implementation of total quality management...

IMPLEMENTATION OF TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT (TQM) IN LIBRARIES:A CRITICAL ANALYSIS

By

Nik Salimah Nik Abdullah *

ABSTRAKPenulis membincangkan mengenai Total Quality Management (TQM) dan aplikasinya dalam bidangperpustakaan. Penulis juga menjelaskan definisi istilah proses TQM dan amalannya diperpustakaan akademik,khusus, awam dan sekolah. Beliau selanjutnya memberi contoh dan Ungkapan kata-kata, pakar dalam bidangtersebut serta membicarakan kebaikan dan kekurangan dalam memperkenal TQM di perpustakaan.

INTRODUCTION

roviding high quality services has always been the role oflibrary and information managers. Additionally, to date there aregreater competitions for resources, the rising expectation offlinders and clients and the increasing complexity of informationprovision from a variety of new providers, mean thatmanagement skills must match these more intense demands on athreats to library and information services. The exploitation ofquality management techniques is therefore, timely. (Kinell, 1996/97).

Because of that so, librarians urgently need to meet thecompetitive threat being posed by new forms on informationdelivery direct to the end-user. Their professionalism indelivering information services as well has to be demonstrablethrough superior quality if they are competing effectively in thisenvironment.

And from what we have seen, change is really being a way oforganizational life for libraries for several decades. The growingdimensions and rapidly increasing pace of changes in libraries isobviously apparent in current library professional publicationsand from the literature, it said that quality improvement loomslarge as one of the many topics concerned for today's libraries.(Boelke. 1995). While in another article it is also being statedthat to survive and thrive into the 1990's the whole purpose of anorganization must be performance and profitability. (Lawes, 1993)This statement is very true as libraries' responsibility shouldfocus on providing the best service possible, and be willing tochange to serve its customers from time to time. (Masters, 1996)

In fact, all organizations including library are expecting to be ableto meet the challenge of service excellence with flexibility,enthusiasm and efficiency. And of course TQM as one of knownquality management is a strategy for achieving service andproduct excellence. Furthermore, Lam, Watson and Schmidt(1991) have asserted that :

" [TQM is] a fundamental change in the way of doingbusiness. It is the creation of an attitude that results inreal employee involvement initiated by a commitmentand involvement of top management. TQM is anenvironment that promotes innovation, leadership,creativity, individual responsibility/authority, andacceptance of accountability at all levels."

At this point, library quality improvement efforts focus largelyon the total quality management (TQM) approach or on processesusing TQM principles under different names. It is however, a topicthat is not without controversy. (Boelke, 1995) Because TQM isthe process that now receives the most attention in the libraryfield as well as in other sectors, the approach, in its varied forms,and is the focus of this overview of current quality improvementactivities in libraries. (Boelke, 1995)Therefore, this paper pictures those who have begun to think aboutusing TQM or those who are already using it in a library setting.Here, planning and implementation issues also are being touched.And it covers as well some descriptions about the programsoutside the libraries that 1 feel it would support the ideas ofimplementation TQM within libraries because 1 believe that thereis much to learn from the experience of others on how TQM hasbeen engaged in their field. But before further discuss, 1 will definewhat Total Quality Management is, then talk about how TQM iscome from and the details of its development, the most importantkey elements of TQM process as well as its benefits and barriersin applying it into library setting. To give a clear dimension ofthis TQM approach, the paper brings the point of how TQM canbe implemented in this particular field. Together with it are someexamples of TQM practices in three types of libraries. Finally,this paper ends up the discussion by recognizing the future trendsof this approach, a bit about recommendation and a very briefconclusion.

DEFINITION OF TERM

Brophy & Coulling (1996) realized the term 'Total QualityManagement1 or TQM has been appropriated by so many different

Student. Department of Library & Information Science, International Mamie University of Malaysia (U1AM}

Hak Cipta Terpelihara © 2001 – Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia


vested interests that it has become difficult to identify preciselywhat it means. British Standard BS 7850 then offered thefollowing definition:

"Total Quality Management (TQM): Management philosophy and company practices that aim to harness thehuman and material resources of an organization in themost effective way to achieve the objectives of theorganization."

Tenner and DeToro (1992) however offered an alternative,redefining quality in the following terms :

"A basic business strategy that provides goods and services that completely satisfy both internal and externalcustomers by meeting their explicit and implicitepectations ... this strategy utilizes the talent of allemployees, to the benefit of the organization in particularand society in general, and provides a positive financialreturn to the shareholders."

They then suggest that TQM should be based on :

< One objective: continuous improvement;

< Three principles: customer focus, processimprovement and total involvement; and

< Six supporting elements: leadership, educationand training, a supportive structure, com-munications, reward and recognition andmeasurement.

Rowley (1996) mentioned in his article that Chase, R.B andAquilano, N.J gave definition on TQM as managing the entireorganizations so that it excels in all dimensions of products andservices which are important to the customers. While excellencein TQM organization is defined by customer requirement andneeds.

Another definition of TQM has been selected from the BritishStandard Institution, which is :

... a management philosophy embracing all activitiesthrough which the needs of the customer and thecommunity, and the objectives of the organization, aresatisfied in the most efficient and a cost effective wayby maximizing the potential of all employees in acontinuous drive for improvement. (Kinell 1996/97)

Whereas, Jurow & Barnard (1993) have defined TQM as asystem of continuous improvement, employing participativemanagement and centered on the needs of customers.

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT

In Kojima's article (1996), he identified that it is quite rare thathighly original ideas and concepts meet instantaneous acceptance

in any cultural setting. Often, within organizational contexts, origi-nality causes controversies; other times creativity elicitsambivalent responses and their potential as culture-trans formingforces bring about these reactions. The concept of Total QualityManagement (TQM) is no exception. When W. Edwards Demingat first introduced TQM in the United States in the 1930s, themanufacturing industry paid it no attention The idea of usingstatistical analyses to achieve quality control was much toofarfetched for a manufacturing industry focused on employingmass-production in order to increase the volumes of sales in theshortest period possible by serving customers (Sheridan, 1993).

Consequently, in the late 1940s, Deming took the concept of TQMto post-war Japan where he was able to implement it, and thenwatch it transform the entire nation into economic giant by in 1980s(Mullen, 1993). Only then did U.S industry begin consideringTQM a means of competing effectively against foreignmanufacturers (Rigg, 1993).

On the other hand, Boelke (1995) has noted that although thequality movement of this century began in the United States inthe 1920s with the work of Walter Shewhart and others at theBell Laboratory, it took dramatically in post-war Japan. The rootsof the string Japanese quality revolution, however, are American.

He then added, in an effort to rebuild Japan's economy and toimprove the quality of its products after World War II, EdwardsDeming, an American pioneer quality consultant, lectured inJapan in statistical quality control methods. His work, thetraining that Joseph M. Juran provided on the managerial aspectsof quality control systems, and the work of Philip Crosby werethe impetus for the enthusiastic Japanese adoption of qualitycontrol principles.

Further, he has explained that by the 1980s, however manyAmerican companies, feeling the Japanese challenge sharply,moved to quality improvement processes. During this period ofcompetition the U.S Navy established the term commonly usedtoday "Total Quality Management" (Riggs, 1992). Following itssolid establishment in the corporate and industrial sectors, TQMis now being embraced by the nonprofit world, including asignificant number of libraries.

However, Masters (1996) has given another opinion that in the1950s, the Japanese asked W. Edwards Deming, an Americanstatistician and management theorist, to help them improve theirwar torn economy. By implementing Deming's principles of TotalQuality Management (TQM), Japan experienced dramaticeconomic growth. As discuss before, in the 1980s, when the UnitedStales began to see a reduction in its own world market share inrelation to Japan, American business rediscovered Deming.

Indeed, quality management experts and sometimes they are knownas gurus, Joseph Juran and Philip Crosby, contributed to thedevelopment of TQM theories, models, and tools, and TQM isnow practiced in business as well as in government, the military,education, and in non-profit organizations including libraries(Jurow & Barnard, 1993).



As pointed by Stuart & Drake (1993) that Total QualityManagement (TQM) has emerged in the last decade as thepreferred method for reducing defects in production, increasingcustomer satisfaction, and boosting productivity. It has beenadopted to drive innovation and improvement in industry,supplanting quality circles, theory z, and management byobjectives, and other cures used in the recent past. Thousands ofcompanies are spending considerable resources to establish TQMprocesses. Then transformation that began with manufacturing isnow being adopted by service organizations, largely becausecustomers' expectations have risen sharply, and because qualityimprovement programs can be adapted to service industries.

Rigss (1992) also claimed that Total Quality Management (TQM)in fact has been used by the Japanese since the ] 950s, and begancatching the attention of American business. W. Edwards Demingtried to gel the U.S businesses to use TQM in the 1950s, but wasignored in his own country. He was welcomed in Japan andbecame instrumental in turning the Japanese industry into aneconomic world power that still has many U.S organizationsreeling. The Japanese embraced Deming's program for managingproductivity and quality, which gave them a 30-year head start onthe United States.

Today, it has clearly evident that TQM is not only won its placewithin industry but also the concept has spread into varioussectors outside industry like within library. However, librariesare just beginning to adopt these practices because among thefirst service industries to experience with quality improvementsprograms were airlines, banking institutions, insurancecompanies and heath care providers. (Stuart & Drake, 1993)

THE TQM PROCESS : KEY ELEMENTS

Barnard (1993) presents a systematic and useful model forimplementing TQM in research libraries. As such, it is anexcellent starting point for identifying the "various issues,elements and processes . . . that comprise a comprehensiveTQM-based transition: (p.58) to an institution that focuses onquality and the customer.

Among the requirements for a TQM organization are the need forat least most of the following (Barnard, 1993,Brown, 1994, Loneyand Bellefontaine, 1993, Warnken, Young and Ahuja, 1992):

a. Strong top management supportb. A system approach and strategic planningc. A customer focusd. An emphasis on employee teamwork,

empowerment and traininge. The use of measurement and analysis

techniques to determine problems andevaluate improvement

f. A commitment to continuous improvement.

Again, Barnard (1993) makes another good point in noting that

unlike the manufacturing and corporate sectors, where TQM oftenrequires "sudden, holistic change" (p.58). Indeed, many elementsof TQM are already in place in libraries and simply ready for anyexpansion and improvement.

a. Strong top management support

As we know, any process that involves a lengthy period ofinitiation, training and implementation before achieving results isundoubtedly requires top management support. In Barnard's(1993) implementation model for research libraries, she stronglysupports the essential role of top management commitment. Sheemphasizes the importance of library managers gatheringinformation about TQM and thoroughly analyzing its potentialrole in the library.

With a primary focus on customer service in qualityimprovement, a strong role from top management also isarticulated by St. Clair (1993c). In his view, although recognizingthe importance of staff involvement and teamwork, he slates thatthe definition of quality service is a management responsibilityand that "nothing will happen if management does not [lead theway and] directly encourage and endorse an attitude of servicebuild around customer service", (p. 126)

As well as others' opinions, St. Clair (1993) also mentioned thatthe key for success is depends on the encouragement from topmanagement. According to him, no program, no matter what it'scalled, how sophisticated it is in its planning and implementation,or how specifically it's been adapted for our group, is going tosucceed unless we have commitment from top management forwhat we're doing. He also further elaborated that qualityproceeds from the top and all the goodwill in the world,enthusiasm, excellence of service and commitment to thatexcellence from library and information service workers, it willnot be totally successful until senior management has accepted (ifnot initiated, which is far) the concept of quality management andpreferable encourage the organization- as a whole-to adapt them.(p.120)

b. Systems Approach and Strategic Planning

ft means a focus on the system points to an obvious andimportant relationship among strategic planning, organizationaldevelopment, and TQM. This is a connection that is advocatedand discussed by many library professionals concerned with theseprocesses (Clack, 1993, Loney and Bellefontaine, 1993, Riggs,1992. Warnken et. Al, 1992).

Furthermore, Riggs (1992b) strongly advocates combining theapproaches of strategic planning and TQM and states that "allservices and products provided by the library should come underscrutiny of TQM, He indicates however, that ideally, before alibrary begins rolling out TQM, a strategic plan is in place. [Thisis important because] the principles of TQM frequently refer backto the library's mission and vision statements, goals, objectivesand strategies" (Riggs, 1992c). To him, the combination of two



processes sees a mean of ensuring the improvement of theworking culture of libraries, and offering refinement in servicesprovided to students and faculty.

complaints and compliments can make a difference. "Often thesimple fact that library staff listen and explain what the situationis ... will keep customer". (Sirkin, 1993, p.73)

c. Customer Focus

As those familiar with the process will know that customerservice and satisfaction lie at the heart of TQM. Here, though inthe library setting the tendency is to automatically think of theexternal customers (the users) however, it should be noticed thatstaff members themselves are also customers when they dependon the services of staff in other library departments in order toprovide service to the public.

Sirkin (1993), a consultant and librarian, makes excellent pointswhen she defines customer satisfaction as including thefollowing: "repeat customers, referral or endorsements, meeting(or exceeding) customer expectations, [and] the creation of aservice-oriented environment". To the public, good qualityservice often means such basic aspects as "courtesy, [a good]attitude, helpfulness, and [the customer] being treated withrespect"

As a starting point in applying TQM process, libraries shouldfocus their efforts on their existing customers. The idea is that itis important to provide excellent service to existing newcustomers, instead of devoting too many resources to getting newcustomers. Furthermore, word of mouth is still one of the bestforms of advertising, particularly in a closed environment such asspecial library. Satisfied customers bring new customers.Dissatisfied customers discourage new and existing customers.(Sirkin, 1993)

Whereas, in a review of the variety of customer-service trainingprograms that are receiving increasing attention today, Arthur(1994) ties this to quality improvement efforts. The program alsoshould be designed for the service requirements of the specificlibrary. On The other hand, although librarians writing on thisaspects of TQM for instance Warnken, et. al (1992) theycarefully pointed out that it may not always be possible to satisfyall customer needs, the library should make decisions based onunderstanding of those needs. And it is equally important as wellthat customers understand what library can provide and whatlimitations exist.Determining customer needs actually covers three techniques,which are focus groups, surveys and suggestion systems Focusgroups are preliminary communication technique that seems tobe gaining more and more favor in the service sector in general,including academic institutions and libraries. For a library, thismeans determining how it perceived by its customers and whatthey identify as their needs. (Boelke, 1995)

Frequently, focus groups are followed by a common quantitativeresearch technique, the survey or questionnaire. Finally, awell-known but often neglected communication device forlibraries, the suggestion box or notebook, should not beoverlooked. Hearing and responding to customer suggestions,

1.

Employee Teamwork, Empowerment and Training

Employment, Teamwork and Empowerment

Riggs (1992) expressed that TQM empowers people by trustingall library staff to act responsibly and giving them properauthority. That's why the involvement of the entire organizationin the improvement and maintenance of quality products andservices is central to Deming's philosophy. To accomplish this,with a focus on "breaking down barriers" between units and"driving out fear', he emphasized the use of work groups or teamsto decentralize decision-making through 'problem-solving ontopics close to their interests. (Besemer, Dorsey, Kittle and Niles,1993. p.70)

Moreover, Rowley (1996) has reported "employee involvementmeans that each individual must take the initiative and not replyupon someone else, In order for this to be achieved theorganization needs a culture which encourages this behavior.Everyone must understand that they contribute equally and canonly succeed through co-operation and support". (p. 17)

A view expressed on quality in libraries also states that "the heartand soul of quality improvement in an academic library is theempowerment of employees and the increased level ofparticipation garnered through team management". (Miller andSteams, 1994, p.408) From these views, undoubtedly the process"will require library managers to move away from expertise inthe technical toward that in people and team building skills, likecoaching, listening, creatively soliciting, question asking and trustbuilding ...". (Lubans, 1992, p. 40)

2. Training Needs for Teamwork

It is generally recognized in the TQM literature that "training is akey component". (Jurow & Barnard, 1993c, p. 8) Moreover, it isa component that is required at each stage of implementing thesystem and for all levels of the staff. And training of course isvery important in making our employees to be highly productive.And it should be used in changing individual beliefs, unconsciousassumptions, mental sets, perspectives and values. ( Dixson, 1998)

According to Loney and Bellefontaine (1993), initial training forsenior managers should focus on 'knowledge of team stages,mechanics of meetings, interpersonal skills, valuing [individual]differences and basic problem-solving skills' (p. 90). They alsosee this as the lime for quality and customer-service awarenesstraining, in-depth exposure to various TQM versions, andtraining in "vision development and strategic planning' for seniormanagers (p. 91). These authors see all managers andsupervisors as needing training in team building, leadership andthe quality effort.

d.



Both of them also recommend that all employees receive trainingon quality and customer satisfaction, on the organization'sstrategy and vision, and on team and quality tool skills. The toolsinclude '"basic problem solving, voting techniques,brainstorming, flow charting and fishbone techniques" (p. 92).Front line employees and support staff will also need specialtraining on how to cany out customer-service goals. This trainingshould concentrate on improving skills in client relations,listening, questioning and communications.

A staff that is able to think analytically, recognizes and solvesproblems, and uses measurement as an improvement tool iscentral to the success of TQM (Jurow & Barnard, 1993c, pp.8-9). In other words, this type of training is essential forachieving one of the key TQM elements, eliminating rework bydoing the work right the first time.

3. A Team Model and Pilot Projects

A first step in implementing the team approach to problem solv-ing is to identify and select processes for pilot projects. Accord-ing to Barnard's view and others, the pilot projects are not onlyimportant but also have a good chance of succeeding. Some withTQM experience recommend that the management should selectthe pilot projects, using the results of subcommittee work whichidentifies and prioritizes external and internal needs (Barnard,1993).

e. Measurement and Analysis Techniques

The use of measurement and analysis techniques to determineproblems and evaluate improvement is another important elementof TQM. With the continued improvement of products, processes,and services as one of the main purposes of a TQM organization,"data gathering and analysis must be in place to providemeaningful information to managers, administrators, and thoseactually engaged in doing the work" (Jurow, 1993, p. 114).

1. The need for Measurement

Many voices from the 1ibrary field focus on the need for systematicand quantitative measures if the quality improvement process isto be implemented. In Penniman's view (1992), he observed thatquantitative analyses are essential to the responsible managementof libraries now and in the future. Many of the tools andtechniques used in 'total quality management' programs currentlyreceiving major attention in U.S industry arc appropriate for theredesign of information services. We need to understand morefully how these tools can be applied in the information servicearena, (p. 44)

2. The Measurement Tools

Since the TQM approach emphasizes determining problems withthe processes not the employees, a special set of measurementtools is used. TQM is good tools as it provides a means ofmeasuring the performance of the system, an important asset to

date in which the profession is experiencing and increasingemphasis on accountability because of budgetary problem.Furthermore, Lubans (1994) points out, " TQM tools, easilylearned and used, are valuable methodology for uncovering a mess[i.e., an indication of a problem] and defining the underlyingproblem" (p. 146).

Jurow and Shaughnessy (1993) each provide good definitions anddescriptions of TQM data gathering tools as Shaughnessy states,"are useful in displaying data, identifying trendlines andgenerally assisting staff in understanding the quality improvementprocess" (p. 11). These tools include the use of flow charts, checksheet, fishbone (cause and effect) diagrams, ran and control charts,histograms, and scatter diagrams. Whereas, Jurow (1993)provides a good illustration of where these tools fall within thestages of the Shewart Cycle, known as Plan, Do, Check and Actcycle in the quality improvement process. She also providesreferences to several books that clearly describe these tools andhow to use them.

3. Benchmarking

Boelke (1995) has reported that Jurow (1993) assumedbenchmarking as a key role in TQM measurement processes. This"process ... establishes an external standard to which internaloperations can be compared ... by contributing information aboutwhat other organizations arc able to accomplish in the same orsimilar operations." (p. 120). Both Muir (1993 a, b) and Jurow(1993) also outline specific benchmarking steps based on TQMmeasurement techniques that a library would take in comparing apractice with the same operation in another institutions. Whilethere is another useful source to describe benchmarking related tolibraries that is written by Allan (1993). It talks about the role ofinformation specialist or special librarian who is part of a largerorganization that can play in the organization's generalbenchmarking process.

f. Commitment to Continuous Improvement

The final integration of a quality improvement process, with itsfocus on continuous improvement, is well outlined by Barnard inher model for implementing TQM in research libraries (Barnard,1993, pp. 68-70). Boelke (1993) stated that in Leonard's view, hecalls for basing inspirations more on 'users" stated needs andexpectations than on our traditional interpretations of qualityservice. This focus will undoubtedly require ongoing assessmentof user-perceived needs.

Besides, other article also points out that the continuousimprovement is also in line with those who see that "a strength ofthe TQM approach is that it is designed to promote improvementas part of a comprehensive (systems) approach [that continues toevolve]" (Loney and Bellefontaine, 1993, p. 94). With such viewsand models, a focus on incremental continuous improvement("kaizen", to use the Japanese term) should be inherent in anylibrary undertaking TQM or a similar quality improvementprocess.



TQM : PROS AND CONS

POSSIBILITIES AND PROPONENTS

Boelke (1995) has brought us to a discussion that the level ofinterest in TQM and its various processes in the library field isindicated in several ways. The rapid growth of the library-focusedTQM electronic discussion list, TQMLIB. with 317 members byfall 1994. is one sign of the attention the process is receiving.Although the numbers were not large, the fact that 18 of the 30respondents to a survey conducted by the library Administrationand Management Association (LAMA) Total QualityManagement for Libraries Discussion Group use a TQM processindicates that these activities are beginning to appear in libraries.The number of library professional association programs devotedto aspects of TQM and the recent rapid growth of TQM-relatedarticles in the library professional literature also illustrate theinterest in the process.

Without doubt, a large number of libraries today are at leastcontemplating, if not actually implementing, this newcustomer-oriented, teamwork-based process for continuousquality improvement. As proponent point out, few serviceinstitutions seem more appropriate for TQM than libraries, withtheir long-established focus on users and the delivery of qualityservices.

BENEFITS OF APPLYING TQM APPROACH INLIBRARIES

In applying Total Quality Management methods in libraries,consideration should be given in the benefits as well as potentialbarriers, likely to be realized or encountered. As far as Jurow(1993) concerned there arc a few fundamental concepts of TQMwhich merit special attention besides other obvious benefits tolibraries. It might be unfamiliar to libraries but seems to havestrong potential to offer new insights and strategies in librarymanagement. They are breaking down interdepartmentalbarriers, the internal customer and continuous improvement.

a. Breaking down interdepartmental barriers

Like other organizations, libraries (end to divide staff andfunctions into specialized units responsible for discrete aspectsof the library's overall mission of providing information resources,or access to resources for its users (Barnard & Jurow, 1993). Byworking together and developing a shared knowledge ofproblem-solving tools and techniques, staff not only growpersonally but also learn about and participate in issues affectingother departments and gain a larger sense of organizationalpurpose,

There are some good points given by Lawes (1993), she furtherelaborated the TQM can breakdown of status barriers, betweeneveryone from support staff to administrators and managersinvolved in the process of problem recognition and resolution.

Many of the benefits to staff grow out of this process. A teamapproach to problem solving is developed out of necessity andthe manager's role becomes one of support and coaching ratherthan one of authoritarian control. This produces a non-threateningenvironment where people work together and debate openly inorder to solve problems and bring about change.

Indeed, measuring compliance with agreed upon standards andefficiency gives us important management control information.Through an emphasis on fact and measurement, staffs recognizeswhat is expected of them and arc better able to participate in theachievement of the unit's mutual goals. Furthermore, it gives suchpersonnel procedures a firm, factual foundation and eliminatesvagueness, which for most staff is a cause of insecurity and fear.

b. The concept of the internal customer

Jurow & Barnard (1993) have clarified that the concept of theinternal customers is a particularly powerful one for libraries.Similarly, Rowley (1996) in her article mentioned that the onlyway to ensure that the organization has a focus on customers,which impacts equally on all departments with the externalcustomer is to encourage each employee to identify those to whomthey provide a service and to view those people as their internalcustomers. In this way the customer orientation can permeate theorganization. And these internal customers have been defined byJurow & Barnard (1993) as people inside the organization whoreceive the output of the organization's processes whether it begoods, information, or services and use it in their own work.

c. Continuous improvement

In fact, continuous improvement is not defined as trying to dobetter all the time. Traditional management approaches oftenfocus on maintaining the status quo. Instead it has shifted tocontinuous improvement in systems and processes. Continuousimprovement uses specific methods and measurements tosystematically collect and analyze data for the purpose ofimproving the processes identified as critical to the organization'smission. The components of continuous improvement are both aphilosophy and a set of graphical problem-solving tools ortechniques. They added, instead of just trying to 'do better' in anundefined, intuitive way, continuous improvement can enablelibraries to set measurable goals, based on quantitativeperformance indicators, and to monitor progress, towards thosegoals. (Jurow & Barnard, 1993)

After looking at the benefits of applying TQM under specificsubtitles, below are several opinions given by well-known authorsrelated to this discussion. By implementing TQM, librarymanagers can transfer best practice from the commercial and othernot-for-profit sectors to their own situation. This encourages andopenness to fresh approaches to old problems. (Kinell, 1996/97)

As stated by Donna (1993) the emphasis of TQM is onsuccessfully meshing people and processes, rather than concentrating



on the end product alone. A key component of TQM is thequantitative analysis process. The use of such tools as flowcharts,affinity diagrams, and control charts enables managers to seebaselines and set benchmarks for process improvement.Librarians relied on the TQM methods of brainstorming, formingcontinuous improvement teams, developing affinity and fishbonediagrams and emphasizing data, rather than assumptions, in theimprovement efforts.

Total Quality Management, with its emphasis in teamwork,service and empowerment, complements librarians' commitmentto service excellence. The concepts and techniques of TQM canguide librarians in examining processes and using human resourcesto their fullest potential. (Donna, 1993)

Besides, this quality approach enables customers to have a greatersay in the provision and delivery of information products, and thelibrary consequently has more information about customers wantand how much they are prepared to pay for it. (Lawes, 1993).Furthermore, she added that the emergence of quality standard,which agreed upon by the library and information unit and itscustomers is an immensely valuable exercise, for as a consequenceof the development of those standards, the organization isencouraged. And even it required supplying the necessaryresources in meeting those standards. This of course changes theequation, because the library is no longer fighting for resourceson its own. The library and its customers make the case for thenecessary funds and staff together.

At the end, she stressed that it should not be forgotten that aconsistent qualify product tailored to customers1 needs buildsmarket share and ensures customer loyalty. She also claimed thatthis quality is used for improving efficiency since it reducesre-work costs by ensuring that tasks are performed properly thefirst time. Staff time is used more effectively, thus increasingproductivity. Waste is also eliminated or minimized, which helpsthe organization control costs and improves cost-effectiveness.As this is already a feature of most library and informationservices systems, it may only be necessary to bring existingprocedures manuals in line with current thinking within theorganization. The main purpose here is to ensure consistencyprovides guidelines for staff unfamiliar with particular routines,and assist with staff training.Lastly, it can be said that this approach is a flexible one since itcan be applied in different ways to a variety of situationsdepending on the level of support for implementing TQM bothwithin and outside of the library. (Barnard, 1993)

POTENTIAL CHALLENGES AND BARRIERS

Total Quality Management (TQM) has come to be quite widelyused in libraries and information services in the last three or fouryears. TQM has its critics, it is very time-consuming since itrequires persistence and commitment at all levels if it is to workinparticular total commitment and support at the top are needed. It

can become mechanical, with the spirit being sacrificed to theletter; and it can be exploitative (Boje & Winsor, 1993) in that itcan be used as a means of getting staffs to make themselvesredundant. There are other reasons for lack of success (Harari,1993). Indeed, its success rate seems to be rather poor since arecent study in British industry (Williamson, Redman and Snape,1993) showed that although nearly two-thirds had introducedqualify programs only 8 percent of forms rated them as totallysuccessful. And this leaves a larger number that were claimed tobe moderately successful, but the results are still far fromimpressive. May be they were expecting too much too soon, andmay be they neglected some of the numerous critical successfactors. (Porter and Parker, 1993)

Jurow & Barnard (1993) confirmed that TQM was developed ina manufacturing environment, and the process of translating it ina service environment has been a slow one. In addition, many ofthose who work in libraries differentiate between their not-for-profit service arena and for-profit service operations, and theyare slow to embrace techniques and attitudes form the for-profitsector.

Some critics charge that TQM places too great an emphasis (e.g:time and effort allocation) on improving processes are important,attention to outcomes or products. Once again, however, this isan incorrect conclusion. An overriding objective of TQM is theimprovement of the quality of customer outcomes, results whichare often brought about by fewer 'hands-off, streamlinedprocesses, and the application of relevant measures ofeffectiveness. (Shaughnessy, 1995)

A number of barriers to the implementation of TQM have beenencountered in all types of organizations, including libraries butaccording Joanne it is not many. (Jurow & Barnard, (1993),Pearson, (1993) Stuart and Drake, (1993)). They range the viewthat this is only another management fad of the day, tomanagement's fear of the loss control, to employee reluctance torecommend changes because of fear of the management, to theconcern that the business and industrial background of TQM mightnot lend itself to the nonprofit sector, including libraries. Besides,they recognized other barriers and problems faced whileimplementing TQM process, for instance the vocabulary barrier,the commitment barrier and the professionalism barrier.

a. The vocabulary barrier

Pertaining to Boelke (1995) questions about the vocabulary andTQM jargon are one of the problems. Terms like customers arestill associated primarily with business and industry, which isproblematic for some members in fields such as librarianship. InShaughnessy's (1995) article, it has been clarified that there is adebate within higher education community over identifyingstudents as 'customer' is too suggestive of commercialism.Because within community, usually library users are referred topatrons or clients, not as customers.



As well as the word 'total', 'quality' and 'management'themselves, they all seem to send up red flag in academic andservice environments. Promoting 'quality" principles seems, onthe surface, to imply that standards are not already being observednor quality work, valued. And referring to students as 'customers'is sure to prompt protestations from faculty to the effect thatuniversities are not in the 'business' of 'selling' learning andknowledge. (Jurow & Barnard. 1993)

As Shaughnessy (1995) identified there are other terminologyissues revolving around the word 'management' in Total QualityManagement. In an academic environment, governance is valuedmore than management. The use of the term 'management'suggests to some that TQM is a management prerogative and thatnon-managers have only a marginal role to play. This is a majormisconception in that one of the critical elements in TQM isfaculty, staff and student participation and intensive teamwork.Because of misconceptions caused by apparent focus on'management' in TQM some universities have changes thenomenclature to TQS (Total Quality Service), VIP (values,Improvements. Process), CQI (Continuous Quality Improvement)and other variations on these themes.

Similarly, there have also been misconceptions about the scopefor TQM. The word 'total' refers of course to 'management' andnot to 'quality'. This gives rise to assumption that TQM can onlybe implemented across an entire organization, and not to anindividual part or parts, such as Library and Information Science.This actually is not the case, and as the quality guru Philip Crosbyclaims, a unit within an organization can implement TQM on itsown, and if effective, others will want to know the remedy for itssuccess. (Brockman, 1992)

b. The commitment barrier

Another barrier is the fact that TQM is not a quick fix butrequires a long-term investment of time over several years asprocesses are analyzed and an organization's culture is changed.This can cause resistance and other difficulties in these days ofincreasing financial and other pressures. (Boelke, 1995) This isbecause new models must be created and new territory, charted.And library managers for instance, particularly in times offinancial duress, may seek short-term solutions and dramaticturnarounds. These managers may be reluctant to undertake aTQM transition, or to be discouraged when quick results do notoccur. TQM is about fundamental, cultural change which cannotbe accomplished overnight, or in a year, though positive changes,particularly in staff attitudes and learning, should occur early inthe process. (Jurow & Barnard. 1993)

In addition Brigham (1993) sees it, suspicious of anynon-academic managerial idea (especially if it is new),administrators and librarians believe that their high quality workneeds no improvement. Miller (1994) as well probes the sameissue of managerial resistance to TQM from a different angle.First, TQM requires a long period of time in its implementation,showing no immediate results thus, administrators view it as too

costly because they are unable to adhere patiently to this newphilosophy. Second, professionals see their conformance tocustomer needs as having to renounce their expertise, tending tofeel powerless in the horizontal environment of TQM.

Fitch (1993) also observes that libraries tend to favor traditionalmanagement styles despite their enthusiasm for adopting andkeeping up with technological advancement. This managerialconservatism helps to explain why TQM approach is still in itsinfancy in academic libraries. Though leaders and librarians withinthese institutions are aware of a multitude of changes occurring inand out of academia. they are reluctant, even afraid, to plunge in.The reasons for such reluctance, according to Shaughnessy (1993)are: a sense of being overwhelmed by the wide range ofdefinitions that the word "quality" carries and of skepticismregarding what the word: "management" means: that is "centralcontrol" or "authoritarianism".

c. The professionalism barrier

Still another fact to be faced that the higher the degree ofprofessionalization within an organization, the greater (Boelke,1995) and the harder the resistance to certain elements of TQM,particularly its customer focus. However, the author of aprovocative article which discusses the place and perception oflibrarians in academia also sees problems with the relationshipbetween professionalism and TQM (Veaner, 1994). In a stronglystated view of the appropriate role for academic librarians, Veanerstresses the need to maintain the intellectual character andleadership function of librarians if they want retain their status asprofessionals with programmatic responsibilities in the academicenvironment. This means that the vigorously opposesmanagement methods like TQM that promote less hierarchy inlibraries.

d. The Process Barrier

More lessons learned from less than successful applications ofthe TQM process are well covered by Pearson (1993). Problemscan exist in establishing a good relationship between control andpromoting employee empowerment. This has resulted in the needfor established standards of service, which are understood andaccepted by all concerned. Moreover, organizations should con-sider the overall context of their operation when setting their stan-dards for quality, avoiding and unrealistic perfectionism.

Another problem encountered is related to TQM statistical, whichcan focus too heavily on zero defects. An inappropriate emphasison these tools in complex service organizations such as librariesmay result in TQM and its goals being regarded as unattainable.This may also lead to the view that TQM is unrealisticmanipulation. Pearson (1993) points out that:

The challenge of TQM, like any other organizational program,is to assure that its full systemic outcomes-its effects on theorganization at large, organization stakeholders, and the



organizational context-are considered ... Before initiating TQM,managers must fully consider and understand the likely effectsthat the program will have on employees and the tasks theyperform. TQM should be implemented only after there isreasonable understanding of the impact that it may have on stake-holders-workgroups, throughout the organization, and outside theorganization. TQM should be an effort implemented not for itsown sake, but to enhance the learning capability of theorganization, (p. 149)

There appears to be an essential fact that underlies all of the basicTQM elements as well as the caveats related to them. Given thedemands of TQM, it seems apparent that the libraries adoptingthe process must be basically healthy institutions not faced withsevere management, staff, professional identity, or resourceproblems. As a library administrator who is deeply involved inimplementing TQM in an academic library, states " a librarycontemplating using TQM will want to think of what it will giveup in immediate staff productivity in order to accomplish thelong-range changes ". (Butcher, 1993)

As Dougherty (1992) indicates that though, Total QualityManagement has the potential to offer us better for instance moreeffective, more fulfilling- alternatives, and at the same time, itwill demand that we pay the price of transformation. Anadherence to the tenets of TQM also will require us to change notonly the way we view our mission, but also the way weaccomplish it.

In another article written by Shaughnessy (1995) indicated thatW. Edward Deming, one of the founders of the quality movement,also suggested that certain so-called 'deadly sin' could cripple anorganization's effort to improve quality. Among the mostimportant factors, which can inhibit the successful application ofTQM are first, lack of commitment (or less than enthusiasticsupport) for TQM and second, explicit resistance by middlemanagers. A number of writers have pointed out how middlemanagers can stall corporate reengineering efforts because theyperceive that they have the least to gain. Similar perceptions may-occur with respect to TQM. Cross-functional teams can bethreatening to managers whose orientation is directed more tocommand and control rather than systems thinking andparticipation. In many instances, line managers will need toassume staff functions as coordination and communication andfor some, such a transition will be quite difficult.

Beside that, lack of information about TQM concept and toolsalso might hinder its implementation. Virtually every university,which has attempted to apply TQM, has commented on the needfor training, for team building and for the commitment of timeand effort. At the same time, several aspects of TQM appear tobe nothing more than common sense, often times common senseis found to be not very common at all. Thus, both patience andpersistence are required to realize the benefits of TQM.

Nevertheless, a more troubling condition affecting TQMimplementation is employee skepticism and disbelief. Manylibrary staff, particularly those who have had experience with such

system such as Management by Objectives. Program PlanningBudgeting Systems. Zero Based Budgeting and similar approachesto more effective management may conclude the TQM is simplyone more fad, another megatrend in which interest will soon fade.While it remains to be seen whether they will be proven to beright, other librarians believe that because of TQM's focus onteamwork, staff participation, and quality services (andcollections), TQM principles do have staying power and will beapplied in organizations indefinitely.

Since TQM requires the results be measured, the progress towardsquality improvements to be calculated, some libraries have notbeen able to adopt the full suite of TQM methods. Because of thelack of such measures, particularly those, which focus on thecustomer and less on the library, seems to be another issue thatlimits the usefulness of TQM in libraries.

As have been indicated earlier, the effective application of TQMdepends on teamwork, especially teams, which are crossfunctional in nature. Therefore, without an investment in teamtraining before TQM projects are undertaken, it is very likely thatthe results of the effort will be disappointing. Another factor,which can have a negative influence on an organization's successwith TQM. is the lack of systems thinking. System thinking asPeter Senge (1990) has pointed out. involves more than merelyadopting an organization-wide view, important though this maybe. Systems thinking also encompasses personal responsibilityfor and mastery of the knowledge and strategies that staff musthave to contribute to the mission organization. It includesdeveloping a shared vision of where the organization is headed,as well as it requires not just individual learning but teamlearning and willingness also is needed on the part of members orparticipants to adopt new mental models of their organization.Certainly this element is especially important for academic librariesas they approach the 21 st century.

In addition, Lawes (1993) has given some points upon this issue.For her, library and information services is fascinating andfruitful in terms of job satisfaction, but frustrating anddepressing in terms of the unending fight for funding andrecognition. Much effort has been expanded, with little success,in the search for a means to determine the value and the impact ofthe services we provide. The situation has been complicated overthe last decade by the constant need to review and justify servicesto administrators and financial controllers.

DEFINING AND IMPLEMENTING TQM

Kinell (1996/97) has noticed that several arguments are advancedin favor of implementing a total quality or quality assurancesystem. First, there is the drive to improve effectiveness in theface of resourcing constraints and increased demands on services.Quality management systems enable managers to be explicit abouttheir intentions and to plan for their success. While libraryservices may already have detailed procedures for some of thejobs undertaken, a quality system will ensure that responsibility



is taken for the documentation of procedures and processes.

A second argument is that the library or information service shouldbe seen as leading the way in developing quality managementtechniques within its organization. Anticipating such moves withinthe organization and gearing the library service up to embracequality management appears to have become increasingly relevant.

Pearson (1993) suggested that the implementation andapplication of TQM must 'fit' with participating organizations'policies and procedures (the way work is supposed to be done)and with the organizations' culture (the way work is actuallyaccomplished). Before initiating TQM managers must fullyconsider and understand the likely effects that the program willhave on employees and the tasks they perform. TQM should beimplemented only after there is reasonable understanding of theimpact that it may have on stakeholders-work groups, throughoutthe organization, and outside the organization. TQM should bean effort implemented not for its own sake, but to enhance thelearning capability of the organization.

Lawes (1993) also pointed that the actual process for achievingquality management is described elsewhere, and by a variety ofauthors with a variety of recommendations. There are indeed manydifferent approaches and systems, and most libraries will perforceadopt the ones chosen by their host organizations.

It would be counterproductive for a library to implement TQMwithout already having a planning process in place, and if thisplanning activity is to be effective, ideally before rolling out TQM,it must include the components of strategic planning. (Riggs, 1992)The principles of TQM frequently refer back to the library'smission and vision statements, goals, objectives and strategies. Astrategic plan provides focus and articulation to the library'smultiyear expectation. The strategies formulated to advance thelibrary must reflect the best thinking available, and they mostcertainly have to include action steps to he followed by specificlibrary personnel. Like commitment to strategic planning, TQMrequires that the library's lop management, by word and deed,display commitment to continuous quality improvement.(Riggs, 1992) Library managers are positioned to take theleadership in creating the future of libraries. The successfulimplementation of the principles of TQM will depend, to a largeextent on how carefully crafted the vision statement is.

THE TQM PROCESS IN PRACTICE

1. TQM in Academic libraries

In Barbara A. Ford-Foster (1995) article stated that sinceacademic libraries reflect the culture of academe, they too haveadopted or adopted business methodologies to the running of thelibrary. They too are the victims of rising costs, increasedcustomer expectations, and demands for accountability. Even, ifother academic institution is not yet working in the realm ofquality improvement, TQM must naturally appeal to the library.

In the words of Riggs (1992), Dean of Libraries at the Universityof Michigan:

Simply put. libraries are a natural environment forTQM. Is there any library not pursuing improvementin its service? To take this line of thinking a step further,most libraries are pursuing excellence in their productsand services. We do not hear library staff saying, "Weare committed to mediocrity around here." Libraries areessentially service organizations, and nearly all peopleworking in academic libraries want to offer the verybest service ...(p.481).

In the article written by Boelke (1995) stated that two surveyspoint out libraries undertaking TQM are in a variety of stages andare using a wide range of approaches. These surveys wereconducted for the LAMA Total Quality Management forLibraries Discussion Group, using TQMLIB electronicdiscussion list and the survey conducted by the Association ofResearch Library's Office of Management Services for its SpecKit and Flyer on quality improvement programs in ARL libraries(ARL, 1993).

In fact, there are many examples could be found about thesuccess of implementing TQM in organizations together withtechniques derived from the overall approach. However, thedetailed discussions on specific quality improvement programsare very limited in the library professional literature. Therefore inthis paper it will only briefly touch on how various libraries haveapproached the process and what some of the outcomes have beenin these libraries. For instance Oregon State University Library,Georgia Tech Library, University of Arizona. Harvard CollegeLibrary, Perkins Library (Duke University) and Davis Library(Sampson University). The approaches range from a formalstep-by-step process using pilot projects, to a focus onorganizational development, to library reorganization, toundertaking the process in just one of the library's wide range ofservices. (Boelke, 1995)

a. Oregon State University Library

Butcher (1993) provides a clear picture about the experienceOregon Slate University Library in implementing this TQMapproach. This library, whose university was implementing aninstitution-wide continuous improvement process, proceeded toconsider and undertake TQM on a step-by-step basis, much inline with the model suggested by Barnard (1993). The library thendecided to undertake the process for several reasons including thepotential for greater efficiency, improved service and betterutilization of resources as well as political reasons. And they alsodecided to try pilot projects after pros and cons were weighedwhich are examining the reshelving process and the flow ofgovernment publications.

Finally, they recognized some problems while implementing thislike time-consuming process as well as training and meeting butthe benefit of participation and decision making by those



doing the work were also being realized.

b. Georgia Tech Library

This library is another example of a library undertaking theprocess as part of an institution-wide TQM effort. The challengewas to create an environment in the Georgia Tech Library thatstressed customer satisfaction and encouraged employeeinvolvement in improving information services. However, theyused their own model of TQM known as CQI (continuous qualityimprovement) and the plan developed is covered some elementslike: "1. Involve everyone on the staff 2. Identify internal andexternal customers 3. Improve customer satisfaction 4. Increaseopportunities for customer interaction and feedback 5. Providevalue-added services 6. Encourage innovation and efficiency 7.Communicate openly 8. Identify staff training, education anddevelopment opportunities" (Stuart and Drake. 1993, p. 133)

With a focus on customer satisfaction, the library started itsprogram using techniques based on those Milliken & Company,winner of the first annual Baldrige National Quality Award whichis actually came from the TQM literature and from library staff

Those techniques included "opportunities for improvement forms"used to elicit suggestions from library staff, the use of brain-storming as a tool, staff development efforts and trainingworkshops. Now they are moving toward giving work groupscomposed of the individuals most responsible for delivering theservices the authority for determining their programs. Focus groupswith university stakeholders and a suggestion box on the GeorgiaTech Electronic Library are also part of the library's qualityimprovement efforts. (Boelke, 1995)

Lastly, he also realized that the quality improvement experiencein this library has revealed the importance if recruiting the rightof librarian to work in the CQI environment. However, it requiresa staff comfortable with empowerment and interested incontributing to the problem-solving and decision-making aspectsof the organization's operations. In line with Oregon State'sconclusion, the Georgia Tech Library sees that "while model ofservice will vary, the imperative for quality will persist" (Stuartand Drake, 1995, p. 136).

c. University of Arizona

The University of Arizona library is another key example ofrestructuring organizational designs based on TQM (Fore, 1993).Just as was the case with Oregon Stale University Library, thisuniversity library resorted to TQM as a means for overcomingtheir recent economic crisis caused, in part, by decrease in theirstate/federal funding. Therefore, this university libraryimplemented TQM with a mission to link users with theinformation they need in the most effective way: that is byeliminating librarians' intermediary functions and therebyredirecting their efforts to other more primary arenas of libraryservices. Now its TQM operation goes forward, aiming at

fundamental changes in every aspects of the library. (Kojima.1996)

"Not as before, both libraries undertake TQM or CQI as alibrary-wide effort address established library procedures on astep-by-step basis, while others take a broader and morefar-reaching approach as far as impact on the library as anorganization. Three good examples are the quality improvementactivities al the Harvard College Library (HCL), Perkins Libraryat Duke University and Davis Library at Sampson University.

d. Harvard College Library

Lee (1993) realized that the establishment of a "cohesive staffand organizational development program [that] is now an HCLpriority ...." and it is an important outgrowth of strategicplanning process. Moreover, they also focus on developingprograms to improve the effectiveness of the staff, emphasis isgiven to 'team building and facilitation, problem solving,communication and collaboration, negotiation and conflictsolution (p. 228). All the elements stated here can be consideredas the aspects of TQM that could be applied in academiclibraries.

Besides, HCL's staff also decided to implement TQM in theirlibrary as they observed that " in a process of organizationdevelopment and planned change, the principles of TQM,including participation in plainning and examining and improvingwork processes, are useful and relevant" (Clack, 1993. pp.40-41). Moreover, HCL also finds that TQM is in line with theservice objectives that are central for all libraries, as many writerson the topic note.

From there. TQM clearly will be and have already been playing akey role in Harvard College's major organizational change effort.In addition, the major strengths of this approach that HCL hasidentified are the aspects that are commonly pointed out and usedby other proponents of TQM for library quality improvement.These cover an emphasis on broad-based participation, acommitment to the group process and good communication withthe entire staff. (Boelke, 1995)

e. Perkins Library (Duke University)

Perkins Library began its quest for reorganization through acontinuous improvement (Cl) process in 1986 when it moved toteam-based approach in technical services. With a visionstatement and guiding principles in place, teams were formed forimplementation planning, communication, futures, staffeducation and continuous improvement recognition (ARL, 1993,pp. 41-49). Several 'quick start' teams were also launched toaddress issues like shelf failure, document delivery and branchlibraries. In discussing Perkins experience. Lubans (1994)indicated that the library has already "picked its low-hanging fruit"and its ready for something more sophisticated and for moreadvanced training. Like many libraries in universities that are



attempting TQM on an institution-wide basis. Perkins Library,through its own efforts and initiative, is actually something of aquality improvement pocket at Duke. (Boelke, 1995)

1. Davis Library (Sampson University)

After facing a situation of understating in one department andovers ta t ing in another, procedures developed aroundpersonalities and a demoralized staff. Davis Library has taken agood step to reorganize it completely. According to thisreorganization, Davis Library has increased service and improvedprocesses. These improvements include more professional hoursat the reference desk and more support staff time at thecirculation desk. Finally, the library sees that two major projectswere facilitated by the new organizational structure: theautomation of the library and a building expansion. Given thisexperience, the library concludes that through the use of a TQMprocess which empowers ail staff, a "library can be turned upsidedown and land on its feet" (Fitch el. al., p. 298)

2. TQM in Special Libraries

As the professional literature indicates, quality improvementefforts have a longer history in special libraries than in other typesof libraries. (Boelke, 1995) Some of the earliest library qualityimprovement efforts are seen in medical and hospital libraries.Quality efforts in libraries in the corporate sector however, arenot far behind.

a. Medical and Hospital Libraries

There is no article somehow talking about the implementation ofTQM in the medical and hospital libraries but other articles ofspecial interest to libraries in the health care field include thesurvey by the Alliant Health System Library at Norton Hospitaland Kosair Children's Hospital in Louiville, Kentucky. Theprimary objective was to establish TQM benchmarks and toexamine the significance of.., [the library's] role in clinical care.(Fischer and Reel, 1992, p. 347)

b. Corporate Libraries

It is not surprising that a number of accounts of libraryimprovement efforts that have used the approach come fromcorporate libraries. The application of TQM in corporate Americais evidently applied when the adoption of the approach by FloridaPower and Light (FPL) in 1981. Efforts paid off in 1989 whenFPL became the first American Corporation to win the covetedDeming Prize awarded by the Union of Japanese Scientists andEngineers for outstanding company-wide quality. Thus, it is notsurprising that FPL's library soon became involved in theprocess. Another reengineering also occurred at the AT&TInformation Research Center (IRC). Although TQM was alreadyin place in the IRC, which provides information to all AT&Temployees, it was recognized that the entire information serviceneeded to be changed. Making process improvements was not

adequate as a means of meeting the competition of externalinformation providers. Then, a new structure of self-managedwork-teams, a strategy team and a set of core services evolved. Anew technology platform also became available to providejust-in-time desktop delivery service. Because of productivityimprovements, revenue trends increased despite decreased staffin the IRC and AT&T as a whole.

According to Strub (1994), lessons learned from the undertakingwere the need for resilient managers who can deal with changeand a recognition that too much time was devoted totechnological improvements. Not enough attention was given tothe people involved who needed training to move to self-managed structure. In addition, although maintaining the TQMfocus, the IRC adopted results driven quality (RDQ) tocounteract the slow process aspects of TQM. "RDQ embracesTQM's long-term vision ... while helping managers makeimmediate tangible improvements'1 (Strub. 1994, p. 19)

c The Government Sector

Applying TQM to the federal government with its enormouscivilian workforce and millions of military personnel obviouslyhas been continues to be a formidable task. Beginning in the1970s with productivity efforts in the Department of Defensewhich volved into a TQM approach in the 1980s, the goal of thegovernment-wide effort is "to break down the rigidity and excessstructure" (Frank, 1993, p. 173). It is also mentioned to improveproductivity, cost savings and staff morale.

However, because of the many challenges faced in applying TQMto governmental functions (including lack of long-range planning,little top administrative support, rigid personnel system resistantto participative management, and no incentive to save money).Obviously most of the successful applications of TQM come fromthe grass roots (Frank, 1994, p. 181).

3. TQM in Public and School Libraries

Although the literature on quality improvements in public or schoollibraries is not prevalent, there is good evidence that these[ibraries are also undertaking quality efforts. The approaches vary,of course, just as they do in other types of libraries.

In public libraries, current efforts mat are taking a TQM approachare often, but not always, part of a city-wide quality improvementinitiative. A good example is the Austin Public Library, winner ofGale Research/ Library Journal Library of the Year Award. Thefruits of adapting TQM techniques are seen in the financialsupport the library receives, with a budget that is a bit better thanbudgets for most urban public libraries in the financially strainedstate. (Joanne, 1994)

However, TQM efforts for school libraries often are part of themovement in education toward what some in the field call "totalquality education". This has involved changing the managementstructure to provide educators, including school library media



specialists, with the opportunity to become active participants insite-based management.

This means empowering them "to make local decisions oncurriculum as well as management" (Barron, 1994, p. 94)

LESSONS TAKEN FROM TQM IMPLEMENTATION

The adoption of the TQM as a tool for organizational reform hasbeen discussed in various aspects and viewpoints. Some hailedTQM as 'medication' to ailing business, others regard it as acompetitive strategy in the competitive world, while there are stillothers who view TQM as just another 'management fad'.

Whatever the views are. the fact remains that TQM has beenadopted by many organizations with the hope that it would boosttheir performance, give them new image, increase their profitsand cut their costs. Some really benefited by the implementationof TQM and some has successfully managed to initiate but stalledat later stages. There are also others, which claimed to theadoption of TQM, but have no evidence of truly trying to do so.

Indeed, the Total Quality Management concept has been subjectedto many interpretations and discussions. And it should be takeninto serious considerations by any parties to implement TQM.Failure to really understand the nature of implementation for eachorganization or misunderstanding by any party involves in theimplementation would cause disruption or even failures.

Regarding to the failures and success in adoption this approach,Fatrah Abdul Samad (1997) slated that Reed et.al (1996) haveattributed the failures of most adopters to several factors, the firstof which is obsession with process rather than the content of TQMitself. With the content they meant the spirit or the meanings ofthe principles, rather than the activities in the implementation.

In her research also explained that the different types of strategiesthat produce the best results differ according to environmentalcircumstances. Ability to choose the strategies that are best suitedto the organizational culture would be important factor indetermining the success or failure of a quality program (Reed,et.al, 1996; Powell, 1995).

Besides, it is important as well for those who want to implementthis TQM process, to realize that not all the payoffs from TQMare quick to appear. Impatience for results might promptstrategies that have been adopted to be abandoned for anothernewly devised. The lack of patient would invariably caused theinvolved parties to give up on the efforts. And it would be betterto remember that the quest for quality would never really be everending, for as each level of quality is achieved, there would benew level of expectations from customers.

It has been implied that what is needed is to understand therelative needs to be satisfied in library institutions before settingabout the strategies to satisfy the needs. Accordingly, there are

some beliefs that TQM has succeeded where it has been impliedhonestly, exclusively and completely. Essentially then, what itmeans here is that if we are on the way of adopting it, it must becomplete for TQM is a holistic philosophy of management.

Since TQM really plays an important role in improving servicesin the organizations, it is appropriate that training should beactivated. While the degree of understanding before the trainingand after training received could as well be relevant. The TQMtraining might also be given an appraisal to evaluate itseffectiveness. It might also be important to continuously identifyproblems of TQM implementation, as to provide a guide to findsolutions to overcome them.

Though we realize that TQM can help to reduce variants inoutputs or in reducing cost, there are some cases that in othersectors, implementing TQM could be very costly step andlimitations of budget would hinder its success.

Taking into accounts, various issues with the failure and successstories of TQM adoption in literature, it is only appropriate thatTQM is consciously look upon as only the means of attainingquality, not an end by itself. If TQM is to be successfullyimplemented in libraries, various matters should be takenseriously. Ability of the libraries to develop quality wouldperhaps be enhanced if supplementary resources and moreautonomy and empowerment were accorded to them.

As had already been said, the focus towards quality managementin the libraries is very timely and appropriate. But itsimplementation is a strategy that should be done properly andcautiously. Much planning on 'the strategy to implement thestrategy' must be given priority before libraries are formallydirected to implement TQM. Rather than incorporating the TQMimplementation as a new program, it would be wiser toimplement it as encompassing and enhancing of any presentquality-focused projects.

TQM also requires everybody to work on measurableimprovements beneficial to the entire system. However, the fearof taking risks might stiffen creativity and innovation that isessential in management process.

As far as we concerned, the benefits of mastering TQM aresubstantial, but adopting the paradigm does not automaticallymake an organization skilled in it. As with any skill, practice andsupportive resources determine how proficient a system becomes.Decisions about inducement or contribution arrangement affectthe amount of practice and supportive resources. Decisions aboutthe mix or resources to be devoted will also affect theimplementation.

In light of the unique organizational culture of libraries, there areconsiderable constraints in effective implementation of strategicmanagement reforms. The adoption of TQM for instance callsfor a clearly written statement of vision, mission and objectives.

And there are even views that it is better to manage entirely within



the conventional management framework rather than to adoptsome TQM elements, tools or practice piecemeal. However itshould also be emphasized thai the importance of incorporatingthe entire TQM paradigm is vital in ensuring the maximumbenefits of the adoption of the concept.

Again it should be stressed that before issuing any directive forthe implementation of TQM to libraries, there should be anexposure to the concept widely for that particular institution.Because without fully understanding the concepts and principlesunderlying it, it would be impossible for them to really apply andbenefit from TQM. When TQM is adopted holistically and whole-heartedly, the effects of even trying to achieve the TQM aims andobjectives would be very positive. The libraries would mostbenefit from the team spirit and trust that all arc parts andcomponents of TQM.

FUTURE DIRECTION / PROSPECTS OF TQM

The library and information services profession has always beencommitted to provide a high quality of service, and it hasconstantly sought ways to improve that quality. Unlike in the past,there was a clear presumption that the way to improve qualitywas to consume more resources, to buy books, recruit more staffand finally to move to larger premises. However, the situation isalready changed. This approach indeed is no longer valid in today'sworld. If we wish to improve qualify, we need to look for differentsolutions. We need to tackle the problem at its source and attemptto raise quality levels within our existing resource constraints.(Lawes, 1993)

Furthermore it has become in today's fiercely competitivemarkets, where products and services are largely differentiatedon the basis of their convenience, reliability and consistent abilityto satisfy consumers, that success is understanding whatcustomers want and then delivering it to them. Then, theimplementation of TQM in service organization is timely sincecontinuous improvement is a key objective and client service isvery emphasized in meeting customers' needs.

Besides, the transformation that began with manufacturing is nowalso being adopted by service organizations, largely becausecustomers' expectations have risen sharply and because qualityimprovements programs can be adapted to service industries.(Stuart & Drake, 1993) Thus, it seems that this approach toimproving products and services is being accepted as one way ofgaining a competition edge as commitment, ingenuity andemployee empowerment are proving to be essential ingredientsfor success.

On the other hand, after considering the challenges and problemsfaced to Georgia Tech Library in implementation these TQMtechniques, both Crit Stuart and Miriam A. Drake (1993)indicate that it is clear that TQM as practiced in manufacturingcorporations cannot be applied to service organizations.Statistical quality control is difficult to apply to the quality of an

information transaction or transfer, because information isintangible and its value often elusive. Librarians also lack a firmconcept of value because they do not follow up to learn howinformation is used and whether a difference to the customer.

Nevertheless, despite of various frustrations, TQM, when fullyimplemented will result in significant improvement for libraryusers. Tangible enhancement will be evident in workflow through-out the library. One of the most important benefits to the librarywill be the culture change that TQM has created in how thelibrary staff has become involved in assessing various operations,participating in determining strategic directions for the library andfunctioning as a team, In addition, it offers an opportunity todramatically transform some areas of the library, implementquality-driven programs, focus more on users, and provide thelibrary with a healthy environment.

In the review of current status of qualify improvement activitiesin libraries, it is evident that total quality management has beensuccessfully practiced by a number of libraries. However thereare also cautionary signals not to be overlooked. The realities ofthe current situation indicate that quality improvement isessential not only for survival but for facing the major changesand growth required for the libraries of today and tomorrow.

TQM and other variations of the quality process are likely to besignificant forces in shaping future library services. Though, modesof service will vary the imperative for quality will persist.However, the implementation of TQM in the library andinformation service environment poses interesting challenges onthe road to potentially significant benefits and of course itrequires courage. If TQM does not survive in its present formhowever quality initiatives will remain in place and will placegreater emphasis on quality, reliability, timeliness and customersatisfaction.

Undoubtedly, there is considerable activity in the application ofquality management to libraries and information services. Theshift from an interest in quality to active use of systematicmethods of managing quality is significant, whenever it has beenevident for many years. It is also evident that research anddevelopment activity, which is seeking to understand how qualitymanagement techniques and philosophies can be applied, is onincrease. This is a healthy situation, which expects well for thefuture of customer-centered services in the field.

Additionally, in the present time, there is a very considerableliterature in the library and information service sector, which touchon one or more aspects of quality management applied to thisparticular field. Despite, there is also a growing body of researchactivity, which is seeking to investigate on how qualitymanagement concepts can be applied systematically to the sector.Thus, it is a potential sign that this TQM approach will grow andmore develop tomorrow.

Although the amount of research pertaining to TQM isincreasing, some ample topics meriting investigation should not



be left out. Future research and investigation should be conductedfrom time to time in determining which libraries have implementedsuch quality process together with how staffs come to accept asthe highest priority. Also further analysis could be done on thebarriers to implement the quality programs and ways to overcomethose challenges. Comparing TQM practices between public andprivate institutions is good as well besides exploring newtechniques that provide meaningful insights into this qualityimprovement. And it might be interesting also to identify moreexpectations related to electronic services and relate them asservice tools and not merely as instruments of inventory. Theactual purpose is to give libraries more choices about whichexpectations they might try to meet or exceed.

Nevertheless, as Kinell (1996/97) reported, there areencouraging signs from the past year that quality is at last beingtaken seriously in the library and information service sector. Buton the evidence of the literature, there is still a long way to gobefore quality techniques are assimilated into library managementfield.

Quality Management is, thus, both an essential too! for managingthe expectations and demands of clients and funders and the meansto service enhancement. An effective quality managementapproach within a library and information service can facilitatethe setting of goals for the service and chart a way forward toensure that services meet the challenges not only for today buttomorrow.

RECOMMENDATION

Success more frequently comes to organizations, which placeresponsibility for customer satisfaction and quality improvementwith front line staff. As Tom Peters affirmed in his bestsellers,"Thriving on Chaos'' that "listening to customers must becomeeveryone's business. With most competitors moving ever faster,the race will go to those who listen (and respond) most intently."This concept may be ignored until quite recently by mostlibraries. Librarians often failed to realize that the library is notthe information source of choice for many faculty and students.Librarians were more concerned with internal process rather thanperceptions of value or customer service. They saw themselves askeepers of knowledge rather than active agents in informationtransfer. They pay little or no attention to the needs of theirprimary or secondary clientele. Since that it became clear if thelibrary did not pay attention to customer needs and did notprovide content-based, value added services, the need for thelibrary would decline in the years ahead.

Each library then, must assess its clientele, their needs, servicesto satisfy those needs and the framework or context forinformation services. Libraries will differ in the way they respondto and satisfy customer needs. Whereas, customers will also rangeaccording their preferred way of interacting with libraries andlibrarians. In large academic institutions for instance, librariansare likely to see a great variety in the preferred informationbehaviors of students and faculty. Since it is unlikely that

academic libraries, which will be funded to provide full service toall users, libraries have to take their own steps to respond to thevariety of customer demands in different ways.

Even though, there are some failures in implementing TQMprocess, it is normal to our daily lives. Moreover, the reasons forearly failures of implementing TQM are sobering to contemplateand a landscape is littered with faltering quality improvementprograms. This is true as the often protracted time cycle ofinitiation, training and implementation usually several years,requires enormous energy, commitment and focus to effectdesired change. Because of that slow emergence of results,sometimes can exasperate organizations that require immediateturnaround to stay in business.

Nevertheless, TQM is one of good quality management programssince its philosophy focuses all of an organization's processes,systems and procedures on customer satisfaction. Fromreassessing and redefining consumer needs, to reworking jobdesigns, then to reexamining product/service delivery. TQM looksbeyond traditional management concerns with internal politics andexternal competitors. TQM is in fact concerns with end-users. Toreally be successful, it requires a long-term process, broad-basedand organizational commitment. (Dougherty, 1992)

As we recognized that the notion of service to a client is reallyimportant and firmly embedded in the efficacy of the libraryfunction. More significant, service is critical to the survival of thelibrary community. In addition to the rapid changes in technologyhave made it possible for private information vendors to competein significant ways with libraries. Because of that so, it is betterfor libraries to practice this quality process before it's too late.Furthermore, in TQM environment, the service focus is notsimply an isolated or separated activity or event rather it is anintegral part of the entire organization process for accomplishingwork and achieving objectives.

In fact, the strength of TQM approach is that it is designed topromote improvement as part of a comprehensive integrated(system) approach. Despite, another desirable aspect of TQM isthat the analytical tools rather straightforward and has beensuccessfully used by all types of employees includingprofessionals, clerks and automotive mechanics. However, it isnot to say that implementing a full TQM transformation is easy.It isn't. At least TQM does provide a way to insure that allelements of the organization are working toward a common goal.

Here I'm also would like to quote the suggestion of Susan Barnardin the ALA midwinter meeting whenever she has mentioned thatthe customer is one of the elements of TQM least familiar in thelibrary community, but potentially one of the most beneficial. Fromher statement, if this is accurate, then we need to enhanceknowledge and awareness of the customer dimension. So, TQMis a useful approach for pursuing this end.

Another reason why TQM process is very much recommended tobe in libraries and service organization because the TQMelements of participative management, staff training and



development, and responsive service to users arc in fact alreadyestablished concept in libraries. Unlike in the case of themanufacturing and corporate sectors where TQM developed,implementation may promote or even require sudden as well asholistic change. As a result, libraries arc in a position to expandand improve upon principles that they already value and employ,while introducing new approaches to planning, problem- solvingand envisioning future customer services and needs.

Although there are variety of approaches and tools, which gotowards a TQM approach, it is better to say that TQM itself is aholistic approach, which begins and ends with an obsessiveattention to customer requirement. So, TQM should be viewed asa means of transition to the new era in libraries and other serviceorganizations as well as of creating a different framework. Whiledefinition of TQM may vary, all organizations including librarywill need to pick techniques and tools to meet their particularrequirements, but the culture of continuous improvement andcustomer focus will be common to all.To conclude, how successful we've been is not for me to say. Thereis much controversy in our community today about TQM. Basedon my reading is simply that these efforts can be beneficial to theorganization and to specialized library or information services unit.But of course these efforts cannot work and indeed should noteven be considered without appropriate organizational attitudesin place. So it is important for us to understand the culture of theorganizations that employ us.

CONCLUSION

In fact, TQM is not an entirely new management technique forlibraries. It offers a more formal, systematic approach to focusingon continuous improvement. One should not expect TQM to solveall problems nor should it be viewed as a quick fix.Organizations that have failed in their TQM endeavor have triedto implement it too quickly without proper staff training. Aneffective TQM process is gradually implemented in a library overa two to three year period. And it will require a commitment ofresources, especially for the intensive training. (Riggs, 1992)

Despite, to ensure the successful integration of TQM into alibrary's management approach, staff need to understand how tothink analytically, how to recognize and fix problems, and how touse measurement as a tool for improvement, rather than as anevaluate mechanism for apportioning blame.

To date, it is clear that there are many libraries are beginning toexperiment with TQM, selectively trying out the techniques andprocesses that seem most applicable. It is our belief that aslibrarians and library staff become familiar with the conceptunderlying TQM, they will come to appreciate the similaritiesbetween traditional service attitude of libraries and service focusof TQM.

actually is superior to another. Each has its own advantages anddisadvantages. It depends on the organization to implement TQMor other approaches. From my own personal view, of course changeis not something that comes easily. That's why someorganizations prefer to deny or ignore it and some libraries aredealing with change and responding to the challenges ofremaining viable. However, though the organization is ready ornot, the time has come for a new, user-oriented approach todelivering library services. And this TQM approach will requireus to alter traditional roles, to let go of the older, and to embracenew perspectives and new behaviors because all in an effort toimprove their products and services in the eyes of those whoconsume them.

Additionally, libraries are information service organization wherethe customer contact takes place daily. Since the core of TQM iscontinuous quality improvement based on customer requirementsand since the customer is the center of library operation, it mayvery well be the case that TQM is the most appropriatemanagerial methodology applicable to today's libraries. For thesuccessful implementation of TQM in libraries, Riggs (1992)contends that long-range planning and proper staff training arethe keys and that the duration of the first phase (staff training)must be at least two to three years. Leaders also will need tomaintain their commitment, keep the process visible, providenecessary support and hold people accountable for results.(Thomas Packard, 1996)

Finally, TQM can be a powerful technique for unleashingemployee creativity and potential, reducing bureaucracy and costsand of course improving service to clients and community. Riggs(1992) then declares that "The quality movement is here to stay."

In a nutshell, it can be said that there is no single approach



REFERENCES

1. . Total Quality Management: The Information Business: Key Issue 92.Hertfordshire: University of Hertfordshire Press, 1993.

2 .Allan, F. C. Benchmarking: Practical aspects for information professional. Special Libraries 84 (1993): 123-128

3. Armstrong, B. libraries around Australia. The Australian Library Journal 40 (1991): 349-354.

4. Arthur, G. Customer-service training in academic libraries. Journal of Academic Librarianship 20 (1994): 219-222.

5. Barnard, Susan B. Implementing Total Quality Management: A Model for Research Libraries. Journal of LibraryAdministration 18, 1/2(1993): 57-70.

6. Barron, D. D. Site-based management: Background, research and implications for school libraries media specialists.School Library Media Activities Monthly 10, 6(1994): 48-50

7. Besemer, S. P., Dorsey, S. B., Kittle, B. L and Niles. C. M. Managing the academic library through teamwork: a casestudy. Journal of Library Administration 18, J (1993): 69-89.

8. Besemer, S.P et.al. Managing the Academic Library Through Teamwork: A Case Study.Journal of Library Administration 18, 3/4(1993): 69-89

9. Boelke, J. H. Quality Improvement in Libraries: Total Quality Management and Related Approaches.Advances in Librarianship 19, (1995): 43-79.

10. Brockman, J. R. Just another management fad? The implications of TQM for library and information services.

Aslib Proceedings 44 7/8 (1992) : 283-288.

11. Brophy, Pand Coulling, K. Quality Management for Information and Library Managers. London: Aslib, 1996.

12. Butcher. K.S. Total Quality Management: The Oregon State University Library's Experience.Journal of Library Administration 18, 1/2(1993): 45-56.

13. Clack, M. E. Organizational development and TQM: The Harvard College Library' experience. Journal of LibraryAdministration 17, 1/2 (1993): 63-75

14. Clack, M.E. Organizational Development and TQM: The Harvard College Library's Experience. Journal of LibraryAdministration 18, 1/2(1993): 29-43.

15. Dixson, L. The Five Elements to TQM.

http://academic.emporia.edu/smithwil/s98mg423/EJAwebs/dixoeja.html

16. Dougherty. Richard. M. TQM: Is It The Real Thing? The Journal of Academic Librarianship (1992): 3

17. Drake, M.A. Technological Innovation and Organizational Change. Journal of Library Administration 19, 3/4(1993): 39-53.

18. Ernest A. Dimattia. Jr. Total Quality Management and servicing users through remote technology.The Electronic Library 11,3(1993): 187-191.

19. Eugene E. Matysek, Jr. Total Quality Management in the Defense Fuel Supply Center: Issues and Observations.Journal of Library Administration 18, 1/2(1993): 183-190.



20. Fatrah Abdul Samad. Total Quality Management in Malaysian Schools. M.A diss.. Petaling Jaya : Management Centre,International Islamic University Malaysia, 1997.

21. Fischer, W. W. and Reel, L. B. Total Quality Management (TQM) in a Hospital Library: Identifying ServiceBenchmarks. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 80 (1992): 347-352

22. Fitch, D.K, Thomason, J., Wells, E. W. Turning the Library Upside Down: reorganization Using Total Quality ManagementPrinciples. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 19, 5(1993): 294-299.

23. Ford-Foster, B. A and Glaviano, C. Managing Quality at Bowling Green: a Case Study. Advances in LibraryAdministration and Organization 13 (1995): 163-193

24 Frank, R. C. Total Quality Management: The Federal Government Experience.Journal of Library Administration 18, 1/2(1993): 171-181/24.

25. Gapen, D.K., Hampton, Q. and Schmitt, S. TQM: The Director's Perspective. Journal of Library Administration 18,

1/2(1993): 15-28.

26. Gitlow, U.S and Gitlow, S.J. Total Quality Management in Action. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1994.

27. Jurow, S. and Barnard, Susan B. Introduction : TQM Fundamentals and Overview of Contents. Journal of Library

Administration 18. 1/2(1993): 1-13.

28. Jurow, S. Tools for Measuring and Improving Performance. Journal of Library Administration 18, 1/2(1993): 113-126.

29. Kinnell. M. Quality Management in Librarianship and Information Work Worldwide 1996/97. London : BowkerSaur, 1996-1997.

30. Kojima, A. M. "Total Quality Management in Academic Libraries: A Literature Review".http://pobox.upenn.edu/-easia/TAMAK.html

31. Lawes, A. The Benefits of Quality Management to the Library and Information Services Profession. Special Libraries

84,3 (1993): 142-145.

32. Leonard, P. On my mind: This too shall pass, or we will. Journal of Academic Librarianship 18 (1992): 304-305.

33. Loney, Tim and Bellefontaine, A. TQM Training: The Library Service Challenge. Journal of Library Administration

18, 1/2(1993): 85-95.

34. Lubans, J. Sherlock's dog, or managers and mess finding. Library Administration Management 8 (1994): 139-149.

35. Manning, H. Total Quality Management: Not Just. Another Flavor of the Month1.. Bulletin of the American Society forInformation Science (1994): 9.

36. Masters, D. G. Total Quality Management in Libraries.hup://ericir.syr.edu/ithome/digests/tqm. html

37. Miller, R.G and Stearns, B. Quality Management for Today's Academic Library, College & Research Library News 55

(1994): 406-409, 422.

38. Muir, H. J. Identifying Benchmarking Partners: Special Libraries. Cincinnati: Library Benchmarking International, 1993.

39. Mullen, J.A. Total Quality Management: A Mindset and Method to Stimulate Change. Journal of Library

Administration 18, 3/4(1993): 91-107.

40. Pearson, C.M. Aligning TQM and Organizational Learning. Special Libraries 84 (1993): 147-149.

41. Penniman, W. D. Shaping the Future. The Council on Library Resources helps to fund change. Library Journal 117, 17(1992): 41-44



42. Peterson, B.J. TQM at 3M: Planning with Customer and Staff Input. Bulletin of American Society for InformationScience (1994): 14-16.

43. Pilling, Stella. Putting the customer first: total quality and customer service at the British Library Document Supply

Center. Asian Libraries 6, 1/2(1997): 6-13.

44. Riggs, D.E. Strategic Qua/ity Management in Libraries. Advances in Librarianship 16 (1992) : 93-105.

45. Riggs, D.F.. TQM: Quality Improvement in New Clothes. College & Research Libraries 53, 6 (1992): 481-482.

46. Rowley, J. Implementing TQM for library services: the issues. Aslib Proceedings 48 1 (1996): 17-21.

47. Shaughnessy, T.W. Total Quality Management: Its Application in North American Research Libraries. AACRL

(1995): 1-5.

48. Sheridan, Bruce M. Changing Service Quality in America. Quality Progress 26, 2(1993): 97-99.

49. Sirkin, A. Farber. Customer Service: Another Side of TQM. Journal of Library Administration 1 8, 1/2 (1993): 71-83.

50. Spang, Lothar. A Staff-Generated Cross-Training Plan for Academic Reference Librarians: The TQM Approach at Wayne

State University Libraries. Reference Services Review 24, 2 (1996): 77-85.

51. St. Clair, G. Total Quality Management in Information Services. London : Bowker Saur, 1997.

52. Strub, M. Z. Quality at warp speed: Reengineering at AT&T. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science

20(1994): 17-19.

53. Stuart, C. and Drake, M.A. TQM in Research Libraries. Special Libraries 84 (1993): 131-136.

54. Sullivan, M. and Siggins, J. A. Total Quality Management Initiatives in Higher Education. Journal of LibraryAdministration 18, 1/2(1993): 157-169.

55. Thomas Packard, D.S.W. TQM and Organizational Change and Development.http://www.improve.org.html

56. Towler, C.F. Problem Solving Teams in a Total Quality Management. Environment. Journal of Library Administration18, 1/2(1993): 97-112.

57. Veaner. A. Paradigm lost, paradigm regained? A persistent personnel issue in academic librarianship, II. College &Research Libraries 55 (1994): 389-402.

58. Warnken, et. al. "Beyond the survey: Using market research techniques to improve library service and collections" InAcademic Libraries: Achieving Excellence and Research Libraries. Chicago: Association of College and ResearchLibraries, 1992.

59. Young, V. Focus on Focus Group. College & Research Library News 54 (1993): 391-394.



implementation of total quality management...

Documents