6 knowledge creation qm
Post on 24-Jan-2016
9 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
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: muhammad.assif@gmail.com
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
Total Quality Management 667
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
Total Quality Management 669
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
Total Quality Management 671
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.
Total Quality Management 675
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.
Total Quality Management 677
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.
top related