 880). Indeed, Addey (2006) identifies no less than 14 aspects to the role of the contemporary quality manager, from researcher to strategist to teacher. According to the US quality managers surveyed by Sebastianelli and Tamimi (2003), the key responsibilities of the quality manager include human resource developer, strategic planner, leader and market researcher. In a study of the roles of knowledge managers, perhaps the latest incarnation of quality manager, Adamson (2005, p. 996) identified aspects, including those of entrepreneur, consultant and technologist. So pervasive is quality management throughout the modern organisation – being the responsibility of all staff – and so broad the role of the quality manager that it has been suggested that, “quality as an entity will be subsumed” and quality managers are likely to metamorphose into project managers or executive positions, if they are prepared to do so (Westcott, 2004, p. 23).

These developments mean that the role of the quality manager will not only remain central to organisational success (Goetsch and Davis, 2006), but also, as discussed below, increasingly challenging for those who practise it. Twelve years ago, Juran (1995, pp. 652-3) predicted growth in the professionalism of quality specialists, and a corresponding rise in the number of higher education institutions offering courses with a focus on quality. However, according to Westcott (2004, p. 23), knowledge through formal education is only one facet of competency for the quality manager, alongside experience (applied knowledge), skills (technical competence, for example), aptitude and attitude.

There has been limited research into the ways in which quality managers perceive their jobs but a recent contribution by Balding based on a case study in the Australian health service indicates that quality managers desire “more time, rewards, resources, quality improvement training, evidence of improvements and support from senior management” (Balding, 2005, p. 284). Also a recent large-scale survey of American quality professionals suggests that they and their companies are aware of the importance of continuing professional development to remain competitive and also utilise up-to-date quality techniques (Hennessy, 2005). Despite all the teachings of the quality gurus in the 1980s and 1990s, embedding quality in ways that achieve and maintain high standards has not proved to be easy, with each organisation having to find its own path to success. Thus the role of the quality manager remains a very challenging one (Dwyer, 2002; Van der Wiele and Brown, 2002). To further understanding of such challenges, more needs to be known about the nature of the roles, responsibilities and aspirations of these managers and the studies reported here make a contribution to the debate in the context of Britain and Australia.

This article reports on studies of quality managers that are part of an international research programme into the careers of technical managers, in particular in Britain and Australia (Burcher et al., 2002, 2005, 2006; Stewart and Waddell, 2003; Waddell and Mallen, 2001). The British quality managers' study examines the experiences, satisfactions, aspirations and development needs of 334 British quality managers who responded to a postal survey in 2005. The respondents are members of the Institute of Quality Assurance or members of a business improvement network, together with some other known contacts. The majority of the quality managers are men, with only 46 women in the whole sample. The age range of the sample varies from 26-70 years old with 49 the average age for the group. A total of 57 percent of the managers currently work in manufacturing with the rest in service industries and 70 per cent had undergone major change in the last two years. These companies vary in size with small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) well represented. The headquarters of the companies are predominantly in the UK (62 per cent) with the rest mainly in the USA, Canada or continental Europe.

The results of the British study are compared with those based on two Australian surveys, one of 290 quality managers which examined their background and career histories, current position, sources of job satisfaction and perceptions of the future and a second study of 235 Australian quality managers looking at their background, training and development needs. Both Australian surveys were drawn from the JAS-ANZ Register of Accredited and Certified Organisations. Sample 1 had 18 per cent females, all working in the service sector. The managers ranged in age from 21-64 years old. Of the companies that they worked in, 57 per cent were manufacturing organisations, with 68 per cent owned by Australian corporations and 67 per cent had undergone major change in the last two years. The second Australian sample had 23 per cent women, again mainly in the services sector, and the respondents' age range was from 20-69 years old, with 65 per cent over 40. With these organisations services were more strongly represented, with only 25 per cent in manufacturing.

Thus, whilst the British study was not formally structured to replicate either Australian survey, there are considerable similarities in the characteristics of the respondents and their organisations in both countries.

Background and career history

Respondents in the British study and the first Australian study were very similar in terms of those without post-school formal qualification and those with technician, undergraduate and postgraduate qualification, but the managers in the second Australian study were rather less well qualified (see Figure 1). The quality managers in the British and first Australian studies in particular were generally well qualified, with 63 per cent of the British managers being graduates and another 28 per cent holding other tertiary qualifications, with the figures for the first Australian sample being 57 per cent and 26 per cent respectively. These different qualifications were mainly technical but not in quality per se. Given the average age of the quality managers in both countries, even those with degrees are unlikely to have a formal qualification in quality management prior to embarking on their careers but for the last 20 years there have been many opportunities to study in this area at post experience level.

The quality managers in both countries brought wide functional experience to their roles, with many coming in particular from production and operations and general management, prior to entering the quality field. Generally the Australian managers are likely to have entered the field of quality with less wide functional experience than the British managers (see Figure 2). The quality managers in both countries may not have enjoyed a clear career path from their further/higher education background that led them to this career choice but for those with wider functional experience this would serve as a valuable preparation for subsequent roles and responsibilities in this field. Where quality is treated as an organisation wide imperative, broad functional experience can assist a quality manager in relating to the particular issues for different areas of the organisation.

Perceptions of current roles

Managers in both countries were not only asked about their major roles and responsibilities, but also asked to reflect on them and their major sources of satisfaction and frustration in their work.

The respondents in both surveys were asked an open question about their major roles and responsibilities. Table I, which ranks the most mentioned areas of their work, indicates that although there was broad agreement about the major elements of their work, managers in the two countries ranked the various areas of activity somewhat differently. While responsibility for procedures and work instructions were key role elements for both groups of managers, the British sample prioritised making improvements in this aspect of the work where the Australian managers were more concerned with their monitoring and maintaining role.

The British managers were also asked if they wanted greater control over their areas of responsibility. Again the emphasis was on making improvements in procedures and work instructions (54 per cent), followed by product quality and accounting (both 50 per cent) and liaison with external quality associations (43 per cent).

Using quality tools and techniques

Within their job as British quality managers, 49 per cent have responsibilities for providing a wide variety of employees' training needs but only 42 per cent run employee surveys to ascertain these needs. This disparity was even greater in the case of the Australian quality managers, of whom 64 per cent are responsible for employee training needs, but just 40 per cent run employee surveys. For both groups, these findings raise the question of how effective they are in the role of trainer if they do not conduct employee surveys to determine employee needs.

Further, in both countries the employee training offered by the quality managers has covered diverse programmes. However, in the case of the British quality managers, only 7 per cent of this training specifically relates to quality procedures, compared to 25 per cent in the case of the Australian managers. This suggests that quality per se within training, in British companies in particular, has been given only limited priority (see Figure 3). 39 per cent of the British quality managers and 33 per cent of the Australian managers also undertook customer surveys.

Turning to the quality tools that the managers use, they are somewhat limited in range, with brain storming, control charts/SPC and Pareto analyses comprising much the most widely used tools in both countries. These findings suggest that the vast majority of the managers surveyed in both countries are not using, and indeed may not be aware of, the range of quality tools and techniques available today. As illustrated in Figure 4, it is particularly surprising in the case of the later British study that virtually no mention is made of more sophisticated tools like Six Sigma. This is in stark contrast to a study reported on American managers (Hennessy, 2005).

Perceptions of their career, its satisfactions and its frustrations

A major source of job satisfaction for managers in both countries is improving efficiency. However, the British quality managers rate opportunities for innovating, problem solving and to demonstrate personal initiative similarly highly. Among the Australian quality managers the emphasis is particularly upon improving quality/efficiency, followed by product/process development and people interaction/feedback. Aspects of employee relations are a source of least satisfaction for British managers, who are also particularly frustrated by hours of work and physical working conditions. For the Australians, documentation and bureaucracy, employees' attitudes to quality, auditing/writing procedures and workload/lack of recognition are the least favoured aspects of their work (see Figures 5-7).

Because of differences in the format of the above questions on attitudes to work between the studies in the two countries, the actual percentages shown in Figures 5-7 are less informative than the rankings by the two groups of managers as seen in Tables II and III.

The picture then emerges of the ways in which quality managers see themselves, their contributions to organisations and the circumstances under which they work as essentially one of mixed feelings, like other technical managers previously studied by two of the authors (Burcher et al., 2007). Self-image is particularly important with the British managers, seeing themselves as innovators and initiators but also as people who deliver, as both the British and Australian managers are essentially results-driven through improving efficiency and problem solving. For both groups too, interpersonal relationships, in various forms, can be problematic and a source of least satisfaction in their work. Frustrations arise from what they see as heavy workloads, including the burden of bureaucracy and working conditions.

When the British quality managers were asked to compare their situation with that of other managers in their organisation, whereas work load, work variety and autonomy were considered to be above average compared with others, they rated advancement opportunities and income as somewhat less favourable. The Australian quality managers were given a rather more limited range of work attributes to rate but did not show marked differences from the British sample. The Australian quality managers also saw themselves advantaged in terms of work variety and less favourably placed in relation to income and status recognition (see Figure 8).

Needs for personal development

Whether or not the British quality managers had experienced higher education, a high proportion appreciate the opportunities for continuing professional development with 76 per cent having attended external courses and 38 per cent taking internal courses. The most widely attended external courses were in the areas of ISO 9000, followed by management courses taken internally or externally, then health and safety programmes (see Figures 9 and 10).

In the case of the Australian quality managers, 82 per cent had attended some type of training programme, with general management the most widely studied area, followed by quality practices and principles (see Figure 11).

Managers in both countries then appear to have undergone development opportunities in a range of management related areas but the emphasis specifically on quality issues has been particularly limited amongst the British quality managers. This may be associated with the limited attention given by them to quality procedures when they are offering employee training (see Figure 3 above). When asked what courses they would like to take for their present job and any future jobs, for their present jobs the British quality managers wanted to study business and management followed by languages, whereas for their future jobs it was languages followed by business and management (see Figures 12 and 13).

The Australian managers sought general management courses for their short term needs (see Figure 14) and were mainly seeking a higher degree or general management development for their long term needs. Perhaps it is surprising, given their limited background in quality, that so few of the quality managers in both countries were seeking personal development in the area of quality tools and techniques. Even amongst the graduates in both countries, very few had degrees specialising in quality management.

Conclusions

The studies indicate that quality managers in both countries have varied educational backgrounds and bring diverse experiences from outside the field of quality to their work. However, they appear to be relying on these factors, together with on the job experience within a quality department, to enable them to perform effectively as specialist managers, rather than recognising and seeking knowledge of the wider range of techniques available for their current specialism. This raises the issue, especially in Britain, of whether organisations are offering sufficiently wide development opportunities for their quality managers, to enable them to remain current with quality thinking and the need for this to be integrated into wider management systems to enhance competitiveness. Over 70 per cent of British quality managers and 67 per cent of the Australian indicate that their organisations have undergone major change in the last two years. It may be that such periods of turmoil have not been conducive to offering sufficient training to ensure that their quality managers are at the leading edge of their profession. Certainly in the case of the British managers, such oversights at top management level may be reflected in the opinion of over 50 per cent of the quality managers that there is inadequate knowledge of quality issues at board level.

Tellingly too, when quality managers were asked how they saw their future in their organisation, a significant proportion of the British managers (25 per cent), and of the Australian managers (32 per cent) indicated “no change”. Generally, the findings in both countries suggest that there is a worrying proportion of quality managers working in an un-dynamic career situation. However, for some at least, this does not seem to be a source of major dissatisfaction. Indeed, other findings indicate that the majority of the quality managers studied are well satisfied with many aspects of their job and view it favourably in relation to the situation of other managers in their organisation.

Nevertheless, from an organisational standpoint, in a world of increasing global competition, senior management need to be fully aware of the potential contribution that can be made by a more dynamic approach to quality which pushes back frontiers towards new systems and approaches, thus preparing their organisation more effectively for future challenges. This will require more investment in this area to enable quality managers to update their professional knowledge and capabilities regularly, so that they are in the best possible position to evaluate the range of alternative approaches and systems that could benefit their organisation.

Turning to wider issues of quality management as a profession in the twenty-first century, within the literature, doubts have been raised as to the need for quality managers if quality belongs to everyone (e.g. Maguad, 2006; Westcott, 2004). The picture emerging from the kinds of organisations that this study's quality managers work within is that there are plenty of tasks for quality managers, although their role does not appear to be strategic. Also although Juran in 1995 predicted growth in the professionalism of quality managers, the findings for the British and Australian managers suggest that, while training in specific aspects of quality has been undertaken by some of the managers in both countries, this generally relates to a specific approach like ISO 9000. The question arises as to why a worrying proportion of managers studied had apparently not undertaken any professional development in the area of quality, given that the educational background of most of these managers was not in quality management? Also when asked about their future training needs, quality management came lowest on their list of priorities, especially amongst the British managers. Is it that organisations now consider that whilst quality is an order qualifier, as such it is no longer an order winner, thus it no longer plays such a strategic role? Certainly there have been significant improvements in quality, especially for instance in the automotive industry but does it require a more dynamic role for quality managers to prevent this from slipping back or indeed having to face up to yet more demanding standards being set by other countries in a expanding global economy? Organisations may be unwise to consign quality managers to a role of competent support service, when facing ever more rising demands from customers and ever-increasing competition.

ImageHighest educational qualifications of British and Australian quality managers
Figure 1Highest educational qualifications of British and Australian quality managers

ImagePrevious functional experiences of British and Australian quality managers
Figure 2Previous functional experiences of British and Australian quality managers

ImageEmployee training topics covered by British and Australian quality managers
Figure 3Employee training topics covered by British and Australian quality managers

ImageQuality tools used by British and Australian quality managers
Figure 4Quality tools used by British and Australian quality managers

ImageAspects of high and low job satisfaction of British quality managers
Figure 5Aspects of high and low job satisfaction of British quality managers

ImageAspects of high job satisfaction of Australian sample 1 managers
Figure 6Aspects of high job satisfaction of Australian sample 1 managers

ImageAspects of low job satisfaction of Australian sample 1 managers
Figure 7Aspects of low job satisfaction of Australian sample 1 managers

ImageHow British and Australian managers rated their job against that of other functions
Figure 8How British and Australian managers rated their job against that of other functions

ImageExternal courses taken by British quality managers
Figure 9External courses taken by British quality managers

ImageInternal courses taken by British quality managers
Figure 10Internal courses taken by British quality managers

ImageExternal and internal courses taken by Australian quality managers, survey 2
Figure 11External and internal courses taken by Australian quality managers, survey 2

ImageTraining needed for present job for British quality managers
Figure 12Training needed for present job for British quality managers

ImageTraining needed for future careers of British quality managers
Figure 13Training needed for future careers of British quality managers

ImageShort-term training needs of Australian (2) quality managers
Figure 14Short-term training needs of Australian (2) quality managers

ImageThe rank order of major roles and responsibilities of British and Australian quality managers
Table IThe rank order of major roles and responsibilities of British and Australian quality managers

ImageSummary of sources of satisfaction for the two groups of managers
Table IISummary of sources of satisfaction for the two groups of managers

ImageSummary of sources of dissatisfaction for the two groups of managers
Table IIISummary of sources of dissatisfaction for the two groups of managers
References

Adamson, I. (2005), "Knowledge management – the next generation of TQM?", Total Quality Management, Vol. 16 No.8-9, October-November, pp.987-1000.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Addey, J. (2004), "The modern quality manager", Total Quality Management, Vol. 15 No.5-6, July-August, pp.879-89.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Balding, C. (2005), "Embedding organisational quality improvement through middle manager ownership", International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 18 No.4, pp.271-88.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Burcher, P.G., Lee, G.L., Sohal, A.S. (2002), "Careers in production and operations management in Australia, Britain and Canada", International Journal of Business and Economics, Vol. 2 No.1, Fall, pp.42-6.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Burcher, P.G., Lee, G.L., Sohal, A.S. (2005), "A cross country comparison of careers in logistics management in Australia and Britain", International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 16 No.2, pp.205-17.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Burcher, P.G., Lee, G.L., Sohal, A.S. (2007), "Production and operations managers and logistics managers: a cross-country comparison", The Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 18 pp.5.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Burcher, P.G., Lee, G.L., Waddell, D. (2006), "The roles, responsibilities and development needs of quality managers in Britain and Australia", POM 2006 17th Annual Conference, Boston, USA, April 28-May 1, CD ROM Proceedings, .

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Conti, T., Kondo, Y., Watson, G.H. (2003), "Quality management: current issues and future trends", in Conti, T., Kondo, Y., Watson, G.H. (Eds),Quality into the 21st Century: Perspectives on Quality and Competitiveness for Sustained Performance, ASQ Quality Press, Milwaukee, WI, .

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Dwyer, G. (2002), "Quality management initiatives and people management strategies: the need for integration in the new millennium in an Irish context", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 19 No.2, pp.524-39.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Goetsch, D.L., Davis, S.B. (2006), Quality Management: Introduction to Total Quality Management for Production, Processing and Services, 5th ed., Pearson-Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, .

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Hennessy, R. (2005), "More pay, more challenges", Quality, No.July, pp.54-8.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Juran, J.M. (1995), A History of Managing for Quality: The Evolution, Trends and Future Directions of Managing for Quality, ASQ Quality Press, Milwaukee, WI, .

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Maguad, B.A. (2006), "The modern quality movement: origins, development and trends", Total Quality Management, Vol. 17 No.2, March, pp.179-203.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Manglesdorf, D. (1999), "Evolution from quality management to an integrative management system based on TQM and its impact on the profession of quality managers in industry", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 11 No.6, pp.419-24.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Sebastianelli, R., Tamimi, N. (2003), "Understanding the obstacles to TQM success", The Quality Management Journal, Vol. 10 No.3, pp.45-56.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Slack, N. (2004), Operations Management, Edition 4, Prentice-Hall, London, .

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Stewart, D., Waddell, D. (2003), "Future consideration for the training and development of Australian quality managers", The TQM Magazine, Vol. 15 No.1, pp.37-42.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Van der Wiele, T., Brown, A. (2002), "Quality management over a decade: a longitudinal study", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 19 No.5, pp.508-23.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Waddell, D., Mallen, D. (2001), "Quality managers: beyond 2000?", Total Quality Management, Vol. 12 No.3, pp.373-84.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]

Westcott, R. (2004), "The metamorphisis of the quality professional", Quality Progress, Vol. 37 No.10, pp.22-32.

[Manual request] [Infotrieve]
Corresponding author

Peter G. Burcher can be contacted at: p.g.burcher@aston.ac.uk