Total Quality Management: Stakeholders Perceptions

1. Abstract

The Total Quality Management: Stakeholders Perceptions (TQM-SP) survey is a multidimensional psychometric instrument developed by Dr. Terry A. Currie (1997) at the University of Georgia to assess institutional adherence to the principles of Total Quality Management (TQM) within higher education contexts, specifically postsecondary technical institutes. The scale captures the subjective evaluations and systemic climate perceptions of essential institutional constituents, including executive administrators, instructional faculty, and operational support staff. Comprising exactly 37 declarative items, the survey is operationalized across four theoretical core tenets: Leadership (9 items), Empowerment (10 items), Strategic Quality Planning (9 items), and Human Resource Development (9 items). Respondents register their degree of cognitive alignment and experiential appraisal utilizing an authentic four-point forced-choice response format anchored from 1 (“strong disbelief”) to 4 (“strong belief”). Psychometric evaluation during initial instrument development demonstrated exceptional internal consistency, yielding a full-scale reliability coefficient of Cronbach’s alpha = 0.92 in a pilot sample of 45 administrators and faculty. Subsequent field validation across a normative sample of 568 postsecondary institutional personnel—comprising 157 administrators, 280 faculty members, and 131 support staff—substantiated the instrument’s structural integrity, discriminant potential across organizational tiers, and content validity verified through rigorous panel-of-experts methodologies. Multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA) revealed significant perceptual divergences between hierarchical echelons regarding administrative commitment, participatory governance, resource redirection, and fear-free cultural environments. The TQM-SP serves as an empirically grounded diagnostic tool for organizational psychologists, academic leaders, institutional researchers, and quality improvement specialists evaluating organizational climate, continuous quality improvement (CQI) implementation, and structural transformation in technical and higher education environments.

2. Keywords

Total Quality Management, Stakeholder Perceptions, Higher Education Assessment, Technical Institutes, Organizational Leadership, Employee Empowerment, Strategic Quality Planning, Human Resource Development, Continuous Quality Improvement, Psychometrics

3. Authors

The Total Quality Management: Stakeholders Perceptions instrument was conceptualized, operationalized, and psychometrically validated by Dr. Terry A. Currie. The instrument was developed as part of doctoral dissertation research conducted within the Department of Occupational Studies (Adult and Vocational Education) at the College of Education, University of Georgia (Athens, Georgia, United States), completed in 1997 under the academic supervision of graduate faculty specializing in workforce development, educational leadership, and organizational systems analysis.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Total Quality Management: Stakeholders Perceptions (TQM-SP) inventory is to provide a standardized, psychometrically sound diagnostic methodology for measuring the penetration, integration, and cultural adoption of continuous quality improvement principles within postsecondary educational organizations. Originally conceptualized in response to the national movement toward total quality integration within the Georgia Department of Technical and Adult Education (GDTAE) during the 1990s, the instrument addresses a critical gap in educational measurement: the need to assess whether managerial philosophies traditionally derived from manufacturing and industrial contexts are perceived as authentically implemented across all stratifications of an academic enterprise.

From an applied organizational perspective, academic institutions frequently implement top-down quality initiatives that fail to permeate lower operational levels or instructional units. The TQM-SP was engineered to capture the operational reality of quality initiatives through the lens of multiple constituent groups—namely executive administrators, full-time instructional faculty, and frontline support personnel. By systematically comparing scores across these stakeholder tiers, the scale diagnoses perceptual discrepancies, institutional blind spots, and alignment deficits. For example, institutional leaders often harbor inflated appraisals of communicative transparency and structural empowerment, whereas instructional faculty and classified staff may experience institutional initiatives as cosmetic mandates characterized by top-heavy bureaucratic control, budget reallocation friction, or psychological insecurity.

In educational administration and industrial-organizational psychology research, the scale provides a quantitative metric to test theoretical models linking total quality climate with organizational outcomes such as employee job satisfaction, turnover intentions, faculty retention, organizational citizenship behaviors, and institutional accreditation performance. Because the scale explicitly avoids superficial customer satisfaction metrics in favor of deep structural processes—such as data-driven strategic planning, resource allocation for continuous quality improvement (CQI), structural delegation of authority, and systematic rewards for collaborative innovation—it operates both as a comprehensive evaluative audit and as an exploratory research scale.

5. Psychological Construct

The overarching construct evaluated by the TQM-SP is the institutional Total Quality Climate, defined as the shared employee perceptions of organizational policies, practices, reward contingencies, and administrative behaviors that promote customer-focused continuous improvement and systemic stakeholder empowerment. Unlike organizational culture, which encompasses deeply ingrained anthropological assumptions and values, organizational climate represents the conscious cognitive appraisal of structural practices and behavioral patterns observable within the work setting. The TQM-SP decomposes this macro-construct into four interconnected subdimensions:

Leadership (9 Items)

The Leadership subscale evaluates the degree to which senior executives—particularly institutional presidents and immediate supervisors—visibly model, communicate, and institutionalize total quality values throughout the organization. Rather than measuring passive administrative endorsement, this construct assesses visible behavioral engagement, personal participation in quality improvement teams, customer-oriented prioritization over cost-accounting ratios (e.g., measuring institutional success by program quality rather than merely by credit-hour production cost), and day-to-day administrative modeling of continuous quality improvement principles.

Empowerment (10 Items)

The Empowerment dimension captures the psychological and operational decentralization of authority within the educational institution. Grounded in theories of psychological empowerment and participatory management, this construct measures an employee’s perceived autonomy to initiate change within their operational scope, psychological safety to take calculated risks without fear of administrative retribution, freedom to participate in quality circle initiatives, structural openness to employee input, and institutional reorganization aimed at eliminating bureaucratic barriers to lateral collaboration.

Strategic Quality Planning (9 Items)

The Strategic Quality Planning construct evaluates the formalization, integration, and systematic dissemination of organizational vision, data infrastructure, and quality goals over short-term (operational: 1–2 years) and long-term (strategic: 3–5 years) temporal horizons. Key elements encompass the systematic collection and empirical utilization of customer satisfaction data, regular organizational performance auditing, transparent communication of quality milestones, dedicated capital and temporal resource commitment, and formalized protocols for establishing positive stakeholder relationships.

Human Resource Development (9 Items)

The Human Resource Development subscale measures the systemic mechanisms deployed by the institution to cultivate, reward, and support human capital in pursuit of continuous quality improvement. This includes continuous professional development aligned with empirical needs assessments, embedded quality technique instruction within individualized staff development pathways, institutional incentives and public recognition for quality achievements, the psychological experience of intrinsic job satisfaction, and the structural management of institutional budget redirection and financial redeployment.

6. Theoretical Framework

The Total Quality Management: Stakeholders Perceptions instrument is conceptually anchored in the operational and philosophical synthesis of modern quality management theory and organizational behavior. Specifically, the scale draws directly upon the seminal philosophies of W. Edwards Deming, Joseph M. Juran, and Armand V. Feigenbaum, harmonized with contemporary models of academic organizational governance (Cornesky, 1992; Marchese, 1991; Tribus, 1993).

At the center of Deming’s management philosophy is the System of Profound Knowledge, which comprises four interrelated components: appreciation for a system, knowledge of variation, theory of knowledge, and psychology. The TQM-SP explicitly incorporates several of Deming’s famous 14 Points for Management, most notably: Point 8 (“Drive out fear, so that everyone may work effectively for the company”), operationalized in Item 28 (“Employees in the institute are given the freedom to act without fear of retribution”); Point 13 (“Institute a vigorous program of education and self-improvement”), captured across the Human Resource Development subscale; and Point 5 (“Improve constantly and forever the system of production and service”), mirrored in the Strategic Quality Planning subscale.

In adapting these industrial tenets to educational institutions, the scale addresses the complex academic debate regarding the identification of “customers” in postsecondary schooling. In technical institutes, educational stakeholders occupy dual roles as both producers of learning and service recipients, while industry employers, enrolled students, and regional communities serve as primary external beneficiaries. The TQM-SP embraces the models proposed by Marchese (1991) and Cornesky (1992), positing that academic quality is fundamentally non-linear and requires total systemic commitment across structural hierarchies. Furthermore, the instrument integrates organizational climate theory (Schneider, 1990), which asserts that individuals form distinct cognitive representations of their work environments based upon institutional priorities, reward contingencies, and leadership behavior, which in turn drive employee engagement, self-efficacy, and organizational performance.

7. Validity

The construct, content, and face validity of the Total Quality Management: Stakeholders Perceptions survey were established through rigorous multistage methodological procedures during its development and field administration across Georgia postsecondary technical institutes.

Content and Face Validity

Content validity was established through an exhaustive synthesis of total quality literature, including classical industrial paradigms (Deming, Juran) and educational adaptations (Cornesky, 1992; Marchese, 1991; Kaufman & Hirumi, 1992; Tribus, 1993). Initial item pools were developed to represent the essential criteria embodied in the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award framework adapted for educational organizations. Face and content validity were further evaluated by an expert review panel comprising university faculty, educational researchers, and technical college leaders. This panel critically appraised each item for thematic relevance, linguistic clarity, structural clarity, and psychometric distinctiveness within its designated core tenet, refining the scale into its definitive 37-item operational structure.

Criterion-Related and Discriminant Validity

Discriminant and criterion validity were demonstrated through empirical field testing on a stratified sample of 568 educational personnel (157 administrators, 280 instructional faculty, and 131 support staff) across Georgia technical institutes. Using Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA), the instrument demonstrated high sensitivity to institutional hierarchy and positional roles. Statistically significant perceptual divergences emerged across the three stakeholder categories across all four subscales: Leadership, Empowerment, Strategic Quality Planning, and Human Resource Development.

Specifically, administrators consistently demonstrated statistically significant higher composite mean scores across all dimensions compared to faculty and support staff. For example, administrators reported markedly higher levels of belief regarding administrative transparency, resource availability, and institutional empowerment structures, whereas faculty and support staff registered significantly lower scores—frequently scoring in the “disbelief” zone regarding non-punitive risk-taking (Item 28), incentive distribution (Item 19), and structural reward revisions (Item 27). This systematic, predictable differentiation among known organizational strata confirms the instrument’s criterion-related discriminant validity, verifying that it captures authentic variance in structural experiences rather than uniform response artifacts or social desirability bias.

8. Reliability

The reliability of the Total Quality Management: Stakeholders Perceptions instrument has been demonstrated across initial psychometric pilot testing and large-scale normative administrations.

Internal Consistency

During the formal instrument development phase, Currie (1997) conducted a pilot investigation utilizing a representative cohort of 45 postsecondary technical institute personnel, including both educational administrators and instructional faculty members. Classical test theory internal consistency analysis yielded an overall instrument reliability coefficient of Cronbach’s alpha = 0.92. This high alpha value confirms strong inter-item covariance and homogeneity across the 37 survey statements, well exceeding the recognized psychometric benchmark of 0.80 for diagnostic research instruments.

Subscale Reliability and Measurement Stability

Analysis across the four independent subscales—Leadership (9 items), Empowerment (10 items), Strategic Quality Planning (9 items), and Human Resource Development (9 items)—revealed robust internal cohesion within each theoretical domain. In the broader normative implementation (N = 568), item-total correlations across the respective core tenets remained consistently strong. The absence of redundant, identically worded items alongside high internal consistency demonstrates that the construct validity of each tenet is sustained across heterogeneous employee groupings, including instructional, clerical, and managerial domains.

9. Factor Analysis

The structural composition of the TQM-SP is theoretically grounded across four primary latent factors derived from continuous quality improvement principles: Leadership, Empowerment, Strategic Quality Planning, and Human Resource Development. The distribution of the 37 items across these four latent dimensions is structured as follows:

• Factor 1: Leadership (9 items): Comprises items 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 24, 26, 30, and 31. These items capture the visible commitment, modeling, and philosophical adherence of the institutional president and departmental supervisors to quality management tenets over short-term fiscal measures.
• Factor 2: Empowerment (10 items): Comprises items 3, 6, 11, 13, 20, 23, 28, 33, 35, and 36. This dimension measures operational autonomy, psychological safety, risk tolerance, collaborative problem solving, and participatory quality team access.
• Factor 3: Strategic Quality Planning (9 items): Comprises items 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 22, 29, 34, and 37. This latent factor aggregates systemic operational/strategic planning horizons, data-driven customer feedback integration, performance auditing, and formal communication strategies.
• Factor 4: Human Resource Development (9 items): Comprises items 9, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 25, 27, and 32. This dimension loads items assessing continuous training integration, staff development need assessments, structural recognition and incentive systems, budgetary redirection impacts, and overarching intrinsic job satisfaction.

Empirical analyses conducted on institutional stakeholder data substantiated the conceptual independence of these four dimensions while demonstrating moderate inter-factor correlations, consistent with higher-order organizational climate models. Multivariate analysis of variance confirmed that these four components function as distinct yet mutually reinforcing pillars of total quality culture, displaying sufficient orthogonality to prevent multicollinearity while explaining a substantial proportion of overall variance in institutional quality climate.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Test Type: Organizational climate survey / Psychometric rating scale
• Format: Paper-and-pencil self-report or computer-administered questionnaire
• Item Count: 37 items
• Target Population: Higher education and postsecondary technical institute personnel, including executive leaders, mid-level administrators, instructional faculty, and classified support staff
• Subscales:
  • Leadership (9 items: 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 24, 26, 30, 31)
  • Empowerment (10 items: 3, 6, 11, 13, 20, 23, 28, 33, 35, 36)
  • Strategic Quality Planning (9 items: 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 22, 29, 34, 37)
  • Human Resource Development (9 items: 9, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 25, 27, 32)
• Response Scale: Four-point forced-choice belief continuum:
  • 1 = Strong disbelief
  • 2 = Disbelief
  • 3 = Moderate belief
  • 4 = Strong belief
• Scoring Rules: Item scores are directly assigned integer values from 1 to 4 corresponding to the chosen anchor. Composite subscale scores are generated by calculating the mean or sum of the items corresponding to each of the four tenets. An overall Total Quality Management perception score is derived by computing the mean or sum across all 37 items (theoretical raw score range: 37 to 148). Higher scores reflect stronger institutional belief and deeper perceived penetration of continuous quality improvement practices. No items are reverse-scored, as all items are phrased toward positive quality practices, with items 16 and 17 functioning as environmental indicators of structural budget reallocation under continuous improvement frameworks. Mean scores below 2.50 typically indicate zones of operational disbelief and structural skepticism.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Total Quality Management: Stakeholders Perceptions inventory was formalized and validated in 1997 as part of doctoral research at the University of Georgia by Dr. Terry A. Currie. As an academic dissertation instrument, the scale was published for educational and scientific research purposes. Researchers and educational practitioners seeking to administer the scale for non-commercial academic research, organizational audits, or institutional effectiveness evaluations may generally access and adapt the instrument with appropriate attribution to the original author (Currie, 1997) and the University of Georgia. Commercial adaptations, mass digital redistribution, or integration into proprietary consulting platforms require direct authorization from the copyright holder or representative academic repository.

12. References

Cornesky, A. (1992). Using Deming to improve quality in colleges and universities. Magna Publications. ERIC ED 354 838

Currie, T. A. (1997). Total quality management in Georgia postsecondary technical institutes (Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia). University of Georgia Theses and Dissertations.

Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the crisis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Advanced Educational Services. MIT Press

Hixson, J., & Lovelace, K. (1992). Total quality management’s challenge to urban schools. Educational Leadership, 50(3), 24–27. ASCD

Kaufman, R., & Hirumi, A. (1992). Ten steps to “TQM Plus.” Educational Leadership, 50(3), 33–34. ASCD

Marchese, T. (1991). TQM reaches the academy. AAHE Bulletin, 44(3), 3–9.

Schneider, B. (Ed.). (1990). Organizational climate and culture. Jossey-Bass.

Tribus, M. (1993). TQM in education: The theory and how to put it to work. Exergy, Inc. ERIC ED 370 168

13. Items of the Scale