measuring quality management level with reference...

Annals of Library and Information Studies 49,4; 2002; 141-163.

MEASURING QUALITY MANAGEMENT LEVEL WITH REFERENCE TO ISO 9000 ANDTQM FOR SPECIAL LIBRARIES IN INDIA *

RKVermaNational Institute of Science Communicationand Information Resources (NISCAIR, formerly INSDOC)14, Satsang Vihar Marg,New Delhi

The main objective of the study is to assess the.impact of six factors viz., status of library; size ofLIS units; sector of organization (administrativecontrol); type of organization (major fields ofactivities); resources; and quality awareness level(as independent variables) on QualityManagement Level (OML) of special libraries inIndia. The QML is represented by nine keyactivities of libraries viz., Commitment bymanagement/leadership; Education & Training;Services standards; Processes standards;'Customers' survey; Quality manuals; suggestion/feedback systems; Quality circles; and Individual·ethics for management and learning treated asdependent variables. In the. study, the empiricaldata was collected through a questionnaire froma sample population of speciallibraries.in India.A· TQM based approach was followed by usingmodified form of Et,Jropean, Quality Model.Presents the findings on QML and its variationsamong special libraries in India and establishesknowledge on associative patterns between QMLand six factors. The results of the survey revealthat (or proper performance measurement of LISsector, OML depends upon a TQM orientedinstrument. Concludes that QML is closelyassociated with innovation and reorganizationprocess rather than streamlining and securingroutine functions .and processes. which would bea conservative approach for successful QualityManagement in libraries.

INTRODUCTION

Libraries and Information Centres have a longtradition of providing information products andservices to its customers. The main ingredientviz. information has been regarded as a keyresource to introduce innovation and increasethe effectiveness of the organisations includingLIS units. There was a time when it was sufficientto perfqrm traditional functions such asacquisition, processing and supplying readingmaterials to the users on request. The earlierscenario has drastically changed now, andvarious factors Iike- introduction of Information

Technology (IT); resource constraints ininstitutions including budget cut; ever increasingexpectations of users and complexity ofavailability of widely scattered material, havecontributed to this state of affairs.

The quality of products and services has alsobeen maintained by following national andinternational standards. However, there has beena change in the earlier connotation of qUC:ilityasa static concept which was restricted to theproduction or some aspects of service andconfined to the technical aspects only. Thecurrent perception of quality is any activity whichchanges with time, environment, customerreaction and other factors. This has happeneddue to the rapid evolutionary process of the

*Based on authors Ph.D. thesis entitled "QualityManagementApproaches in LIS Sector in Indiawith particularReference to ISO 9000 StandardsandTQM Concepts"

Vol 49 No 4 December 2002

RK Verma

principles and practice of quality management(aM) during the last twenty-five years. In thisprocess, four fairly discrete stages or levels viz.Inspection; Ouality Control (OC); OualityAssurance (OA); and Total quality Management(TOM) have been identified. Despite thisdevelopment, the concept of quality is vieweddifferently within the professionals in LIS sectors.For one group it is just another manage!T1entconcept with more emphasis on bureaucraticnature than real term use. Still another groupfeels that it is an effective management conceptonly in industrial sector and the same cannot beapplied to LIS sector. However, a report publishedby FID [1] describing two case studies and furthersurvey of literature reveals that probably thecorrect interpretation, commitment and propercommunication among professionals and positiveattitude towards adoption of the same are themain factors for its success.

The overall effect of above factors lead to thesituation when a large number of informationproducts and services remain underutilized andin some cases even fully unutilized. Keeping thisin view and the benefits of OM standards asmentioned above, it becomes appropriate to takestock of the situation in the present system whichwill also reveal the approaches followed forimprovement in quality of not only the productsand services but the management itself, in short,the quality management (OM).

The above introduction leads to the basicquestion which is posed to the professionals.What approaches on OM are being followedcurrently by the Indian libraries particularly thespecial libraries? It is high time to initiatesystematic efforts towards achieving the sameparticularly in view of success of ISO 9000certified industrial sectors and a few in LIS sectorin the Western countries. With a view to findingan answer to these questions a fresh look intothe current status of OM approaches is required.

QUALITY MANAGEMENT APPROACHES

Within OM, a variety of OM approaches in theform of standards, concepts and philosophieshave been evolved. These standards are

- practice-oriented tools whose basic tunctionsmay vary from creating and sustaining confidence

in a customer-supplier relationship to providinga systematic approach to OM. In general,institutions conform to a large part of therequirements of its own standards, by adoptingmethods that are usually informal and tooperson-dependent. Therefore, conforming to therequirements of ISO 9000 standards would meanidentifying those parts of the systems that arenon-conforming, and then making the entiresystem formal and well understood bydocumentation and training. The ISO 9000standards, though, assure quality throughrigorous set of requirements specified by theinstitutions themselves, the element of itsconsistency and continuity is achieved byfollowing TOM's philosophy and techniques whichis the ultimate aim for any progressive institution.All institutions follow some OM approach includingthese two extreme approaches, however themajority may not be following either of these inits totality for any reason.

Quality Management Level (QML)

The above account may lead to the impressionthat adoption of quality standards in the form ofISO 9000 series is very important for the librarymanagers to follow. However, misinterpretationof quality standards requirement and claim thatit is not the prerequisite to lead to TQM pathultimately [2] and other criticism prevailing in thisfield [3] may act as barrier in following these QMapproaches for quality management in LIS units.With this assumption an attempt has been madeto find out the solution to the problem, by a fieldsurvey of select special libraries in India. Forassessing the OM approach as adopted by IndianLIS Units, the concept of Quality ManagementLevel (OML) has been followed as used earlierin a paper by Johannsen [4] and a FrD report byBang[1]. This concept of QML has opened a newdimension in assessing quality managementapproaches systematically. In essence, thisconcept is concerned with the efforts pursued toachieve quality targets and represent as anindicator of a few well recognized key .activitiestowards quality improvement.

Johannsen adds a new dimension in the field of

quality management approaches in LIS sector byintroducing the conceptofOualityManagementLevel (OML) aS8Pplicabletoiibraryservices. He

Ann Lib Int" Stu

explains that QML can be regarded as predictorof quality and adds that QM is the predecessorof quality itself. Theoretically, QML can be definedas the level of efforts by which a library seeks toachieve its quality goals. Regarding QML it isfurther clarified that there are situations when alibrary scoring high on quality (e.g. measured interms of high customer satisfaction rate) but lowin QML. This may indicate negative futurechanges in the library's quality level. On thecontrary, a high QML for a library with poor qualityresults argues well in the future.

Within quality management theory two principalframeworks have been developed to enableidentification, specification, and measurement ofa company's QML: ISO 9000, and Total qualityManagement (TQM). In the ISO 9000 frameworkthe assessment of QML is based on therequirements of the ISO standards on QM:Certification' here is a measure of a company'sQML. TQM is a broader framework than ISO9000. The theoretical background of the TQMconcept is presented in the works of Deming[5], and Dahlgaard [6]. The evaluation schemesand criteria of national and international qualityawards like the Malcolm Baldrige Quality award,the Deming Prize and the European QualityAward provide practical interpretations lfndinstruments to measure QML· in a TQMperspective. QML is here expressed as sum ofscores on different criteria.

Keeping the above in view, an atfempt has beenmade

1. To know the current status of QMapproaches in Special* LIS units in Indiathrough field survey

2. To know the quality awareness level among·library/information science professionalheads of special LIS units in India throughfield survey

MEASURING QUALITY MANAGEMENT LEVEL

3. To find correlations, if any, between sixidentified factors (independent variables)and nine key activities representing QualityManagement Levels (QMLs) (dependentvariables) using questionnaires' data.,

These factors are:

(i) Status of library (Information work level)

(ii) Size of LIS unit (Number of employees inlibrary)

(Hi) Sector of organization (on the basis ofadministrative control)

(iv) Type of organization (on the basis of majorfield of activities)

(v) Quality Awareness Level

(vi) Resources ~th following five sub-factors

Academic qualifications

Professional qualifications

Experience

Year of inceptLon (Age of theorganization)

Library's annual average, budget

and the key activities representing QMLsunder study are:

a} Commitment by Management!Leadership

b} Education and Training

c} Services standards

*Special units means libraries/Information services units in major metropolitan cities viz. Delhi, Mumbai,Chennai, Bangalore, and Kolkata as per the following criteria:

Private and public secturs (including service sector)R&D units/institutes of S&T nature serving industries' needs explicitlyLibraries (from non-metropolitans also) already known to be ISO 9000 certified

Vol 49 No 4 December 2002 143

R K Verma

d) Processes standards

e) Customers' survey

fi) Quality manuals

g) Suggestion/feedback systems

h) Quality circles

i) Individual's ..working ethics andlearning

With the above six factors (independentvariables) and three Quality Management Levels(dependent variables), following null hypothesisare tested

(i) Status of LIS unit in .terms of informationwork level (advanced, modern or traditional)is not associated with Quality ManagementLevel (QML)

(ii) There is noa.ssociatio~between size(Number of employees in LIS unit) and QML

(iii) There is no association between sector oforganisation and QML

(iv) There is no association betw~en type oforganisation and QML

(v) There is no association between qualityAwareness Level and QML

(vi) There is no association betw~en resources(including human and financial types) ofLIS units and QML

NATURE OF THE STUDY

The main objective of the study IS to assess theimpact of various factors on Quality ManagementLevel (QML) of special libraries in India. Thisassessment of a given library's QML i'3J complexand demanding evaluation task and isrepresented by certain key activities of libraries.One library's strength may be quality planningemphasizing definition of quality goals,objectives, and standards while another mayfocus on active collection of information oncustomers needs and preferences. Within the

144

total quality management tradition a normativeframework for evaluating QML has beendeveloped by Deming, in his so called 14 points.These 14 points provide criteria by which anyonein the organization may measure theperformance of management as to qualitymanagement giving everyone a basis by whichto answer the question: "How is the QML of thisparticular library?" As a consequence of thegrowing awareness of the importance of quality,a situation is emerging where qualitymanagement is no longer an exclusivemanagement concept for the few but a commonfeature and everyday necessity of a librarymanagement and administrative programme. Thegrowing importance of the quality issue createsneed to understand how QML is associated with

different factors. The aim is to Rresent findingson QML and its variations among special librariesin India and to establish knowledge onassociation patterns between QML and a numberof factors as independent variables. For thispurpose, the empirical data is taken from thequestionnaire's survey of sample of speciallibraries population in India.

9uestionnaire's Design

:rhe main criteria was to include all basic

concepts reflecting the TQM philosophy and ISO9000 standard. Within this framework, it wasintented to divide the questionnaire's design into4 parts viz. Section A: Factual Data; Section B :General Issues/Aspects; Section C : StrategicalIssues/Aspects; and Section D : OperationalIssues/Aspects followed by one open endedquestion.

As mentioned above, Section A refers to thefactual data which also includes requirements fordata on five factors, -the sixth factor Le. 'QualityAwareness Level' is derived from set of

questions from Section B. For the purpose ofcalculating QML' score for each record ofquestionnaire, Sections C and D are used.Regarding tne structure and number of questionsin each section, out of a total of 55 questions(excluding Section A and 56th open endedquestion), 13 pertain to Section B, 20 from~ection B, and 22 from Section D. Section Acontains 17 questions marked from (a) to (u).The complete design of the questionnaire

Ann Lib lnf Stu

including contents with all the Sections and whichhas been used for data collection is provided inAppendix I..

Sampling

For collection of data, the target population wasdecided to be special libraries for the sole reasonthat .they are attached to the institutions whichgive priority to the aM standards and conceptsas the major focus by virtue of their policies. Alsoto have sufficient and meaningful data thisdecision was taken without having anydiscrimination with purely academic and publiclibraries. For selecting sample out of thepopulation of special libraries in India, thefollowing criteria was taken in to account:

Private and public sectors (includingservice sector)

R&D units/institutes of S&T nature servingindustries' needs explicitly

Libraries already known to be ISO 9000certified

For the purpose of sending questionnaires thefollowing sources were consulted for identifyingthe addresses of the LIS units.

(a) Directory of R&D Institutions in India by DST[7]

(b) Directory of S&T Institutions in-India byINSDOC[8]

(c) - Q-Prod Directory of ISO 9000 certified..companies in India [9]

(d) CSI R Directory 2000 [10]

MEASURING QUAUfY MANAGEMENTLEVEL

Data Collection

As mentioned above, survey method using welldesigned questionnaire for knowing existingstatus and future plans of major special librarieswas followed for the study.

In all, 175 questionnaires were sent to the headsof the libraries/information units attached tovarious institutions in Delhi, Mumbai, Pune,Chennai, Bangalore and Kolkata. Out of which113 were received back which is 65% response.In Delhi region, the data we-re collectedpersonally by visiting the libraries with thepurpose of clarifying points, if any, desired bythe respondents. A few questionnaires were alsoreceived bye-mail particularly those from outsideDelhi region.

For the purpose of data analysis, a modifieddatabase structure as in Table 1 was used which

was subsequently fed in to SPSS package fortesting various hypotheses.

Codification and scheme for data analysis

As mentioned earlier, for the purpose of fulfillingthe objectives of the study, six factors and ninekey activities representing QMLs were identified,the details of which are given in Tables 1 and 2along with the codes, and criteria for scoring fordata analysis. Further, the distribution ofquestions arranged by key activities represent squality management levels (QMEs)- is given inTable 3. The identification of factors and QMLs

is based on the similar study made by Johannsenwho has used modified scheme of EuropeanlTIodel for Total Quality Management Criteria .

R K Verma

Table 1

FactolS. their codification and scheme for scoring .

.S.No. Factor CodificationStructure for Score

1.

Status of library 1-Advanced(Information work level)

2-Modem3-Traditional

NA

2.

Size of LIS unit 1-High >10(Number of employees in library)

2-Medium 5-103-Low-1-4

NA

3.

Sector of Organization 1-Govt.(on Admnistrative Control Basis)

2-Autonomous3-Public sector4-Private5-Academic6-Others

NA

4.

Type of Organization 1-Academic

(on major field of activities basis)2-R&D

3-Manufacturing industry4-Service industry5-Hea1th care6-Trade Association7-Financial industry8-Consultancy9-Management10-OthersNA

5.

Quality Awareness level 1-High-45-65Score equal to option2- Medium-35M

no. chosen by the3- Low-1-34

respondent as per 5options in positivequestions and inreverse order for*negative questions

.6.

Resources Academic Qualifications:Maximum Total score=19

(i) Academic qUalifications

5-Phd.4-Mlib Sc3-B.Ub Sc

Equal to the number of2-C Lib

option chosen1-Nil --

Contd.

146 Ann Lib lnf Stu

--------- -


Table 1(contn.)

SI. No. Factor CodificationStructure for Score

Professional qualifications:

Total options in fiveparameters are 19 nos.(ii) Professional qualifications

5-Ph.D4-Post Graduate3-Graduate2-Under Graduate

The details are:1-0thers

(iii) Experience

ExperienceAcademic Qualifications =5

(3 levels)Professional Qualifications

1- 1-10 yrs

=5

2- 11-20 yrsExperience = 3

3 >20yrs

(iv) Year of inception

Year of inception:Year of Inception = 3(Age of the organization)

(3 levels)Library's Budget = 31- After 1970 2- From 1951-1970

The criteria for scores is3-Before 1951

as follows:

(v) Library's annual average

Library's budget:1- High 14-19budget

(3 levels)2- Medium 9-131 - 1-5 Rs. Lakhs

3- Low 1-82 - 6-10 Lakhs 3-> 10 Rs. L::ll.hs

*Negative types of questions: 1, 3, 6, 8, 13

I'I

The nine key activities based on TQM frameworkand representing three levels of QMLs havebeen modified from the 11 nos. provided inEuropean Quality Award mode,1(Table 4). The

criteria for calculating· total score along with theQML indicators is given below. The details ofcodification and scheme for data analysis is given

·in Table 2.

R K Verma

Table 2

Quality management levels (QMLs), their codification and scheme for scoring

SI. QML Question no.(s)Codification Structure for ScoreNo.

as given inQuestionnaire(Appendix I)

1.

Commitment by 14,19,31Five Options from eachMaximum score is 15 (based onManagemenV

question as per theSCOieof 5 for each option andLeadership

following codes:out of 3 questions in this QML1- Do not agree

indicator) as per option no.2- To some extent agree

chosen by the respondent. For3-Agree

example option no. 1 will have a4-Stronglyagree

score of 1 and so on. The

5-Very strongly agreequestions put in negative* sense

will have the score in reverseorder Le. option 5 will have score1and so on.2.

Education and Training23,24,41Same as above schemeSame as above

3.

Services standards 21,42Same as above schemeSame as above with the withthe difference that maximumscore is 10 here because of only2 questions having 5 asmaximum marks each

4.

Processes standards 27,35,36Same as above schemeAs in Sr. 1

5.

Customers' survey 20,44Same as above schemeSame as against Sr. 3

6.

Quality manuals 16, 17, 18,Same as above schemeMaximum score is 75 based on22, 29, 32,

15 questions with 5 as33, 34, 37, 38, 39, 40,

maximum points43, 46, 48

7.

Suggestion/Feedback 25,47Same as above schemeMaximum score is 1°systems

8.

Quality circles 26, 28, 30,Same as above schemeMaximum score is 2049

9.

Individual ethics for 15, 50, 51,Same as above schemeMaximum score is 35management and

52, 53, 54,learning

55

*Negative type of Questions 30, 32, 33, 45

MEASURING QUAUTY MANAGEMENT LEVEL

The set of questions arranged by nine keyactivities representing OMLs are given in theTable 3.

Criteria for' three-level ranking QML' score forInstitutions (LIS Units)

Tota~Maximum score calculated: 205

as per option no. with 5 asmaximum score per question(as chosen by the respondentout of 41 questions, 20 fromSection C, and 21 from Section,ignoring one question Le no. 35because of its dependency onQ. no. 34)

Range of Scores for LISunits with High OML (>85%)

Range of Scores for LIS units:with Medium OML (65-84%)

Range of Scores for LIS unitswith Low OML «65%)

174 to 205(Rank 1)

133 to 173(Rank 2)

1 to 132

(Rank 3)

Table 3

Distribution of questions arranged by key activities representingQuality Management levels (QMLs)

SI.No.1 QML Questions

1.

I Commitment by 1.a is not enough to recommend standards for quality, butManagement/Leadership

whether the same are understood and accepted by allconcerned is also important2.

Leadership at top management level is a must for startingany quality improvement program in the library/infor-mation center3.

TOM is not a quick fix but requires a long term investmentof time over several years

2.

I Education and TrainingI1.All employees including frontline and staff should receive

training in quality awareness and how tocarry out

customer service goals 2. The areas for training should be continuously scrutinisedand well known to the staff at various levels3.Are staff members adequately trained to carry out the

various processes?3.

I Services standards I1.There is a need to tollow established standards of service

2.Do you have an identifiable process for delivering a service

which conforms to your customer's requirements?4.

I Processes standardsI1.Suitable standards should be established for key processes2.

Do you establish norms or benchmarks for a uisition,against which you can test and inspect3.

Do you keep records of these tests and inspections?

Contd.


"

R K Verma

SI.No.1 QML

Table 3 (Contn.)

Questions

5.

6.

7.

150

Customers' survey

Quality manuals

Suggestion/feedbacksystems

1. Regular customer (user) survey should be undertaken2. Do you identify the methods whereby you check customer's

satisfaction?

1. By involving workers in decision-making process you coulduse their service up to the full potential

2. The optimum quality of any product/service is determinedtaking into account the cost factor also

3. The quality targets should be well defined for achievingquality goals

4. Designing library manuals for quality improvement help inbuilding sense of responsibility and delegation of authorityamong staff

5. There should be a document record which states who willdo what, when, how and why

6. There are problems in establishing good relationshipbetween top management control and promoting employeeempowerment

7. An attempt to change the organizations culture is resistedby financial and other processes

8. Do you have means for selecting and checking theperformance of your suppliers (vendors)

9. Do you have procedures in place for cases of nonconformance, when a uisition does not meet yourrequirements or those of customers?

10. Are records kep~to 5l!·jw what happens when performanceis not satisfactory?

11. Do you have records, which demonstrates performance ofyour supplier

12. Do you choose a supplier on the basis of price alone?13. Do you identify the methods whereby statistics are kept of

loans, sales, complaints, & enquiries?14. Do the employees report for problems in their areas of

work before it is noticed by the management?15. Do you follow statistical process control methods such as

flowcharting, check sheets, cause & effect diagrams,control charts etc.

1. Suggestions from all the staff members should be takenfor quality improvement on a regular basis

2. Are the employees competent enough to identify thecauses of the problems and possible solutions to offer assuggestions

Contd.

Ann Lib Inf Stu

MEASURING QUALITY MANAGEMENT lEVEL

Table 3 (Contn.)

SI.No.1 QML Questions

I·

i

8.

9.

Quality circles

Individual's Working Ethicsand learning

1. The initiation of Quality improvement project teams leadsto TQM path

2. Team building skills like coaching, holding questionsessi~ns, listening carefully to the staff problems andcreatively soliciting is essential to the path of TQM

3. Employees show reluctance to recommend changes forbetter procedures because of fear of top management

4. Do you modify the product/service specifications as perthe changes in customer's demand?

1. Quality improvement is linked with organisational changeand learning

2. Do you have a clean desk where you can always find thingsyou need?

3. Do you make notes of activities to do in a particular day?4. D~ you see to it that no tasks are postponed irrespective

of your disliking the same?5. Do you respect hierarchical structure while communicating

with your colleagues?6. Are you polite with your colleagues and subordinates even

in situation Gf Piv;tucaiion7. Do you listen to others attentively even if you do not agree

with them?

It may be noted here that for self-evaluationpurpose or for single and multiple case studies,the European and similar models would be anadequate means. However, if we need an overallpicture of QML in the US sector based on asurvey sites to enable statistical generalizationwe may prefer another more simple model.Otherwise, we may expect data quality problemsand a low response rate because of lengthyquestionnajres arid difficulties of US sectorrespondents in proper understanding of thequestions. Though for the purpose of survey forQML a sample of population of special librariesin India were selected, the main elements of theEuropean model have. been retained asrepresented by the degree to which the keyactivities.ard favoured by the respondents. Mostimportantly the quality results here have not beenaddressed, but the study has only focused on


the 'enablers' as mentioned in the said Europeanmodel.

APPROACHES FOR MEASUREMENT OF OML(ISO 9000 VS. TOM SCALE)

Within Quality management theory two mainfr:::trne'..A.'':)rkshave been developed to enableidentification, specification, and measurement ofan organizations's QML

These are: ISO 9000 and Total QualityManagement (TOM). In the former framework theassessment is based on the requirements of theISO standards on quality management.Certification here is a measure of anorganization's QML Regarding the latter casei.e. TQM, the same is a broader framework thanISO 9000. The theoretical background of the TQM

151

R K Verma

is provided in the works of Deming, Juran, andDahlgaard. The assessment scheme and criteriaof national and international quality awards like.the Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award, The DemingPrize, and The European Quality Award provide

practical interpretations and instruments tomeasure QML. In a TQM perspective, QML isexpressed as sum of scores on different criteria.As an example, the main criteria for the EuropeanQuality Award is indicated in the Table 4.

Table 4

. Assessment criteria of The European Model for Total quality Management 1994

S.No. CategorizationQML IndicatorStructure for Score

1.

EnablersLeadership 1002.

EnablersPeople Management903.

EnablersPolicy & ~rategy 804.

EnablersResources 905.

EnablersProcesses 1406.

Results People Satisfaction 907.

ResultsCustomer Satisfaction2008.

Results Impact on Society 609.

Results Business results 150

Total

1000

Compared to the requirements of ISO 9000standards on QM, the European model containsunique elements like staff management andquality results. If we take a closer look at theelements common to the ISO 9000 standards

and the European Model i.e. Leadership, Policyand Strategy, Resources and Processes, afewsignificant differences are found. For example,Leadership in ISO 9000 is understood in termsof mainly the responsibility and authority, policyand management review whereas the TQMoriented European model also counts elementslike a consistent TQM culture, involvement withcustomers and suppliers and active outsidepromotion of TQM under the 'Leadership'indicator. For the purpose of the present study,a simple version for assessment is followed with

some modifications of the European modelkeeping all the main elements of this model.Instead of concentrating on presence or absenceof particular key activity, the appropriate scoreis awarded to degree of agreement with thestrategical i.IIU operational aspects as reflectedin the questions in the questionnaire. The detailsof the same have already been provided.

ISO 9000 VS QML

Before analyzing the impact of various factorson QML it would be interesting to note any relationbetween ISO 9000-oriented and TQM-oriented(QML) scale. The Table 5 provides thedistribution pattern between these two variablesusing SPSS package as a cross table.

MEASURINGQUAllTYMANAGEMENTlEVEL

Table 5

Quality Management Level (QML) Rank according to ISO 9000 and a TQM-oriented scale

ISO 9000

Low QMLMediumQMLHighQMLTotal

1.

Certified 381122.

Under process for certification 14053.

Under plan 5160214.

No plan 2448375

Total

33764113

Chi-square Pearson value (Tc): 2.B61

Degree of freedom: 6

Tabulated value (Tb) at 5% level of significance:12.5916

Since Tc<Tb so there is no significant relationbetween the two frameworks of measurement.The p-valu~ Le. 0.826 also supports this viewsince in statistical terms we speak of significantrelationships only when p-values are below 0.05

ASSOCIATIVE PATTERNS

Status of library

Categorization: The categorization of librariesinto three parts as Traditional, Modern, andAdvanced is based mainly on the sophisticationof services rendered by them. For example, noncomputerized services belong to lowest level Le.

Traditional. while those having computerizedservices fall under 'Modem' and those with onlineaccess to external databases and/or with digital/electronic libraries facilities qualify for'Advanced' _ This categorization may not beuniversal since while deciding about this aspectone has to see the relative status of the librariesin Indian context.

Distribution of entries : The status wisedistribution of libraries is shown in the Table 1Regarding the impact of status of library in termsof its information work level on QML, it is observedthat the calculated value of Chi-square is 10.05.This is greater than the tabulated level i.e.7.77944 (taken at 5% level of significance). Itsimply means rejection of null hypothesis i.e.There is no association between the status of

libraries and QML. So the alternative hypothesisis accepted which says that the factor status oflibraries in terms of information work level has asignificant relation with QML.

Table 6

Distribution pattern of Status of Libraries (Information work level) andQuality Management Level)

SI.No. Status (Information work !c,vel) LowQMLM~~!!JmQMLHighQMLTotalof Library

1.

Advanced 818 1272.

Modern 2348 -71

3.Traditional . 211215

Total

3377 3113


153

R K Verma

Assuming 5% level of significance

Chi-Square Pearson value (Tc): 10.05


Tabulated value (Tb): 9.48773

Tc>Th, So, null hypothesis is rejected

Size (Number of employees) in library

The size iri terms of number of employees in thelibrary and information service unit is categorizedinto three parts with 1-<5; 2-5 t010; and 3-> 10.The categorization has been done keeping inview the overall distribution of data and is arelative term.

Table 7

Distribution pattern of Size (Number of employees in library) andQuality Management Level

SI.No. Size (Number of Employees)LowQMLMediumQMLHighQMLTotal

in Library1

High 1825 1442

Medium 928 2393

Low 620 127

Total

3373 4*110

*Indicates that out of 113 respondent:>, 110 had furnished thp. C'0mp!ete information


Chi-Square Pearson value (Tc): 4.396


Tabulated value(Tb) : 9.48773

Tc<Tb, so null hypothesis is not rejected

Sector of Organization

The distribution pattern of sector of organisationand QML is indicated in Table 8.

Table 8

Distribution pattern of Sector of organization and Quality Management Level

SI. No. Sector of OrganizationLowQMLMediumQMLHighQMLTotal

1.

Government 921 3332.

Autonomous 10350453.

Public Sector 54094.

Private Sector 6130195.

Academic Sector 22156.

Others 1102

Total

33764113

154

Ann Lib Inf Stu


Chi-square Pearson value (Tc) : 14.966





Table 9

Distribution pattern of Type ot organization and Quality Management Level51.No.

Type of OrganizationLowQMLMediumQMLHigh QMLTotal

1.

Academic 381122.

R&D 18391583.

Manufacturing Industries 22044.

Service Industries 15175..

Health Care 190106.

Trade Associations 11027.

Financial Industries 01128.

Consultancy 03039.

Management 140510.

Others 64010

Total

33.764113

Type of Organization


Chi-square Pearson Value (Tc) : 27.524




Table 10

Distribution pattern of Quality Awareness level and Quality Management Level

SI.No. Quality Awareness LevelLowQMLMediumQMLHigh QMLTotal

1.

High 13291432.

Medium 20422643.

Low -6-6

Total

33'773113


R K Verma

Quality Awareness level


Chi-square Pearson value (Tc): 3.046




Table 11

Distribution pattern of Resources and Quality Management Level

SI.No. Resources LowOMLMediumOMLHigh OMLTotal

1.

High 46-10

2.Medium 1755375

3.Low 28-10

Total

23693*95

*Indicates that out of 113 respondents 95 ~ad furnished the complete information

Resources


Chi-square Pearson value (Tc): 2.276




CONCLUSION

are different in content and scope, though havingsome common requirements. The findings alsorevealed some interesting association patternsbetween OML and a number of factors confirmingthat TOM is closely associated with innovationof services and an integral part of changemanagement in the LIS sector. Thus it seems tobe a conservB.tive approach to speak of OM onlyin terms of streamlining and securing routinefunctions and processes.

REFERENCES

1.The results of the survey have revealed thatproper performance measurement of LIS sectorOML should depend upon a TOM orientedinstrument since the scope of ISO 9000 measuresare too narrow and cannot be applied broadly.The framework based on the evaluation schemes 2.of the quality awards could be applied to LISsector OM purposes. Regarding OML, thefindings showed that about 10% libraries wereinvolved in ISO 9000 assessment. However, thecomparison of ISO 9000 level of assessment w!thOML as suggested in this study reveal no 3.association between them, which implies that tofollow TOM path, it is not essential to go for ISO9000 certification first since the two approaches

156

BANG (T) eta!., comp.: ISO 9000 forLibraries and Information Centres: A Guide

Report of a project supported byNORDINFO, FID 713, The Hague,Netherlands: 1996, 95p.

CHAKRABORTY (S) : Will quality happenif we got ISO-9000? Managementdevelopment programme on Total OualityManagement in Library & InformationServices. 11M,Lucknow, 1999, 140p.

ELLIS (Debbie) and NORTON (Bob):Implementing BS 5750/ISO 9000 inLibraries. - Aslib : London, 1993.-121p.

Ann Lib Inf Stu

4.

5.

6.

JOHANNSEN (Carl Gustav) : QualityManagement and Innovation: Findings of.a Nordic Quality Management survey. Libri1995,45,131-44

DEMiNG (W E) : Out of the CriSIS.Cambridge: Mass. Institute of Technology,1986, 18-96 Juran, J M: Juran on planningfor quality. New York, The Free Press, 1988

DAHLGAARD (J J) etal The qualityjourney - a journey without an end .London: Cartax, 1994

MEASURING QUALITY MANAGEMENT IEVEL

7. Directory of R&D Institutions 1999. NewDelhi: DST, 1999; 284p.

8. Directory of S&T Institutions in India. NewDelhi: INSDOC, 2001

9. Q-Prod Directory of ISO 9000 certifiedcompanies in India . New Delhi: Q ProdPublishers, 1995, 217p.

10. CSIR. Directory 2000. New Delhi:NISCOM(C""""') nnnr. ~"'A._.::>In , LUUU, 10'+1-'.

.•.

Vol 49 No 4 December 2002 ]57

R K Verma

APPENDIX I

QUESTIONNAIRE

Quality management approaches in Library and Information Services (LIS) Sector in india with particularreference to ISO 9000 standards and TQM Concepts

Section A- Factual data

(a) Name:

(b) Designation : Phone e-Mail

(c) Qualifications:

(d) Experience:

(e) Organisation :

(f) Type of organisation (PI. tick mark):

Academic

Health care

Management

(g) Year of inception:

R&D

Trade Association

Other (PI. specify)

Manufacturing industry

Financial industry

Service industry

Consultancy

(h) Total Budget (PI. tick mark): <5 lakh 5 - 50 lakh 50 lakh -1 crore >1 crore

(j) LIS unit's budget:

(k) Number of employees in ?rganisation.

(I) Number of employees in LIS unit:

(m) Please indicate (tick mark) the current status/level of your library/Information Centre:(as per the following criteria)

(i) Advanced (fully automated activities; including online access to external databases/digital libraries or electronic document delivery)

(ii) Modern (including applications of computers for in-house activities)(iii) Traditional (not computerised; including routine library activities like circulation,

document supply, etc.)

(n) Please indicate (tick mark) ttv, status of ISO 9000 series of standards adoption:

158

(i) Certified (ii) Under Process (iii) Under plan (iv) No plan

Ann Lib lnf Stu

MEASURING QUAI1TY MANAGEMENT LEVEL

(p) Please indicate (tick mark) the applicability and coverage of ISO 9000 series of standards asper the following options: _

(i) Parent organisation only (ii) LIS unit only (Hi) Parent organisation and LIS Unit

(q) What are the Library/information products/services covered in certification:

(r) Whether any Quality consultant/Manager was appointed:

(i) If so, from within or outside the organisation (PI. tick mark):

(s) Your experience in Quality management Projects/Activities:

(t) . Any formal/informal quality assurance/management practice (other than ISO 9000) adopted(such as TQM, Quality circle, Statistical process control, Benchmarking etc.):

(i) If so, give details:

(u) Any national/international quality award conferred on your esteemed organisation:

(i) If so, give details:


R K Verma

Section B - Quality Management - General issues/aspects

Please tick mark the answer on one of the following options on a 5-point scale as below:

1- Do not agree, 2-To some extent agree, 3-Agree, 4-Strogly agree, 5- Very strongly agree

1. Quality is an absolute category linked to universal and eternal values

2. Quality is a dynamic entity changing with tilT)e, customer's requirementsand other factors

3. Richness and range of collections in library speaks of good quality

4. Quality is system driven and not attained by chance

5. Terminological and conceptual inconsistencies prevalent in Qualitymanagement act as barrier in the path of its improvement

6. Customer-focus comes in way of professionalism

7. It is the system not the employees that is responsible for mostinefficiencies in the library

8. Doing the work right the first time is only a quality slogan and isdifficult to maintain in practice

9. If the organization, particularly the LIS section is not certified forISO 9000, the quality service will not be achieved

10. The accreditation for ISO 9000 undermine autonomy and ability touse one's own skills

11. There is a direct relationship between certification for ISO 9000 andTQM philosophy

12. Bureaucratization inherent in ISO 9000 standards can demotivatethose wishing to be more innovative

13. The philosophy of continuous improvement impose pressures at work

1 2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5I

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

2 3 4 52

3 4 5

160 Ann Lib Inf Stu

--------------------------------,....


Section C - Strategical issues/aspects

14. It is not enough to recommend standards for quality, but whether thesame are understood and accepted by all concerned is also important

15. Quality improvement is linked with organisational change and learning

16. By involving workers in decision-making process you could use theirservice up to the full potential

17. The optimum quality of any product/service is determined taking intoaccount the cost factor also

18. The quality targets should be well defined for achieving quality goals

19. Leadership at top management level is a must for starting any qualityimprovement program in the library/information centre

20. Regular customer (user) survey should be undertaken

21. There is a need to follow established standards of service

22. Designing library manuals for quality improvement help in buildingsense of responsibility anq delegation of authority among staff

23. All employees including frontline and staff should receive training inquality awaren~ss and how to carry out customer service goals

24. The areas for training should be continuously scrutinised and wellknown to the staff at various levels

1 2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

234 5

1

2 3 4 5

2 3 4 52 3 4 52 3 4 52

3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1 2

345

25.

26.

27.

Suggestions from all the staff members should be taken for qualityimprovement on a regular basis

1234 5

The initiation of Quality improvement project teams leads to TQM path

1234 5

Suitable standards should be established for key processes

1234 5

28.

29.

30.

31.

Team building skills like coaching, holding question sessions, listeningcarefully to the staff problems and creatively soliciting is essentialto the path of TQM

There should be a document record which states who will do what,when, how and why

Employees shaw reluctance to recommend changes for betterprocedures because of fear of top management

TOM is not a quick fix but requires a long term investment of timeover several years

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5


R K Verma

32. There are problems in establishing good relationship between topmanagement control and promoting employees' empowerment 1 2 3 4 5

33. An attempt to change the organzation's culture is resisted by financialand other processes. 1 2 3 4 5

Section D - Operational issues/aspects

The respondent is requested to answer the following questions on the 5-point scale as below:

1-Never, 2-Selaom, 3-0ccasionally, 4-Usually, and 5-Always

34. Do you have means for selecting and checking the performanceof your suppliers (vendors)? 1 2 3 4 5

35. Do you establish norms or be: :Ghmarks fcr a uisition, aqainstwhich you can test and inspec 1 2 3 4 5

36. Do you keep records of these tests and inspections? 1 2 3 4 5

40. Do you choose a supplier on the basis of price alone?

44. Do you identify the methods whereby you check customer's satisfaction?

39. Do you have records, which demonstrate p~rformance of your supplier

1 23 4 5

1

23 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1 234 5Do the employees report for problems in their areas of workbefore it is noticed by the management?

46.

45. Do you blame employees and not the system in case of inefficiencyin the work?

43. Do you identify the methods whereby statistics are keptof loans, sales, complaints & enquiries?

42. Do you have an identifiable process for delivering a service whichconforms to your customer's· requirements?

37. Do you have procedures in place for cases of non-conformance,when a uisition does not meet your requirements orthose of customers?

41. Are staff members adequately trained to carry out the variousprocesses?

38. Are records kept to show what happens when performanceis not satisfactory?

47. Are the employees competent enough to identify the causes of theproblems and possible solutions to offer as·suggestions? 1 2 3 4 5

162 Ann Lib lnf Stu


---.

48.

49.50.51.52.53.54.

1 55.

Do you follow statistical process control methods such asflowcharting, check sheets, cause & effect diagrams, control charts etc.?

Do you modify the producVservice specifications as per the changes incustomer's demand?

Do you make notes of activities to do in a particular day?

Do you have a clean desk where you can always find things you need?

Do you see to it that no tasks are postponed irrespective of yourdisliking the same?

Do you respect hierarchical structure while communicatingwith your colleagues?

Are you polite with your colleagues and .subordinates even insituation of provocation

Do you listen to others attentively even if you do not agree with them?

Open ended question

1 23 4 5

2 3 4 52 3 4 51

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

1

2 3 4 5

2 3 4 52 3 4 5

56. What are your views on quality improvement approaches including ISO9000 and TOM? Please arid any other information related to the samewhich you think may contribute to successful Implementation of qualityimprovement activities (Please write in brief up to a maximum of 300 words)


measuring quality management level with reference...

Documents