6 knowledge creation qm

Knowledge creation through quality management

Muhammad Asifa∗, Henk J. de Vriesb and Niaz Ahmadc

aCollege of Business Administration, Prince Sultan University, Riyadh, Kingdom of SaudiArabia; bRotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University, PO Box 1738, Room T10-42,NL 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; cNational Textile University, Faisalabad, Pakistan

Organisations use quality management (QM) to improve process performance.However, further improvements and business excellence require acquisition andintegration of new knowledge organisation-wide. It is a challenge for managers todesign and execute QM practices so that they create new knowledge as well. Thisarticle shows how six QM practices (continuous improvement, statistical qualitycontrol, customer satisfaction management, process-improvement techniques,individual learning, and new product development methods) can contribute to the fourtypes of knowledge-creating processes (socialisation, externalisation, combination,and internalisation). Such knowledge can be created through multiple channels and atvarious organisational levels. This article is new in describing the dynamics of howknowledge can be created through QM. This is relevant for both researchers andpractitioners.

Keywords: quality management; knowledge creation; heterogeneous knowledge;continuous improvement; exploration; exploitation

1. Introduction

Interest in quality management (QM) has increased in many sectors because it is known to

improve organisational performance. It is widely believed that the underlying practices in

QM are essential for effective management and help to generate a sustainable competitive

advantage. While QM can improve the performance of existing organisational processes,

dynamic market conditions also require an organisation to explore and innovate (Owlia,

2010; Yang & Wei, 2010). Organisations need to simultaneously exploit existing

resources and explore new skills, capabilities, and resources to meet emerging challenges.

Deming’s (1994) ‘System of Profound Knowledge’ also strongly emphasised knowl-

edge creation: ‘Best efforts and hard work, not guided by new knowledge, only dig deeper

the pit we are already in’ (p. 1). While QM has been in practice for a long time, the ques-

tion arises of which underlying processes lead to performance improvement, and how

knowledge can be created through QM practices. The existing literature shows a

tension between QM and knowledge creation. For example, Benner and Tushman

(2003) noted that QM practices facilitate the exploitation of existing resources but

dampen exploration, a knowledge-oriented function. This is because the development of

systematic structures by QM could cause rigidity and bureaucracy, and so hamper inno-

vation. Furthermore, the link between QM and knowledge creation has not been developed

in concrete terms (Choo, Linderman, & Schroeder, 2007; Linderman, Schroeder, Zaheer,

Liedtke, & Choo, 2004), and there is a need to understand how knowledge creation can

take place through QM practices.

# 2013 Taylor & Francis

∗Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

Total Quality Management, 2013

Vol. 24, No. 6, 664–677, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2013.791097

Using the well-known theory of knowledge creation (Nonaka, 1994; Nonaka & Takeu-

chi, 1995), this article examines how various QM practices could create new knowledge

and give rise to a dynamic QM system capable of addressing the emerging challenges.

This article challenges the notion that QM practices are beneficial for organisations in

stable contexts, but not for knowledge and innovation-oriented contexts (Benner &

Tushman, 2003). We argue that QM practices can be designed to create knowledge.

The main contribution of this article is twofold. First, it provides an elaborate account

of knowledge creation through QM practices and second, it shows how QM practices

can be designed and executed for knowledge creation. The next section of this article

describes the theory of knowledge creation. Section 3 examines the role of QM practices

in knowledge creation. The article ends with conclusions and discussion.

2. Theory of knowledge creation

Nonaka (1994) and Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) showed that knowledge is created

through interactions between tacit and explicit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is context-

specific and difficult to transfer (Nonaka, 1994). It involves both cognitive and technical

aspects. The cognitive element involves mental models that help to understand situations,

whereas the technical aspect relates to skills that apply to the context. For instance, in cus-

tomer service understanding customers’ problems through listening to them is the cogni-

tive element, whereas the skills required for handling complaints and fixing problems are

the technical aspects of tacit knowledge (Linderman et al., 2004). Explicit knowledge, on

the other hand, can be codified and transferred through formal languages and formal

modes of communication. Examples include procedures, specifications, formulas, and

documented best practices.

Theory of knowledge creation contends that knowledge is created through a continu-

ous process in which tacit and explicit knowledge interact and give rise to new knowledge.

The four types of knowledge-creating processes are socialisation, externalisation, combi-

nation, and internalisation (Table 1).

Socialisation is the process of sharing experiences and thereby conveying tacit knowl-

edge from one person to another. Thus, a more experienced person shares mental models

and technical skills with others. This interaction occurs without dialogue or use of

language and involves observation, imitation, and practice. It requires face-to-face inter-

action and allows people to understand and incorporate feelings in the knowledge-sharing

process. Socialisation creates new knowledge through shared experiences (tacit knowl-

edge) and is important for a firm for three reasons. First, it enables employees to share

experiences and know-how. Second, it improves communication, decision-making and

productivity within the firm, and third, it is a powerful source of sustainable competitive

advantage because tacit knowledge is difficult to imitate.

Table 1. Knowledge creation from interactions between tacit and explicit knowledge.

To

Tacit knowledge Explicit knowledge

From Tacit knowledge Socialisation ExternalisationExplicit knowledge Internalisation Combination

Sources: Nonaka (1994) and Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995).

Total Quality Management 665

Externalisation involves converting tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge. The

purpose of externalisation is to make tacit knowledge understandable to others. Since

tacit knowledge is difficult to store, organisations usually transform it into explicit knowl-

edge. This is carried out by conceptualising the subjective knowledge of employees into

forms such as metaphors, analogies, hypotheses, procedures, manuals, and models.

Through externalisation, organisations can disseminate tacit knowledge throughout the

organisation. Storytelling is seen as one form of externalisation whereby less formal

tacit knowledge is made more explicit (Huff, Floyd, Sherman, & Terjesen, 2009).

Combination is the process of combining different types of explicit knowledge into a

new whole. Existing explicit knowledge is re-catalogued and expanded into new explicit

knowledge, for example, when a controller puts together information from across a corpor-

ation and creates a financial report (Huff et al., 2009). Knowledge creation through com-

bination also takes place during discussions and meetings where bodies of explicit

knowledge are combined for decision-making.

Internalisation is the process of converting explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge.

For explicit knowledge to become tacit, it helps if the knowledge is verbalised or dia-

grammed into documents, manuals, or oral stories (Linderman et al., 2004). Internalisation

could be defined as ‘learning by doing’. For example, when explicit knowledge is shared,

employees internalise the information, extend their own knowledge and, in many cases,

reframe their own tacit knowledge (Huff et al., 2009).

Knowledge creation, thus, takes place through interactions between explicit and tacit

knowledge, also called the knowledge spiral. In this way, it disseminates from individual

knowledge into organisational knowledge. The different forms of knowledge, resulting

from interplay, transformation, amplification, and (horizontal and vertical) dissemination,

are referred to as heterogeneous knowledge. Depending on the mode of creation, hetero-

geneous knowledge can take the form of work instructions, procedures, manuals, mental

models, concepts, analogies, metaphors, and personal stories. It can exist at the strategic

level where it is needed for devising and formulating strategy, at the tactical level

where it is required for devising business plans, and at the operational level where it is

embedded in day-to-day operations and routines. The creation of heterogeneous knowl-

edge is important for two reasons. First, whenever knowledge undergoes conversion

from any of these four knowledge-creating processes, it is amplified and moves to a

higher ontological level. Employees gain greater insights and a higher level of understand-

ing and this knowledge is then disseminated at group, organisational, and inter-organis-

ational levels (Nonaka, 1994; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). Second, while knowledge is

an important organisational resource and determinant of sustainable competitive advan-

tage (Grant, 1996), heterogeneity of resources is another determinant of sustainable com-

petitive advantage (Barney, 1991). Heterogeneous knowledge could, thus, provide a

competitive advantage that hinges on QM.

3. The role of QM practices in knowledge creation

In this chapter, we examine the literature on the contribution of QM to knowledge creation

and distinguish between the two streams of literature. One focuses on the possible role of

QM in knowledge creation, the other addresses the dual role of QM in knowledge creation

and effective utilisation of resources. We then explore the possible contribution of six QM

practices to the four types of knowledge-creating processes: socialisation, externalisation,

combination, and internalisation.

666 M. Asif et al.

The first stream of literature examines possible links between QM and knowledge

management, and whether QM practices lead to knowledge creation in an organisation.

Alazmi and Zairi (2003), for instance, summarised the critical success factors of knowl-

edge management. Many of these factors are also elements of QM, which shows that

QM and knowledge management share some common elements and can be integrated

to improve organisational performance. Adamson (2005) argued that TQM and knowledge

management are interlinked and that knowledge management could be the next generation

of TQM. Research by Choo et al. (2007), Linderman et al. (2004), and Linderman, Schroe-

der, and Sanders (2010) focuses on the possible link of QM and Six Sigma with knowledge

creation. Their findings suggest that QM practices can be integrated with knowledge-creat-

ing processes. Similarly, a number of publications have explored the relationship of QM

and knowledge management from a business performance perspective. For instance, Tsai,

Li, Lee, and Tung (2011) found that knowledge management moderates the effect of enter-

prise resource planning on business performance. Molina, Montes, and Fuentes (2004)

found that the implementation of TQM and ISO 9000 can enhance the transferability of

knowledge among different functions. Other publications addressing the relationship

between QM and knowledge creation include Hsu and Shen (2005), and Stewart and

Waddell (2008). The overall message of these studies is that QM practices can positively

contribute to an organisation’s knowledge management initiatives.

The second stream of literature goes beyond the exploration of the possible relation

between QM and knowledge management and investigates the effect of QM on knowledge

creation and effective utilisation of resources. Noteworthy examples in this stream include

Benner and Tushman (2003), Kim, Kumar, and Kumar (2012), and Zhang, Linderman, and

Schroeder (2012). Benner and Tushman (2003) argued that QM practices facilitate the

‘exploitation’, i.e. effective utilisation of organisational resources but dampen the

‘exploration’, i.e. creation of knowledge leading to innovation. Zhang et al. (2012)

argued that QM practices have two types of orientations: ‘quality exploitation’ and

‘quality exploration’. The former produces the best results in a stable environment,

whereas the latter is more successful in a dynamic environment. Kim et al. (2012)

provide empirical evidence of a positive relationship between QM practices and several

forms of innovation.

These two streams of literature provide a better understanding of the relation between

QM and knowledge creation. However, research has yet to establish the dynamics of

knowledge creation through QM practices. This article explores the role of QM in knowl-

edge creation. More specifically, we show how six QM practices can contribute to knowl-

edge creation. These practices, the reason for their inclusion, and some core sources are

summarised in Table 2.

3.1 Knowledge creation through continuous improvement (CI)

CI is the core element of a QMS (Dean & Bowen, 1994). An organisation’s growth

depends on how it achieves improvements along various dimensions of strategy and oper-

ations. The true challenge for organisations is to foster CI from multiple channels and at

various organisational levels. During CI, knowledge creation from socialisation (tacit to

tacit) results when management forms teams and promotes teamwork to achieve improve-

ments. Examples include quality circles and kaizen (Imai, 1986), on-the-job-training,

group problem-solving, and small-group activities. These QM practices hinge on exten-

sive teamwork to bring about CI. Augier, Shariq, and Vendelø (2001) and Choo et al.

(2007) have stressed the need to develop an environment that stimulates teamwork. For


example, Japanese organisations promote knowledge transfer through socialisation by

designing open space offices (Yoshihara, 1977) that stimulate frequent interaction

among employees. These QM practices provide an important means of knowledge cre-

ation through socialisation.

Knowledge creation from externalisation occurs when tacit knowledge is converted

into explicit knowledge. Organisations retain explicit knowledge in the form of rules,

directives, manuals, procedures, work instructions, and checklists. Externalisation offers

a useful way to integrate experience-based, tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge.

This allows employees to develop conceptualisation of knowledge and to make it acces-

sible to more people, paving the way for organisation-wide CI. Management reviews and

upgrades of management manuals, procedures, and task-specific work instructions are

examples of externalisation and bring about CI at strategic, tactical, and operational

Table 2. Illustrative QM practices and their literature base.

QM practice Reason for inclusion Supporting literature

CI CI is one of the main pillars of QMand requires organisations toseek, create, utilise, andassimilate knowledge on acontinuous basis. CI andknowledge management,therefore, go hand in hand

Alavi and Leidner (2001), Anderson,Rungtusanatham, and Schroeder(1994), Choo et al. (2007), Deming(1994), Linderman et al. (2004),Rungtusanatham, Forza, Filippini,and Anderson (1998)

SQC ‘Fact-based decision-making’ is oneof the underlying principles ofQM. SQC helps to achieve this bycollecting, analysing, and usingdata for such decision-making

Ahire, Golhar, and Waller (1996),Choo et al. (2007), Flynn, Schroeder,and Sakakibara (1995), Lindermanet al. (2004)

Customersatisfactionmanagement

Listening to customers duringdesign and development, andimproving after sales service andoverall customer experiencerequire knowledge creation andassimilation on a continuous basis

Ahire et al. (1996), Dean and Bowen(1994), Rungtusanatham et al.(1998), Samson and Terziovski(1999)

Process-improvementpractices

Process management is aimed atimproving process performancefor economic, environmental, andsocial benefits. Since processimprovement requires state-of-the-art knowledge, it is aknowledge-oriented function

Choi and Eboch (1998), Flynn et al.(1995), Rungtusanatham et al.(1998), Saraph, Benson, andSchroeder (1989), Sharma (2006)

Individual learning Individual learning is pivotal for CI,knowledge creation, and for theoverall QM system of anorganisation. Deming’s system ofprofound knowledge stronglyemphasises individual learning

Anderson et al. (1994), Deming (1994),Rungtusanatham et al. (1998)

Product/servicedesign methods

Excellence and innovation inproduct/service design requiresthis function to be knowledge-intensive. Therefore, knowledgecreation must be integrated in theQM system of an organisation

Ahire et al. (1996), Curkovic, Melynk,Calantone, and Handfield (2000),Flynn et al. (1995), Saraph et al.(1989)

668 M. Asif et al.

levels. Other examples of knowledge creation through externalisation include standardis-

ation, best-practices manuals based on employees’ experiences, and visual management

whereby employees make process improvements explicit and more visible based on

their tacit knowledge.

Knowledge creation from combination (explicit to explicit) takes place in management

reviews where managers combine data from various sources to make informed decisions.

Combination provides a means to improve products and services by channelling data and

information among customer service, R&D, production, and other organisational func-

tions. The synthesis of knowledge based on information from multiple channels facilitates

a pragmatic approach towards problem-solving and CI. Other examples of knowledge cre-

ation through combination include exchange of information among departments, individ-

uals, teams, and with suppliers. Regular upgrades of procedures and work instructions

based on information from different functions and data sources are also examples of CI

based on combination.

Knowledge creation through internalisation (explicit to tacit) takes place when

employees use procedures and work instructions to execute their tasks. Internalisation

leads to knowledge creation in multiple ways. First, task execution leads to learning by

doing and to enhanced comprehension of processes. The cognitive element of tacit knowl-

edge (i.e. mindful task execution) allows individuals to reframe their knowledge, leading

to conceptual clarity and knowledge creation at a higher level. Second, execution of pro-

cesses and QM practices over a period of time leads to the development of routines. Rou-

tines are embedded in the dynamic interaction of multiple knowledge sources and are more

firm specific and less transferable, thus leading to a sustained competitive advantage

(Peng, Schroeder, & Shah, 2008).

3.2 Knowledge creation through statistical quality control (SQC)

SQC is a pivotal element of QM as it deals with data collection and analysis in order to

improve process performance. The dominant mode of knowledge creation in SQC is com-

bination where data are collected, analysed, and compared with past data and emerging

trends. However, knowledge creation in an SQC system can also take place from other

interactions.

Knowledge creation from socialisation takes place during group discussions on

process performance and SQC results. Such discussions usually involve people from oper-

ations, design, engineering, and QM and are aimed at finding ways to improve processes

based on collected data. The use of SQC tools and techniques involves both cognitive and

tacit elements. The cognitive element is about thinking, reasoning, remembering, compar-

ing, and interpreting results, whereas the tacit element is about executing tasks. While the

cognitive element leads to enhanced understanding of SQC, the tacit element leads to more

efficient task execution. The cognitive element comes from sharing SQC knowledge

among individuals, from discussions, and from conceptualising in the form of mental

models. The tacit element, on the other hand, derives from experiences, observations, imi-

tation, and practice.

Knowledge creation from externalisation occurs when SQC tools and techniques are

used for process mapping. These include control charts, histograms, scatter diagrams, Ishi-

kawa diagrams, and process flowcharts. Process mapping lies at the core of process

improvement (Benner & Tushman, 2003) and improves our understanding of processes,

and leads to a higher level of knowledge generation. Knowledge creation from combi-

nation occurs when SQC data from various processes are analysed, compared, and


merged to improve process performance and to generate a higher level understanding of

processes. Since knowledge creation from combination is based on data collected from

various organisational processes, it is critical for rational decision-making and systems

thinking. Knowledge creation from internalisation takes place during SQC routines and

process improvements based on SQC results. Conversion of explicit SQC knowledge, in

the form of instructions and procedures, to tacit knowledge leads to reframing an individ-

ual’s SQC mental models, and to an improved understanding of processes.

SQC is conventionally employed as an isolated and stand-alone process-improvement

tool. However, the above discussion shows that the use of SQC could be extended by inte-

grating it with mainstream processes and social systems of the organisation. This also

highlights the need to design an SQC system that goes beyond mere data combination.

Six Sigma is an example of SQC imbedded in a systematic approach which may lead to

knowledge creation (Linderman et al., 2010).

3.3 Knowledge creation through customer satisfaction management

Customer satisfaction management allows organisations to identify the needs and wishes

of their customers by analysing complaints and/or data from surveys (Linderman et al.,

2004). It involves people from production, engineering, operations, finance, R&D, and

sales and marketing. Knowledge creation during socialisation takes place during inter-

action with customers at various contact points, through customer feedback activities,

and during customer management activities involving teams and discussions.

Knowledge creation during externalisation occurs when employees compile records

and develop procedures and best-practices manuals related to customer satisfaction man-

agement. Such codification is required to provide future guidance and to make codified

knowledge accessible organisation-wide. Experiences can be codified in the form of

flow charts, models, and storytelling. Knowledge creation through combination takes

place when managers combine data from customer complaints, design and engineering,

operations, and marketing to understand customer-related processes and the causes of cus-

tomer-related or operations-related problems. Knowledge creation through combination

also takes place during analysis of data from customer surveys. Knowledge creation

during internalisation occurs when employees consult customer management procedures

and use this knowledge to address customer problems. Learning from training is also an

example of internalisation.

A customer satisfaction management system, therefore, can create knowledge through

multiple channels. By relying on only one mode of knowledge creation, such as combi-

nation, the organisation would be insensitive to changing customer preferences, and man-

agers would continue to focus on existing data and analysis based on combination.

Organisations employing QM practices that lead to knowledge creation are more likely

to understand the broad spectrum of their customers’ varying needs, whereas those

lacking such an infrastructure are more likely to capture only the superficial and apparent,

while missing the core and soft elements of customer needs. This point is also highlighted

by Linderman et al. (2010) who noted that managers need to create knowledge along all

dimensions of customer management.

3.4 Knowledge creation through process-improvement practices

Process-improvement techniques such as failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA), Six

Sigma, Poka yoke, Kaizen, lean, and business process reengineering can be designed

670 M. Asif et al.

and executed to create new knowledge. For instance, in FMEA, a problem analysis

requires determining the frequency of a problem, its severity and detectability. While

data regarding frequency and severity can be obtained from customer complaints, the

detectability of a problem and subsequent actions to fix it requires extensive collaboration

from design, production, marketing, and other functions. If the scope of the FMEA is too

narrow, relying solely on customer data to identify problems which are then fixed by

engineers, the analysis could overlook various possible sources of heterogeneous knowl-

edge – such as from socialisation and combination.

Six Sigma is another example which makes use of SQC, and employs a special infra-

structure of people within the organisation (Champions, Black Belts, and Green Belts, etc.)

who are experts in SQC methods. The aim of this process-improvement practice is to

reduce the number of defects in a process and to improve the overall performance of a

process. The implementation of Six Sigma is led by Black Belts who are supported by

Champions. The teamwork-oriented structure of Six Sigma provides a powerful means

for knowledge creation through socialisation. Knowledge creation from externalisation

takes place when developing a project charter, during group discussions, and when docu-

menting project knowledge (Choo et al., 2007). Knowledge creation from combination

occurs when documenting customer knowledge (Nonaka, 1994) and analysing processes

and customer-related data, and during document review. Knowledge creation from intern-

alisation takes place when employees execute a Six Sigma project, reflect on their tasks

and performance and then improve the latter. Six Sigma provides an excellent example

of heterogeneous knowledge creation. It also implies that QM practices can be designed

to create knowledge that is useful along various dimensions of an organisation.

3.5 Knowledge creation through individual learning

A number of QM practices entail enhanced individual learning. Such QM practices range

from very basic team-oriented activities at the operational level to management reviews at

the tactical level. This gives rise to knowledge creation at various organisational levels.

Kaizen, teamwork, and small-group activities promote individual learning and knowledge

creation at the operational and tactical levels through socialisation. Since socialisation

gives people the opportunity to reframe their individual knowledge, it leads to knowledge

augmentation and enhanced individual learning. Development of conceptual models, ana-

logies, and metaphors during the preparation of procedures and instructions leads to indi-

vidual learning through externalisation. Taking notes for improved understanding is

another example of externalisation. Discussions during meetings, management reviews,

and information sharing entail individual learning and new knowledge creation through

combination. Learning during task execution, during day-to-day operations, from lectures,

and training materials represents knowledge creation through internalisation. As noted

earlier, when knowledge undergoes conversion from one form to another, it is amplified

(Linderman et al., 2004). Thus, individual learning and knowledge creation from QM

can be woven together for augmented knowledge generation.

3.6 Knowledge creation through product/service design methods

Product/service design relies on the codified repositories of knowledge and the tacit

knowledge of R&D teams and others involved in this process. Since product/service

design requires state-of-the-art knowledge, it is important to embed this function in a

knowledge-intensive environment. Knowledge creation from socialisation takes place


during new product development (NPD) team meetings, brainstorming sessions, concept

generation, and interaction with customers at customer contact points. Knowledge creation

from externalisation occurs during collaborative sketching of product/service design,

model development, storytelling, formulating product development plans, and NPD pro-

cedures and manual development. Knowledge creation from combination takes place

when data and information from design and engineering, operations, customer relations,

and marketing is integrated to improve product/service design. Knowledge creation

from internalisation occurs during prototype development, product design, development,

and improvements to existing designs.

Quality function deployment (QFD) is a technique that is used to incorporate customer

requirements into product/service design. It is based on extensive teamwork and makes use

of data from different functions of an organisation. It can lead to knowledge creation

through socialisation, externalisation, combination, and internalisation. The main steps

in the QFD process are (i) discussing required features, specifications, and possible

alternatives through extensive teamwork (socialisation); (ii) making quantitative judge-

ments, such as assigning a rating to different alternatives, and using it to develop QFD

matrices (externalisation); (iii) combining data in QFD matrices to determine the best

design (combination); and (iv) using QFD as a structured and consensus-based

decision-making mechanism (internalisation).

3.7 Overview

The above discussion shows that QM practices have the potential to create new knowl-

edge. During the execution of QM practices, knowledge is created, augmented, and

moves to higher levels, i.e. individual, group, departmental, organisational, and inter-

organisational. The creation of knowledge from various QM practices is summarised in

Table 3.

The above overview shows that these six different QM practices have quite some com-

monalities in their impact on knowledge creation from socialisation, externalisation, com-

bination, and internalisation. The QM practices result in discussion and cooperation within

the company and between the company and its customers: socialisation. Good practices

are laid down in manuals, flow charts, procedures, and instructions: externalisation.

Data from different sources are combined to get aggregated information which can be

used for solving problems or underpinning decisions: combination. Moreover, QM prac-

tices result in learning and development, and in upgrading routines: internalisation. To

conclude, QM practices can lead to knowledge creation.

This may apply to different organisational functions, whether it is new product design

and development, customer management, operations, or staff training and development.

Furthermore, knowledge creation through QM practices can take place at different organ-

isational levels. For instance, SQC and process management practices can lead to knowl-

edge creation mainly at the operational level. QFD, FMEA, and management reviews can

result in knowledge creation mainly at the tactical level, and development of CI structures

and infrastructure can lead to knowledge creation not only at the strategic level but also

organisation-wide. The six QM practices each differ in their mode of knowledge creation

(i.e. through the various combinations of socialisation, externalisation, combination, and

internalisation) and level of knowledge creation (i.e. operational, tactical, and strategic),

but they all create knowledge through multiple channels. Together, each of these QM prac-

tices provides a means for organisation-wide knowledge creation.

672 M. Asif et al.

Table 3. Illustrative QM practices leading to heterogeneous knowledge creation.

QM practices

Knowledge creation from

Socialisation Externalisation Combination Internalisation

(1) CI Teamwork Management reviews Combining and exchanging dataamong departments, teams, andwith suppliers

Task execution based onprocedures

On-the-job-training Standardisation Upgrading procedures based oninformation from differentfunctions/data sources

Learning by doing

Open space offices Developing procedures andwork instruction

Decision-making based oninformation from multiple sources

Developing routines

Quality circles Revising existing proceduresGroup problem-solving Visual managementSmall-group activities Creating best-practices

manuals(2) SQC Group discussions on process

performance and SQC resultsDeveloping SQC conceptual

modelsCombining data from various

processes or SQC methods to reacha higher level of understanding ofprocesses

Executing SQC methods

Developing process flowcharts Developing SQC routines

(3) Customersatisfactionmanagement

Interaction with customers at variouscontact points

Developing or revisingprocedures for customersatisfaction management

Combining data from customers,distributors, production, etc. tosolve a problem

Executing customermanagement processes

Obtaining customer feedback Storytelling about customerexperiences

Customer management meetings;strategy formulation meetings

Learning from training

Customer management activitiesinvolving teams and discussions

Developing training manuals Combining data from customers andsurveys to develop marketing/NPDstrategy

(4) Process-improvementtechniques

Knowledge sharing among individualsduring process improvement orproblem-solving – such as duringFMEA, Poka Yoke, and reliabilitystudies

Process-improvementflowcharts

Combining data/information fromcustomers, engineering,production, and marketing to betterunderstand problems and findsolutions

Developing processimprovement routines

Process-improvementdrawings

Developing procedures based on theinformation provided in machine

Developing cognitiveschemes and mental

(Continued)

To

tal

Qu

ality

Ma

na

gem

ent

67

3

Table 3. Continued.

QM practices

Knowledge creation from

Socialisation Externalisation Combination Internalisation

manuals, and regulatory andprocess requirements

models of processimprovement byindividuals

Developing process-improvement procedures

(5) Individuallearning

Observation Developing conceptualmodels, analogies,metaphors for understandinga process or phenomenon

Discussions during decision-makingmeetings

Learning during taskexecution

Assembly of experts Taking notes Management reviews Learning from routines,lectures, and trainingmaterials

Teamwork Information sharingSmall-group activitiesKaizen

(6) NPD Brainstorming Collaborative sketching Compiling and comparing data/information from market,production, engineering, etc.

Product design anddevelopment

Teamwork involving production,engineering, and marketing

Formulating productdevelopment plans

Combining data from various sourcesduring prototype development

Prototype development

Concept generation Formulating product designdrawings

Changing product design tomeet local requirements orto incorporate changingspecifications

Interaction with customers at customercontact points

Applying QFD

NPD team meetings during the use ofQFD

Developing NPD proceduresand manuals

Developing product prototypemodels

Storytelling by those whointeract directly withcustomers or those who fixproblems

67

4M

.A

sifet

al.

4. Conclusions and discussion

QM practices such as CI, SQC, customer satisfaction management, process management

practices, individual learning, and product/service design methods can create hetero-

geneous knowledge. Knowledge generation takes place through interactions between

tacit and explicit knowledge. These interactions result in four knowledge-creating pro-

cesses: socialisation, externalisation, combination, and internalisation (Figure 1).

This knowledge creation can take place at all levels of the organisation. Knowledge

creation forms the basis for exploration. QM practices can go far beyond the pitfalls of

rigidity and bureaucracy, and may stimulate rather than hinder innovation. This article

joins the research of Linderman et al. (2004), Chong, Ooi, Lin, and Teh (2010), Choo

et al. (2007), Adamson (2005), Hsu and Shen (2005), Molina et al. (2004), Stewart and

Waddell (2008), and Zhang et al. (2012) in showing that knowledge management and

QM are inextricably linked. However, this research goes one step further in describing

the dynamics of knowledge creation through QM. In doing so, it provides a greater under-

standing of the mechanism of knowledge creation from QM practices. Our findings are

consistent with resource-based theory which states that the basis of competitive advantage

lies in the heterogeneity of resources of an organisation (Barney, 1991), and with the

knowledge-based view of firms (Grant, 1996) which emphasises the integration of knowl-

edge into organisational processes for sustainable competitive advantage.

The major limitation of this article is that knowledge creation in a QM system –

through various interactions of tacit and explicit knowledge – is a potential role. Our argu-

ments stem from the comparison of various concepts from QM and knowledge manage-

ment, and we refer to the literature which provides empirical evidence of some

relationships between knowledge creation and QM practices. However, in subsequent

research, such evidence should be gathered in a more complete and systematic way.

Future research could focus on elaborating how QM practices actually lead to knowledge

creation in an organisational setting, and on exploring and/or testing the relationship

between knowledge creation and sustainability of QM practices. Kim et al. (2012)

provide empirical evidence of a positive relationship between QM practices and several

forms of innovation, but do not provide data on the causalities of this relationship. The

combination of their findings and ours suggests that knowledge creation acts as a mediator.

This is another topic for future research. Future research should start with case studies to

better understand the process of knowledge creation from QM practices.

References

Adamson, I. (2005). Knowledge management – the next generation of TQM? Total QualityManagement and Business Excellence, 16(8–9), 987–1000.

Ahire, S., Golhar, D., & Waller, M. (1996). Development and validation of TQM implementationconstructs. Decision Sciences, 27(1), 23–56.

Figure 1. Heterogeneous knowledge creation through QM practices.


Alavi, M., & Leidner, D.E. (2001). Knowledge management and knowledge management systems:Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107–136.

Alazmi, M., & Zairi, M. (2003). Knowledge management critical success factors. Total QualityManagement and Business Excellence, 14(2), 199–204.

Anderson, J.C., Rungtusanatham, M., & Schroeder, R.G. (1994). A theory of quality managementunderlying the Deming management method. Academy of Management Review, 19(3),472–509.

Augier, M., Shariq, S.Z., & Vendelø, M.T. (2001). Understanding context: Its emergence, transform-ation and role in tacit knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(2), 125–136.

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management,17(1), 99–120.

Benner, M.J., & Tushman, M.L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: Theproductivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238–256.

Choi, T.Y., & Eboch, K. (1998). The TQM paradox: Relations among TQM practices, plant perform-ance, and customer satisfaction. Journal of Operations Management, 17(1), 59–75.

Chong, A.Y.L., Ooi, K.B., Lin, B., & Teh, P.L. (2010). TQM, knowledge management and colla-borative commerce adoption: A literature review and research framework. Total QualityManagement & Business Excellence, 21(5), 457–473.

Choo, A.S., Linderman, K.W., & Schroeder, R.G. (2007). Method and context perspectives on learn-ing and knowledge creation in quality management. Journal of Operations Management,25(4), 918–931.

Curkovic, S., Melynk, S., Calantone, R., & Handfield, R. (2000). Validating the Malcolm Baldrigenational quality award framework through structural equation modeling. InternationalJournal of Production Research, 38(4), 765–791.

Dean, J.W., & Bowen, D.E. (1994). Management theory and total quality: Improving research andpractice through theory development. Academy of Management Review, 19(3), 392–418.

Deming, W.E. (1994). The new economics for industry, government, education. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.

Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G., & Sakakibara, S. (1995). The impact of quality management practiceson performance and competitive advantage. Decision Sciences, 26(5), 659–691.

Grant, R.M. (1996). Towards a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal,17(9), 109–122.

Hsu, S., & Shen, H. (2005). Knowledge management and its relationship with TQM. Total QualityManagement and Business Excellence, 16(3), 351–361.

Huff, A.S., Floyd, S.W., Sherman, H.D., & Terjesen, S. (2009). Strategic management: Logic andaction. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.

Imai, M. (1986). Kaizen: The key to Japan’s competitive success. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.Kim, D.-Y., Kumar, V., & Kumar, U. (2012). Relationship between quality management practices

and innovation. Journal of Operations Management, 30(1–2), 295–315.Linderman, K., Schroeder, R.G., & Sanders, J. (2010). A knowledge framework underlying process

management. Decision Sciences, 41(4), 689–719.Linderman, K., Schroeder, R.G., Zaheer, S., Liedtke, C., & Choo, A.S. (2004). Integrating quality

management practices with knowledge creation processes. Journal of OperationsManagement, 22(6), 589–607.

Molina, L.M., Montes, F.J.L., & Fuentes, M.D.M.F. (2004). TQM and ISO 9000 effects on knowl-edge transferability and knowledge transfers. Total Quality Management & BusinessExcellence, 15(7), 1001–1015.

Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organisational knowledge creation. Organisation Science,5(1), 14–37.

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company. New York, NY: OxfordUniversity Press.

Owlia, M.S. (2010). A framework for quality dimensions of knowledge management systems. TotalQuality Management & Business Excellence, 21(11), 1215–1228.

Peng, D.X., Schroeder, R.G., & Shah, R. (2008). Linking routines to operations capabilities: A newperspective. Journal of Operations Management, 26(6), 730–748.

Rungtusanatham, M., Forza, C., Filippini, R., & Anderson, J.C. (1998). A replication study of atheory of quality management underlying the Deming management method: Insights froman Italian context. Journal of Operations Management, 17(1), 77–95.

676 M. Asif et al.

Samson, D., & Terziovski, M. (1999). The relationship between total quality management practicesand operational performance. Journal of Operations Management, 17(4), 393–409.

Saraph, J.V., Benson, G., & Schroeder, R.G. (1989). An instrument for measuring the critical factorsof quality management. Decision Sciences, 20(4), 810–829.

Sharma, B. (2006). Quality management dimensions, contextual factors and performance: Anempirical investigation. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 17(9),1231–1244.

Stewart, D., & Waddell, D. (2008). Knowledge management: The fundamental component for deliv-ery of quality. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 19(9), 987–996.

Tsai, M.T., Li, E.Y., Lee, K.W., & Tung, W.H. (2011). Beyond ERP implementation: The moderat-ing effect of knowledge management on business performance. Total Quality Management &Business Excellence, 22(2), 131–144.

Yang, C.L., & Wei, S.T. (2010). Modelling the performance of CoP in knowledge management.Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 21(10), 1033–1045.

Yoshihara, H. (1977). The Japanese multinational. Long Range Planning, 10(April), 41–45.Zhang, D., Linderman, K., & Schroeder, R.G. (2012). The moderating role of contextual factors on

quality management practices. Journal of Operations Management, 30(1–2), 12–23.


Copyright of Total Quality Management & Business Excellence is the property of Routledge and its content

may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express

written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

6 knowledge creation qm

Documents