www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No.

1; 2013

The Effect of Quality Management Practices on Organizational

Performance in Jordan: An Empirical Study
Ali Bakhit Jaafreh (Corresponding author)
PhD, Management Information Systems, Shaqra University, KSA
Tel: 962-79-510-6548 E-mail: [email protected]

Abedalfattah Z. Al-abedallat
PhD, Banking & Finance sciences, The World Islamic & Educational University (W.I.S.E), Amman, Jordan
Tel: 962-79-700-9837 E-mail: [email protected]

Received: October 11, 2012 Accepted: November 7, 2012 Online Published: December 23, 2012
doi:10.5430/ijfr.v4n1p93 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/ijfr.v4n1p93

Abstract
Quality management practices (QMPs) have been proposed to improve organizational performance and received
substantial attention in recent researches. This study empirically examines the extent to which QMPs and
Organizational performance are correlated and how QMPs impacts on organizational performance.
In this study, a QMPs framework is developed according to a comprehensive literature review and represents a
relationship between QMPs and Organizational performance through examining the effects of the six QMPs
constructs on Organizational performance. Questionnaire using for collected data from the banking sector in Jordan
and tested proposed model. The results of this study supported a model proposed.
Keywords: Quality management, Organizational performance, Banking, Jordan
1. Introduction
In response to increase global pressures customers demanding superior quality of products and services, the global
marketplace has become very competitive, many organizations have adopted practices such as total quality
management (TQM), and benchmarking. Many scholars claim that managers can implement TQM in any organization
in any sectors of the economy such as manufacturing, service, education, and government (Dean & Bowen, 1994), and
that it generates improved products and services, more satisfied customers and employees, reduced costs, improved
financial performance, enhanced competitive, and increased productivity (Zu, 2009; Kaynak, 2003; Deming, 1986).
Organizations that adopt a quality management strategy focus on achieving and sustaining a high quality outputs using
management practices as the inputs and quality performance as the outputs (Flynn, Schroeder, & Sakakibara, 1994).
The pioneers in TQM, such as Deming, Juran, Cosby and Feigenbaum, highlighted the importance of the quality
philosophy as an essential competitive weapon for the transformation of an organization.
Researchers define Quality management (QM) is both a set of guiding principles and management style and that have
been adopted by managers in organizations to improve competitiveness and organizational performance.
Many scholars study identifies relationships among QM practices and examines the effects of these practices on
performance, but the finding inconsistencies and conflicting results among scholars. These findings suggest that a
positive relationship exists between the QM practices or TQM and firm performance and between other variables such
as product quality, product and process performance, perceived quality, quality drivers, reduced cost, more satisfied
customer and improve financial performance. In general, A large body of literature highlights the positive impact of
QM practices on performance (Zu, 2009; Kaynak, 2003; Ahire, Golhar, & Waller, 1996; Kaynak & Hartley, 2005; Sila
& Ebrahimpour, 2005; Anderson, Rungtusanatham, Schroeder, & Devaraj, 1995; Flynn, Schroeder, & Sakakibara,
1995; Ho, Duffy, & Shih, 1999; Prajogo & Sohal, 2003; 2006; Terziovski & Samson, 1999; Choi & Eboch, 1998 ), but
others have not found a relationship between QM practices TQM- and performance (Nair, 2006; Agus, 2003).

Published by Sciedu Press 93 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

Therefore, quality management (QM) plays an important role in the productivity and performance of an organization.
Therefore, it appears that quality practices are important for continuous survival of Jordanian organizations. Today,
TQM has, despite this debate, a widespread acceptance and the most significant research themes in both the academic
and professional (Dean & Bowen, 1994; Choi & Eboch, 1998; Flynn et al., 1995). However, there is a lack of
agreement on the findings and some results are contradictory with QM theories.
2. Research Objectives
Thus, based on the analysis of past research, This paper aims to investigate a relationship between quality management
practices (QMPs) and organizational performance (OP) in the banking sector through the development of a conceptual
framework, and recognizes the importance of critical success factors (CSFs) of QMPs to organizational performance,
and to develop an instrument for measuring quality management practices for Jordanian banking and in general the
Jordanian context. To reach such a goal, a set of items for measuring QMPs constructs had to be well developed.
Developing a valid instrument for quality management practices which can be used in multiple countries will be
helpful for practical and academic perspectives. In addition, the literature review promises to expose a lack of research
with regard to some critical factors of QM practices. Therefore, the current research proposes a holistic framework for
QM practices based on an extensive review of the factors that contribute to the success QM practices.
The present study attempts to make a contribution, as following: (1) Towards filling a gap in the literature on the
relationship between QMPs and organizational performance, a conceptual framework is devised as shown in figure (1)
In addition, researchers provide empirical evidence for the fact that QMPs contribution to banks performance is
greater in service firms, which partly reflects the actual situation in Jordan and other similar developing countries. The
contribution of this research consequently, lies in the development of the link between quality management and
organizational performance through the complementation of the empirical results about these issues in the banking
sector in Jordan. (2) Many scholars have developed valid scales for quality management practices (e.g.., Saraph,
Benson, & Schroeder, 1989; Flynn et al, 1994; Ahire et al., 1996). However, none of these scales were empirically
tested and validated in the Jordan context. To overcome this limitation, this paper provided a set of a valid and reliable
operational measurement stream of quality management in Jordan.
3. Research Framework and Hypotheses
The objective of this study is to examine the relationship between QM practices elements and organizational
performance. Based on the above literature review, a research framework was developed. Figure 1 Research
framework illustrated this relationship. In this framework, QM practice elements are independent variables, and
organizational performance is a dependent variable correspondingly.
These relationships deal with main hypotheses:
H 1: there is significant, positive relationship between Quality management and organization performance
H 1-1: there is significant, positive relationship between Top management (leadership) and organization performance
H1-2: there is significant, positive relationship between Strategic planning and organization performance.
H1-3: there is significant, positive relationship between Customer focus and organization performance.
H1-4: there is significant, positive relationship between Process management and organizational performance
H1-5: there is significant, positive relationship between Supplier quality and organization performance.
H1-6: there is significant, positive relationship between Employee relation and organization performance.
This paper is organized as follows. The related literature is reviewed to identify key latent variables as well as observed
variables. The relevant literature is reviewed to describe the relationship among variables in the model. These variables
include QM practices, and organizational performance; Next, Empirical validation and refinement of the scales follow.
Finally, the paper concludes with recommendations for future research.
4. Review of Literature
Researchers have reported that one of the problems with QM implementation is the lack of a universally accepted
definition of quality (Eng & Yusof, 2003).
Deming defined quality as multidimensional to produce a product and/or deliver a service that meets the customers
expectations to ensure customer satisfaction (Deming, 1986, P.54). Juran defined quality based on a multiple meaning,
namely (1) Quality consists of those product features which meet the needs of customers and thereby provide product
satisfaction, and (2) quality is apparently associated with customers requirements, and fitness suggests conformance

Published by Sciedu Press 94 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

to measurable product characteristics (Juran, 1988, P.22). Crosbys definition of quality is conformance to
requirements (Crosby, 1979, P.7). Another definition of TQM: "an integrated approach to achieving and sustaining
high quality output, focusing on the maintenance and continuous improvement of processes and defect prevention at all
levels and in all functions of the organization, in order to meet or exceed customer expectations" (Flynn et al., 1994, p.
342).
4.1 Quality Management Theories, Models, and Frameworks
Several QM practices have been developed based on three approaches: contributions from quality leaders, Formal
evaluation models (Quality Award models); and finally, the Measurement studies. The second and third concerned by
the formal evaluation models and measurement studies.
The researchers reviewed contributions by quality leaders such as Deming (1986), Juran (Juran & Gryna, 1993),
Crosby (1979), Feigenbaum (1991), and Ishikawa (1985). In addition to the work of study measurement (Zu, 2009;
Flynn et al., 1994; Saraph et al., 1989; Black & Porter, 1995; Ahire et al., 1996; Kaynak & Hartley, 2005; Sila &
Ebrahimpour, 2005; Prajogo & shoal , 2006; Powell, 1995; Tari, Molina, & Castejon , 2007; Sila, 2007; Agus, Ahmad
& Muhammad, 2009), and Quality Awards frameworks reviewed such as the Malcolm Baldride Quality award
Framework (MBQA), the European Business Excellence Model (EFQM), & King Abdullah II Award (KAAPS).
The contributions from quality leaders have had an influence upon later studies about TQM, in such a way that the
literature on TQM has gradually developed, identifying various practices for effective quality management. Quality
leaders believe that management and the system are the cause of poor quality rather than the workers (Juran & Gryna,
1993). However, a brief overview of their contribution to the quality journey is given, supported by several references.
Deming is well-known for his 14 points of management and the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) Cycle that is still used
today. Deming believed management is responsible for 94% of quality problems, and quality must be built into the
product to achieve a high level of excellence (Deming, 1986). Deming philosophy begins with top management but
maintains that a company must adopt the fourteen points of this system at all levels. Deming fourteen point plan, each
of which can be derived from one or more of his SPK parts, is a complete philosophy of management, that can be
applied to small or large organizations in the public, private sectors, which according to Deming (1986, p. 23) "Are a
signal that management intend to stay in business and aim to protect investors and jobs".
Juran developed the quality trilogy - quality planning, quality control and quality improvement- , and ten steps to
quality improvement (Juran, 1988). Crosby is well-known for his "Quality is free" concept and his zero defects
concepts. Crosbys philosophy can be described best by his four absolutes of quality improvement process (Crosby,
1989).
Feigenbaum (1991) is known as the originator of total quality control, a concept he introduced in the 1950s.
Feigenbaum saw it as a business method and proposed three steps to quality as Quality leadership; Modern quality
technology; and Organizational commitment. TQM requires a high degree of effective functional integration among
people, machines, and information, stressing a systematic approach to quality. Clearly defined total quality system is a
powerful foundation for TQM, and Quality is the responsibility of everybody in the company (Feigenbaum, 1991).
Ishikawa developed the Japanese style of Total Quality control (TQC), Company Wide Quality Control (CWQC)
means that Quality control consists of developing, designing, producing, marketing and servicing products and
services with optimum cost-effectiveness and usefulness, which customers will purchase with satisfaction. To achieve
these aims, all the separate parts of a company must work together (Ishikawa, 1989). Ishikawa made many
contributions to quality, the Ishikawa diagram and the assembly and use of the seven basic tools of quality such as
Pareto analysis, Cause and effect diagrams, Histograms etc. (Ishikawa, 1985).
There are standardized quality models or formal evaluation models used by firms as a guide for their implementation,
or in order to carry out self-assessments of their quality practices. There are several Quality Awards in the world, but
the most accepted domains and demonstrate worldwide activities in this field such as the Deming Prize in Japan, the
European Quality Award (EFQM) in Europe, the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award in the United States of
America, and other similar awards in other countries was the official recognition of the importance of TQM.
Each award model is based on a perceived model of TQM. The award models do not focus solely on either product or
service perfection or traditional quality management methods, but consider a wide range of management activities,
behavior and processes that influence the quality of the final offering. These models provide a useful framework which
firms can evaluate their TQM implementation practices, seek improvement opportunities, and the end results.

Published by Sciedu Press 95 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

These quality award models provide a worldwide framework for evaluating aspects of TQM practices in a firm.
Although each award has its own unique categories and emphasis, there are some common areas. (1) Each model has
two parts: One is TQM enablers; the two is overall business results. (2) Most of these award models emphasize the
importance of leadership, supplier quality management, employee relations, strategy and policy, information, customer
focus, and process management.
The most criticized shortcomings of quality award models are lack of a unified theory that explains how organizational
outcomes are achieved, lack of strategic focus, and lack of credibility, which is not surprising because business
excellence models have been developed and promoted by practitioners (Anderson, Rungtusanatham, & Schroeder,
1994).
Researchers summarized the award models that the most known in the world (the Deming Prize, EFQM Award,
MBNQA frameworks, ISO, & King Abdullah II Award -Jordanian quality award-) as The following the awards
criteria and objectives and Fundamental Quality principles as shown in Table 1 below to explore objectives,
Fundamental principles, and Criteria for Award models.
The measurement studies of the Saraph et al. (1989), Ahire et al. (1996), and Flynn et al. (1994) help both researchers
and managers faced with decisions related to quality management and identified QM practices. These study developing
an instrument for measuring quality management and assessing its reliability and validity, applicable to both industrial
and service sectors (Saraph et al., 1989; Ahire et al., 1996; Flynn et al., 1994). In addition to the work of other scholars
(e.g., Black & Porter, 1995; Powell, 1995; Kaynak & Hartley, 2005; Sila & ebrahimpour, 2005; Prajogo & shoal, 2006;
Tari et al., 2007; Sila, 2007; Agus et al., 2009 ; Zu, 2009).
Critical success factors (CSFs) are the factors that guarantee the successful implementation of QM. Many studies have
attempted to synthesize different QM practices into a meaningful set of CSFs to help users conceptualize the QM
concepts more easily. CSFs are management practices, actions or pre-conditions necessary for successful QM (Saraph
et al., 1989). Quality management practices have been investigated extensively e.g., Saraph et al. (1989), Flynn et al.
(1994), Powell(1995), Ahire et al. (1996), etc., And several studied adopted these scholars studies. Each one of these
studies determined dimensions of QM that applied by organizations to gain competitive advantage.
4.2 Selection and Analysis of QM Frameworks
An extensive literature survey has been carried out to select TQM/QM frameworks for this study. Research into quality
management and TQM has identified many critical success factors that affect an organizations position. Most of the
recent articles on QM CSFs utilized some of factors from Saraph et al. (1989), Flynn et al. (1994), Powell (1995), Ahire
et al. (1996), etc., Or a set of factors from quality literature and very few authors empirically validated the QM CSFs.
Based on the writings of Crosby, Deming, Feigenbaum, Juran, Ishikawa, and several QM implementation studies, and
quality awards existing in different countries. However, most of quality awards in the world are basically derived from
three basic: the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA), the European Quality Award (EFQM) and the
Deming Prize. This study, therefore, includes only these three basic awards as TQM frameworks, in additional King
Abdullah II Award (Jordan).
Researchers have been selected six QMPs for development framework for the banking sector in Jordan; Based on A
detailed analysis of the frameworks with respect to CSFs is carried out and based on the frequency analysis, the CSFs
QMPs are prioritized presented in Table 2 to the selection and Analysis of QM Framework
Therefore, the following six CSFs have emerged out of an above analysis and the most frequency in QM studies; these
elements of QMPs are namely: the Leadership, Strategic Planning, Customer Focus, process management, employee
relation, and supplier management. The other CSFs QMPs that are not presented in Table 2, because of its very few
frameworks frequencies so that researchers omitted it.
The next section provides a brief description for each construct of QM practices.
4.2.1 Leadership (Top Management Support)
The critical factor top management support is cited by most researchers. Strong commitment from the top
management is vital in quality management and leading to higher quality performance. Most of the researchers
consented to this notion (Saraph et al., 1989; Flynn et al., 1994; 1995; Ahire et al., 1996; Juran, 1988; Anderson et al.,
1995).
Senior management acts a driver of TQM implementation, establishing values, goals, and systems to satisfy customers
needs and expectations and improve organizational performance (Ahire et al., 1996; EFQM Award, the Malcolm
Baldrige Quality Award and King Abdullah II Award). Anderson et al. (1994) explained the concept of leadership as:

Published by Sciedu Press 96 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

The ability of top management to establish a practice, and lead a long-term vision for the firm, driven by changing
customer requirements. According to Juran & Gryna (1993), the roles of top management identified as: Establish
quality policies, establish and deploy quality goals, provide resources, provide problem-oriented training, and
improvement.
Therefore there is very strong evidence that the leadership factor is relevant in a quality management such as Top
management accepts quality responsibility; evaluated on quality; participate in quality improvement efforts; makes
strategies and goals for quality; alignment of IS strategy with business strategy; considering market demands and
consumer needs; and organizational performance and profitability (Saraph et al.,1989; Flynn et al., 1994, 1995; Ahire
et al., 1996; Anderson et al., 1995; Black & Porter, 1996; Crosby, 1979; Deming, 1986; Juran & Gryna, 1993; Kaynak,
2003; Powell; 1995; Prajogo & Sohal, 2003; Rao et al., 1999; Sila & Ebrahimpour, 2005; Wilson & Collier, 2000).
Leadership is important in influencing groups of people and mobilizing resources. Effective leadership promotes the
strategic direction of the company to achieve customer satisfaction and business results.
4.2.2 Strategic Planning
Strategic quality planning is defined by Juran & Gryna (1993, p. 300) and indicates the main concepts: Strategic
Quality Planning is a structured process for establishing long-range quality goals, at the highest levels of the
organization, and defining the means to be used to reach those goals. Krumwiede & Charles (2006) emphasized that
the strategic aspects of quality are recognized and embraced by top management in the strategic planning process (p.
37).
Strategic Planning allows firms to set clear priorities and allocate resources for the most important things. The focus of
a TQM practitioner includes a leaders vision of an organizations desired future state, translating vision into strategy,
goals and policy, strategy development, and strategy into reality (Sila & Ebrahimpour, 2005). Within the TQM model
stipulated by MBNQA, Strategic Planning stresses that long-term organizational sustainability and a competitive
environment are key strategic issues that need to be integral parts of an organizations overall planning (NIST, 2010,
p. 39). In the Malcolm Baldrige model, it has been stated that there is a positive link between strategic planning for
quality and quality information and analysis (Wilson & Collier, 2000).
4.2.3 Customer Focus
Several studies have reported a strong link between the delivery of high quality goods and services and profitability
through customer satisfaction (Sila & Ebrahimpour, 2005).
Anderson defined Customer satisfaction as the degree to which a firms customers continually perceives that their
needs are being met by the firms products and services (Anderson et al., 1994). An organization must identify
Customer relationship to Measure customer needs and expectations; involve customers in quality improvement;
determine customer satisfaction (Prajogo & Sohal, 2003; Sila & Ebrahimpour, 2005; Flynn et al., 1994, 1995; Powell,
1995; Ahire et al., 1996; Black & Porter, 1996).
Many scholars mentioned to the importance of customer satisfaction; based Deming work as The consumer is the
most important part of the production line, Quality should be aimed at the needs of the consumer, present and future
(Deming, 1986, p. 32). The customer should be closely involved in the product design and development process, with
input at every stage of the process; so that there is less likelihood of quality problems once full production begins
(Flynn et al., 1994).
The availability of customer complaint information to managers and the degree of the use of customer feedback to
improve product quality reveal the level of customer focus in an organization. As customer expectations are dynamic,
an organization needs to survey customer expectations regularly and modify its operations accordingly (Ahire et al.,
1996).
4.2.4 Employee Relations
An important factor to achieve goals in firms is Workforce management, Workforce management is emphasized on
recognize employee performance on quality; encourage team working; provide training; involve employees in quality
decisions (Saraph et al., 1989; Kaynak, 2003; Prajogo & Sohal, 2003; Anderson et al., 1995; Flynn et al., 1994, 1995;
Powell, 1995; Ahire et al., 1996; Black & Porter, 1996; Wilson & Collier, 2000; Sila & Ebrahimpour, 2005).
The human resource indicated which includes employee training and employee relation was positively related to
quality improvement. A TQM program will be successfully implemented depends on the collaboration and
coordination among a firms workforce (Ho et al., 1999). The employees can make timely and more responsive

Published by Sciedu Press 97 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

decisions to customers can have a positive impact towards customer relations through increased access to information
and resources (Ahire et al., 1996).
Empowering and involving all employees in making continuous improvement is essential; under such conditions
(Flynn et al., 1995; Deming, 1986; Kaynak, 2003; Ho et al., 1999; Ishikawa, 1985; Ahire et al., 1996). The organization
must ensure that an organization-wide training program is available in order to provide employees with the proper
skills (Kaynak, 2003; Anderson et al., 1995; Flynn et al., 1995; Rao, Solis, & Raghu-Nathan, 1999).
4.2.5 Supplier Quality Management
The supplier quality is an important element of quality management in the organization because materials and
purchased parts are a major source of quality problems (Kaynak, 2003; Flynn et al., 1994). Supplier relationship focus
on: Rely on a small number of suppliers; involve suppliers in product development; evaluate suppliers based on quality;
provide training and technical assistance to suppliers (Saraph et al., 1989; Kaynak, 2003; Sila & Ebrahimpour, 2005;
Anderson et al., 1995; Powell, 1995; Ahire et al., 1996; Flynn et al., 1994, 1995; Black & Porter, 1996).
Scholars suggested the organizations selected their suppliers on the basis of quality, rather than only on price
(Feigenbaum, 1991; Ishikawa, 1985). According to Deming (1986) the price has no meaning without a measure of the
quality being purchased.
Supplier quality management enhances the cooperation between suppliers and firms by permitting suppliers
involvement and participation in the design process and in the production process, and suppliers management helps
the procurements of materials meet the firms requirements and be efficiently utilized (Flynn et al., 1995; Kaynak,
2003). Suppliers management used to facilitate tasks such as following cooperating with suppliers to ensure meeting
the customers expectations, managing supplier relationship, involving suppliers in the product development process,
developing strategic alliances with suppliers, and enhancing the process management (Flynn et al., 1995; Anderson et
al., 1995).
4.2.6 Process Management Quality
The effectiveness of process management implementation has been cited as one of the major dimensions of integrated
quality efforts (Anderson et al., 1995). Process refers to combinations of machines, methods, materials, tools, and
people employed in production.
TQM works on the belief that the overall quality of products can be enhanced by improving the quality of the processes
directly or indirectly related to their creation (Ahire et al., 1996).
The objective of process management is to reduce process variation by building quality into the production process
(Flynn et al., 1995; Anderson et al., 1994). That led to increase the quality of outputs as well as decreasing the costs
such as rework costs and waste costs (Anderson et al., 1994; Forza & Flippini, 1998). The maintenance of process
capability to meet production requirements is the important matter in process control and improvement (Feigenbaum,
1991; Juran & Gryna, 1993). Deming confirmed that improving product quality should not be dependent on mass
inspection. Quality comes not from inspection, but from improvement of the production process (Deming, 1986).
MBNQA criteria classify the process management category in the central requirements for identification and
management of core competencies to achieve efficient and effective process management (NIST, 2010). In the EFQM
Excellence Model and King Abdullah II Award, the process management is defined as how the organization designs,
manages and improves its processes in order to support its policy and strategy and fully satisfy, and generate increasing
value for, its customers and other stakeholders (KAAPS, 2010; EFQM, 2010).
4.3 Organizational Performance
TQM is often used as a multidimensional approach to measuring organizational performance, where both financial and
non-financial measures assume equal importance (Sila, 2007). A Literature on TQM suggests various measures of
performance, for instance, Performance was also conceptualized differently across studies.
Key Performance Results, in the EFQM Excellence Model (2010) are defined as What the organization is achieving
in relation to its planned performance. Essentially, the results document the relationship between what organizations
do in terms of quality management practices and the results they achieve in several types of outcomes (NIST, 2010).
The business results' category in all quality award models looks at key measures of organizational performance as
multiple dimensions, including product and service outcomes, financial and market outcomes, customer-focused
outcomes, process effectiveness outcomes , workforce-focused outcomes, and leadership outcomes.

Published by Sciedu Press 98 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

The results dimension in these models used sub-criteria and identifies many possible measures, including some of
popular measures like user satisfaction and service quality and from a stakeholder perspective. Based on quality
management awards the Results as outcomes which we target measure and achieve. The Results criteria cover what an
organization achieves. So that researchers consider the Business results as outcome so they included the result as
dimension in part of organizational performance in this study. MBNQA criteria classify performance in five major
categories: customer evaluation of product and services, financial and market results, human resource result, supplier
and partner performance, and organizational effectiveness results (NIST, 2010).
For measurement performance, many scholars used financial as well as non-financial performance (Powell, 1995; Choi
& Eboch, 1998; Flynn et al., 1995; Forza & Filippini, 1998). And others have considered customer satisfaction
measures to capture performance benefits accrued from QM practices (Choi & Eboch, 1998; Forza & Flippini, 1998;
Anderson et al., 1995; Wilson & Collier, 2000; Terziovski & Samson, 1999).
Based on a pervious review researchers adopted the measurement of organizational performance in term of customer
satisfaction, where this Support by Deming (1986) confirmed the focus on quality will lead to outcomes such as
employee and customer satisfaction, efficiency, and profitability.
The measurement of organizational performance adopted as follows : Customer retention (Improved satisfaction of our
clients) (NIST, 2010; Sila, 2007); Reliability and timely delivery of products/services reaches the customer faster
(Wilson & Collier, 2000, Sila, 2007); Personalized service (Flynn et al., 1995; Sila, 2007); Value for the money spent
(A reduction in the number of customer complaints and grievances) (Dean & Bowen, 1994; NIST, 2010; Sila, 2007).
Based on prescriptions of Deming, Juran, Crosby, and Ishikawa; Saraph et al. Conducted one of a first empirical effort
to validate an instrument for integrated quality management. This study produced 8 different factors, which measure
the quality practice of an organization .The major strength of this instrument was the high level of external validity, for
both manufacturing and service industries were included in the sample (Saraph et al., 1989).
The Flynn et al.s study based on the Saraphs study focuses on a plant rather than an organization as a unit of analysis
and utilizes the perceptions of both line and managerial level employees. This study identified seven dimensions of
quality management primarily based on the empirical and practitioner literature (Flynn et al., 1994, 1995).
Organizations that adopt a quality management strategy focus on achieving and sustaining high quality outputs using
management practices as the inputs and quality performance as the outputs (Flynn et al., 1994).
Based on an extensive review of the conceptual and empirical literature on TQM, Ahire et al. identified, validated, and
tested 12 constructs of integrated quality management through an empirical survey of 371 manufacturing firms (Ahire
et al., 1996). Based on a series of items from the Baldrige model and the literature, Black and porter developed a
39-item questionnaire. This study produced 10 different (Black & porter, 1996)
According to the study of Yang (2006), TQM along with human resource management significantly affected quality
performance, especially with regard to customer and employee satisfaction. According to Sila (2007), customer and
employee satisfaction and streamlined processes together produce improved operational and financial results which
will eventually lead to business excellence. Study by Wilson & Collier (2000) empirically tested the causal
relationships of the MBNQA framework and overall IS quality. They found significant impact and on business results.
There is growing evidence that QM implementation has improved organizations performance and significantly
impacted on most organizations (Dewhurst, Martinez-Lorente, & Sanchez-Rodriguez, 2003).
Several studies showed that QMPs had the strongest effect on the quality performance measures such as Flynn et al.
(1994) and others founded positively correlated with organizational performance such as (Powell, 1995; Ahire et al.,
1996; Samson & Terziovski, 1999; Agus, 2003; Rao et al., 1999; Kaynak, 2003; Prajogo & Sohal, 2003; 2006; Sila &
Ebrahimpour, 2005; Zu, 2009).
5. Methodology
5.1 Instrument Development
The aim of this study is to develop an instrument for measuring TQM implementation for the banking sector in Jordan.
To reach such a goal, a set of items for measuring QM practices constructs had to be well developed. This was realized
on based on a thorough review of the QM literature, expert guidance, and input from colleagues.
Originally the questionnaire was designed in English. The decision was made to translate the research questionnaire
into Arabic and to distribute the questionnaire because of the official language in Jordan, to make it very clear for the
respondents.

Published by Sciedu Press 99 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

The primary data for the study was collected through the survey method by using standardized, structured
self-administered questionnaires. The unit of analysis is the individual since the study is concerned with the
perceptions of individuals. Finally, these results only 384 usable questionnaires were collected comprising the final
sample of the study which comprised of 64 percent of the total number of questionnaires distributed.
5.2 Population and Sample
The target population for this study is employees in the banking sector in Jordan which consist of 22 Commercial banks;
and the number of employees working in its about 14036 employees (Association of Banks in Jordan, 2010). While a
sample of this study consists of 600 employees; which was selected randomly.
5.3 Measurement and Operationalization of Variables
An empirical examination of the proposed model of quality management in this study requires the operationalization of
the theoretical constructs included in the model of study. Measurement statements for each construct were identified
from previous studies, and developed by the author and adopted from previous studies (E.g., Saraph et al., 1989, Ahire
et al., 1996; Powell, 1995; Flynn et al., 1994, 1995). Five point Likerts scales will be used to measure model
dimensions.
The Operationalization of QMPs Constructs shown in Table 3 based on previous literature, the QM practices will be
operationalized using six main dimensions namely leadership, strategic planning, customer focus, employee relation,
supplier quality, and process management.
5.4 Data Analysis and Research Findings
The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) has been used to analyze the data.
The Preliminary analysis was conducted to check for any violations in normality, equality of variances and linearity.
The data from the sample fulfilled all the assumptions allowing for parametric tests to be conducted.
5.4.1 Reliability Analysis
The validity of the instrument researchers adopted items, which were used in previous research; and seeking an opinion
from individuals such as academics and professionals who are experts in their respective area. The scale of Cronbachs
coefficient alpha value is the most widely used statistics to determine the reliability of the measurement; Cronbach
Alphas in our study were Table 4 illustrates test results.
The overall value of Cronbachs alpha for independent variables is above 0.89, which means that the constructs were
reliable for measure the organizational performance. Whereas the alpha value of dependent variable Performance is
0.874, which is in an acceptable range and means that individual constructs were reliable for measure the parameters of
performance.
5.4.2 Descriptive Statistics for Quality Management Variables
Table 5 shows The Results of Descriptive Statistics of QM dimensions and the characteristics of QM dimensions used
in this study. The results indicated the mean of the QM dimensions ranged from (4.05) to (4.20). Top management
(TOP) has the highest mean (4.20) while Process management (PRO) has the lowest mean (4.05) with a minimum
score of (3) and maximum score of (5).
The means of all variables in the study above the scale midpoint which is most respondents share similar opinions
toward each variable in this study. Also the SD is less than one; that is, the variations in respondents opinions were
small. In brief, mean, SD was used to determine the extent of spread of the data.
5.4.3 Correlation Analysis and Multiple Regressions Analysis
The major statistical measure of the relationship is the correlation coefficient. Correlation analysis is primarily
concerned with finding out whether a relationship exists and with determining its magnitude and direction (Saunders et
al., 2007; Hair et al., 1998). In order to know the most contributory of this relationship between the variables, the
multiple regression was conducted. Hair et al. (1998); Saunders et al. (2007) and Sekaran (2003) described the multiple
regressions as a statistical technique to predict the variance in a single dependent variable caused by the effect of more
than one independent variable. In other words, correlation indicates to the existence of the relationship between the
variables while the multiple regressions specify the most crucial variables for this relationship.
5.4.4 Test Hypothesis
The output SPSS we concerned with three tables are summary model, ANOVA and coefficient tables. The main
hypotheses proposed to answer the research questions. The hypothesis was tested by using the correlations and

Published by Sciedu Press 100 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

multiple regressions as it was seeking to determine the relationships between quality management dimensions
(independent variables) and organizational performance (dependent variables).
The main hypothesis is:
H 1: there is significant, positive relationship between Quality management variables and organizational performance.
The Results of Correlation Test between QM variables and OP is shown in Table 6.
The relationships between the QM variables (top management, strategic planning, customer focus, employee relation,
supplier quality, and process management) and OP employed in this study are presented in Table 6. Using correlation
analysis, the results show that all variables are positive correlation but the results show that the four out of six variables
(top management, strategic planning, customer focus, and employee relation) are highly positively correlated with the
OP but process management and supplier quality are a weak positive correlation and not significant with OP. The
correlation value suggests the four out of the six QM dimensions are significantly correlated to the OP and the rest are
supplier quality and process management is not significantly correlated to OP. Furthermore, the result showed the QM
overall is a positive and significant correlation with OP.
The highest correlation values with OP are customer focus, employee relation, top management, and strategic planning.
This indicates that these four variables have a strong influence on OP. On the other hand, the process management and
supplier quality have not influenced on OP. In general, the findings indicate that four of QM variables are supported
and impact on OP in their banks. So the result of the correlation analysis, therefore, supported all the hypothesized
relationships developed in this study excepted process management and supplier quality.
The results of correlations indicated the existence of the relationship between the variables but did not identify the most
crucial variables for this relationship. To achieve this objective, the multiple regressions were conducted between QM
variables and OP. Stepwise Multiple Regression analysis was used to determine the importance of each independent
variable and its contribution to the mathematical model.
The multiple regressions were conducted between QM dimensions namely (top management, strategic planning,
customer focus, employee relation, supplier quality, and process management) as they were the independent variables,
and the OP a dependent variable. The results of multiple regression analysis between QMPs variables and OP were
shown in Tables 7 and 8.
Table 7 revealed that the R2 adjusted value of 0.847 indicates that four out of factors proposed in our model, including
top management, strategic planning, customer focus, employee relation, can explain 84.7% of the variance in OP as a
dependent variable. Table 7 shows that the measures of significance for the overall model (F = 530.440; sig. =; Sig. =
0.000), indicated the model is statistically significant.
Table 8 showed the independent variables that were found to contribute to this relationship (a greater effect on the DV)
were four out of the six of the QM variables which had significant relationships with OP. These four variables are top
management, strategic planning, customer focus, and employee relation. But process management and supplier quality
were out of the regression equation which provides confirmation of the previous analysis as a weak.
According to the standardized beta (Beta-B-) coefficient, we can arrange them according to strongest contribution in
explaining the dependent variable.
The variable employee relation has been the strongest contribution (B=0. 356; sig. =0. 000; R2adj=0. 828) which
explained with (customer focus and top management) 82.8% of the variation in (OP) the dependent variable, followed
by variable top management (B= 0.258; sig. =0. 000; R2adj=0. 791) which explained with (customer focus) 79.1% of
the variation in the dependent variable. The third variable was customer focus (B= 0.249; sig. =0. 000; R2adj=0. 739)
which explained 73.9% of the variation in the dependent variable. The fourth and final variable was strategic planning
(B= 0.185; sig. =0. 000; R2adj=0. 847) which explained with (customer focus, top management and employee relation)
84.7% of the variation in the dependent variable. Nonetheless, process management and supplier quality variable was
out of the regression equation which provides confirmation of the previous analysis because of a weak correlation and
did not meet the criteria of Multiple Regression.
Consequently, our proposed hypotheses are tested and discussed below:
Table 9 summary of the results of the hypothesis; as shown in Table 9, the results of the hypothesis show that T value,
significance level, the Beta value and the decision. That indicates that the top management, strategic planning,
employee relation, and customer focus, have a significant direct impact on the ISS overall .On the other hand, our
hypothesis supported, and asserts that there is a strong trend among the individuals in the sample for the impact of top
management, strategic planning, employee relation, and customer focus on OP. On the other hand, supplier quality and

Published by Sciedu Press 101 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

process management have no significant impact on the OP. Moreover, the values of VIF and tolerance showed no
multicollinearity between the variables as their values less than 10 for the VIF and more than 0.10 for tolerance level as
suggested by Hair et al. (1998). Another way to check it is a coefficient of correlation the highest in this research is
0.859, which is below the cutoff of 0.90 for the collinearity problem. Therefore, multicollinearity problem does not
occur in this research (Hair et al., 1998).
The findings are consistent with previous studies on relationships between quality management variables and OP (e.g.:
Flynn et al., 1994; Powell, 1995; Saraph et al., 1989; Sila, 2007; Jaafreh, 2011; Kaynak & Hartley, 2005; Kaynak, 2003;
Prajogo & Sohal, 2003; 2006; Sila & Ebrahimpour, 2005; Zu, 2009).
6. Conclusions and Future Research Directions
To achieve this objective a systematic approach study was employed to determine the quality management dimensions
used in the previous literature and suitable to be tested in this study. This approach provided a new instrument for
assessing the quality management dimensions required for all management levels in the banking sector in Jordan.
The findings of this study contributed to both theoretical and managerial perspectives. From the theoretical standpoint,
the results gained from this study consistent with the theories and the previous literature which supported these theories
by providing empirical evidence throwing in enrichment the body of knowledge about the QM theory.
From the managerial perspective, the results of this study showed that there was a significant relationship between
quality management dimensions (leadership, strategic planning, customer focus, and employee relation) and OP. This
means the managers should be concerned about these dimensions to enhance the OP of the organization.
In conclusion, the researcher offers this brief summary of conclusions. This study has advanced research in the QM
field by (1) providing support for using the model QM at the individual level of analysis in its entirety; (2) Shown
support for the use of objective, real features to be used both as dependent and independent variables in the analysis to
provide practical results that can be used immediately by practitioners in the real world, and by researchers in a further
analysis. (3) The results showing how QM concept can be applied in Jordans context and providing some empirical
evidence from a survey that QM model are effective. Finally, the proposed model has the potential to contribute to the
quality and the OP and the organization by providing feedback to manage and improve the OP to better meet the needs
of the organization.
Although the results of this study only drawn from the banking sector in Jordan. It is acknowledged that differences
among sectors may impact upon the results, but these are beyond the scope of this research, and those issues could be
addressed by further research.
The theoretical model of this study can be further extended as well. Moreover, integrating those findings into the model
and empirically testing it would make a further research contribution in this vital research stream. The researchers
could also build more detailed models specific to a particular set of circumstances. Future research needs to continue
the development of sound theoretical models and instruments.
References
Agus, A. (2003). The Structural Linkages Between TQM, Product Quality Performance, and Business Performance:
Preliminary Empirical Study in Electronics Companies. Singapore Management Review, 27(1), 87-105.
Agus, A., Mhd.Suhaimi Ahmad, & Jaafar, M. (2009). An Empirical Investigation on The Impact of Quality
Management on Productivity and Profitability: Associations and Mediating Effect. Contemporary Management
Research, 5(1), 77-92.
Ahire, S., Golhar, D., & Waller, M. (1996). Development and Validation of TQM Implementation Constructs.
Decision Sciences, 27(1), 2356. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb00842.x
Anderson, J.C., Rungtusanatham, M., & Schroeder, R.G. (1994). A Theory of Quality Management Underlying the
Deming Management Method. Academy Of Management Review, 19(3), 472-509.
Anderson, J.C., Rungtusanatham, M., Schroeder, R.G., & Devaraj, S. (1995). A Path Analytic Model of a Theory of
Quality Management Underlying the Deming Management Method: Preliminary Empirical Findings. Decisions
Sciences, 26(5), 637658. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1995.tb01444.x
Association of Banks in Jordan. (2010). the Annual Reports of 2010. [Online] Available:
http://www.abj.org.jo/AOB_Images/634533916428491982.pdf (March 4, 2011)
Black, J.A., & Porter, L.J. (1995). An Empirical Model for Total Quality Management. Total Quality Management,
6(2), 149-164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09544129550035495

Published by Sciedu Press 102 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

Black, S.A., & Porter, L.J. (1996). Identification of the Critical Factors of TQM. Decision Sciences, 27(1), 1-21.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb00841.x
Choi, T. Y., & Eboch, K. (1998). The TQM Paradox: Relations Among TQM Practices, Plan Performance, and
Customer Satisfaction. Journal of Operations Management, 17(1), 59-75.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(98)00031-X
Crosby, P. (1979). Quality Is Free. New York, And Mentor.
Crosby, P. (1989). Let's Talk Quality: 96 Questions You Always Wanted to Ask Phil Crosby. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Dean, J., & Bowen, D. (1994). Management Theory and Total Quality: Improving Research and Practice Through
Theory Development. Academy of Management Review, 19(3), 392-418.
Deming Prize. (2011). [Online] Available: http://www.juse.or.jp/e/publications/ (October 15, 2011)
Deming, W.E. (1986). Out of the Crisis. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.
Dewhurst, F., Martnez-Lorente, A., & Sanchez-RodrGuez, C. (2003). An Initial Assessment of the Influence of IT
on TQM: A Multiple Case Study. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 23(4), 348374.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443570310467302
EFQM. (2010). European Foundation Quality Model (EFQM 2010). [Online] Available: http://www.efqm.org
(August 17, 2011)
Eng, Q. E., & Yusof, S. M. (2003). A Survey of TQM Practices in the Malaysian Electrical and Electronic Industry.
Total Quality Management, 14, 63-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783360309708
Feigenbaum, A.V. (1991). Total Quality Control. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY.
Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G., & Sakakibara, S. (1995). The Impact of Quality Management Practices on
Performance and Competitive Advantage. Decision Sciences, 26(5), 659691.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1995.tb01445.x
Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G., & Sakakibara, S. (1994). A Framework for Quality Management Research and an
Associated Measurement Instrument. Journal of Operations Management, 11(4), 339-366.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(97)90004-8
Forza, C., & Flippini, R. (1998). TQM Impact on Quality Conformance and Customer Satisfaction: A Casual Model.
International Journal of Production Economics, 55(1), 120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(98)00007-3
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis (5th ed.). Prentice
Hall: USA.
Ho, D.C.K., Duffy, V.G., & Shih, H.M. (1999). An Empirical Analysis of Effective TQM Implementation in the
Hong Kong Electronics Manufacturing Industry. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 9(1), 1-25.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6564(199924)9:1<1::AID-HFM1>3.0.CO;2-L
Ishikawa, K. (1985). What Is Total Quality Control? The Japanese Way. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Ishikawa, K. (1989). Introduction to Quality Control. JUSE Press Ltd, Tokyo.
Ismail, S. (2006). Examining the Effects of Contextual Factors on TQM and Performance through the Lens of
Organizational Theories: An Empirical Study. Journal of Operations Management, 25, 83-109.
ISO. (2011). International Organization for Standardization. [Online] Available: http://www.iso.org/iso/home.htm
(October 7, 2011)
Jaafreh, Ali, B. (2011). Quality Management for Information Systems Effectiveness: An Empirical study of Jordanian
industrial firms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Banking and Financial Sciences, Amman, Jordan.
Juran, & F.M., Gryna. (1993). Quality Planning and Analysis (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill Book Company: New York.
Juran, J.M. (1988). On planning For Quality. London: Collier Macmillan.
KAAPS. (2010). King Abdullah II Award for Excellence in the private sector (KAAPS Booklet 2010). [Online]
Available: http://www.kaaps.jo/award-criteria (August 25, 2011)
Kaynak, H. (2003). The Relationship between Total Quality Management Practices and Their Effects on Firm
Performance. Journal of Operations Management, 21(4), 405435.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(03)00004-4

Published by Sciedu Press 103 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

Kaynak, H., & Hartley, Janet L. (2005). Exploring Quality Management Practices and High Tech Firm Performance.
Journal of High Technology Management Research, 16, 255272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hitech.2005.10.002
Krumwiede, K. R., & Charles, S. L. (2006). Finding the Right Mix. How to Match Strategy and Management
Practices to Enhance Firm Performance. Strategic Finance, 87, 37-43.
Nair, A. (2006). Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Quality Management Practices and Firm Performance
Implications for Quality Management Theory Development. Journal of Operations Management, 24(6), 948-75.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2005.11.005
NIST. (2010). National Institute of Standards and Technology: the 2009-2010 Criteria for Performance Excellence
(MBNQA). [Online] Available: www.nist.gov/baldrige/publications/criteria.cfm (September 16, 2011)
Powell, T.C. (1995). Total Quality Management as Competitive Advantage: A Review and Empirical Study.
Strategic Management Journal, 16, 1537. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250160105
Prajogo, D.I., & Sohal, A.S. (2003). The Relationship between TQM Practices, Quality Performance, and Innovation
Performance: an Empirical Examination. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 20(8),
901-918. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656710310493625
Prajogo, D.I., & Sohal, A.S. (2006). The Integration of TQM and Technology/R&D Management in Determining
Quality and Innovation Performance. Omega, 34(3), 296-312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2004.11.004
Rao, S. S., L. E. Solis, & Raghu-Nathan. (1999). A Framework for International Quality Management Research:
Development and Validation of a Measurement. Total Quality Management, 10(7), 1047-1075.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0954412997226
Samson, D., & Terziovski, M. (1999). The Relationship Between Total Quality Management Practices and
Operational Performance. Journal of Operations Management, 17, 393-409.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(98)00046-1
Saraph, J.V., Benson, P.G., & Schroeder, R.G. (1989). An Instrument for Measuring the Critical Factors of Quality
Management. Decision Sciences, 20, 810-829. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1989.tb01421.x
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research Methods for Business Students. (4th ed.). London:
Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Sekaran, U. (2003). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach. (4th ed.). New York: John Wiley
and Sons.
Sila, I. (2007). Examining the Effects of Contextual Factors on TQM and Performance through the Lens of
Organizational Theories: An Empirical Study. Journal of Operations Management, 25, 83-109.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2006.02.003
Sila, I., & Ebrahimpour, M. (2005). Critical Linkages among TQM Factors and Business Results. International
Journal of Operations and Production Management, 25(11), 1123-55.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443570510626925
Sureshchandar, G. S., Rajendran, C., & Anantharaman, R. N. (2001). A Conceptual model for total quality
management in service organizations. Total Quality Management, 2(3), 343-363.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09544120120034492
Tari, J. J., Molina, J. F., & Castejon, J. L. (2007). The Relationship between Quality Management Practices and
Their Effects on Quality Outcomes. European Journal of Operational Research, 183(2), 483-501.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.10.016
Terziovski, M., & Samson, D. (1999). The Link Between Total Quality Management Practice and Organizational
Performance. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 16, 226-237.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656719910223728
Wilson, D. D., & Collier, D. A. (2000). An Empirical Investigation of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award
Causal Model. Decision Science, 31(2), 361- 390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2000.tb01627.x
Yang, C. C. (2006). The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on The Implementation of Total Quality
Management. The TQM Magazine, 18, 162173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09544780610647874
Zu, Xingxing. (2009). Infrastructure and Core Quality Management Practices: How Do They Affect Quality?
International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 26(2), 129-149.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656710910928789

Published by Sciedu Press 104 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

 www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

Table 1. To explore objectives, fundamental principles, and criteria for award models

Awards Objectives Fundamental Quality principles Criteria

The Malcolm Baldrige To help improve performance Visionary leadership, customer-driven Leadership; Strategic
National Quality practices and capabilities for excellence, organizational and personal Planning; Customer Focus;
Award The National enhancing the value of the learning, valuing workforce members Measurement, Analysis and
Institute of Standards organizations' products and and partners, agility, focus on the Knowledge Management;
and Technology services to customers; To future, managing for innovation, Workforce Focus; Process
(NIST), The 2009-2010 facilitate communication and management by fact, social Management; Results: Product
Criteria for sharing of best practices among responsibility, focus on results and Outcomes, Customer-Focused
Performance U.S. organizations; To serve as a creating value, and systems Outcomes, Financial and
Excellence. working tool for understanding perspective. Market Outcomes,
http://www.nist.gov/bal and managing performance; Workforce-Focused
drige/publications/criter planning, training and Outcomes, Process
ia.cfm). assessment.; To guide Effectiveness Outcomes,
organizations toward Leadership Outcomes
performance excellence
European Foundation To stimulate and assist Achieving Balanced Results; Adding Leadership; People; Strategy;
Quality Model management teams in adopting Value for Customers; Leading with Partnership and resources;
(EFQM) 2010 and applying the principles of Vision, Inspiration and Integrity; Processes, products and
(http://www.efqm.org.) organize; To improve the Managing by Processes; Succeeding services; People results;
competitiveness of European through People; Nurturing Creativity Customer results; Society
Industry; To close the gap of and Innovation; Building Partnerships; results; Key results.
competitiveness between Europe Taking Responsibility for a Sustainable
and the USA and Japan Future.
The Deming Prize To evaluate and recognize Create a vision, and demonstrate Customer focus; Leadership;
-Japan- methods of companywide commitment; Learn the new Quality planning; Human
(http://www.juse.or.jp/e quality control for Japanese philosophy; Understand inspection; resource development;
/publications/) businesses. Stop making decisions purely on the Information management;
basis of cost; Improve constantly and Process management; Supplier
forever; Institute training; Institute relationship; Organization
leadership; Drive out fear; Optimize the culture; Social responsibilities;
efforts of the teams; Eliminate Business results.
exhortations; Eliminate numerical
quotas and management by objective;
Remove barriers to pride in
workmanship; Encourage education
and self-improvement; Take action.
ISO The main goal of ISO 9000 is to Customer focus, leadership,
9000:2005, 9004:2000, produce an effective quality involvement of people, a
(http://www.iso.org/iso/ system that will assist in process approach, a system
home.htm). eliminating errors, save money approach to management,
on rework and wasted work and continual improvement, a
satisfy customer requirements; factual approach to decision
To maintain quality; To support making, and mutually
continuous improvement; Used beneficial supplier
by senior as a framework to relationships
guide; their organizations
towards improved performance.
The King Abdullah II Enhancing the competitiveness Achieving Balanced Results; Adding 1. Leadership, 2. Strategy, 3.
Award for Excellence of Jordanian businesses by Value for Customers; Leading with People, 4. Partnerships &
in private sector promoting quality awareness Vision, Inspiration & Integrity; Resources, 5. Processes,
(KAAPS) and performance excellence, Managing by Processes; Succeeding Products and Services, 6.
(KAAPS Booklet recognizing quality and business through People; Nurturing Creativity & Customer Results, 7. People
2010; achievements of Jordanian Innovation.; Building Partnerships; Results, 8. Society Results, 9.
http://www.kaaps.jo/a organizations, and publicizing Taking Responsibility for a Sustainable Key Results.
ward-criteria) these organizations successful Future.
performance strategies and
sharing them.

Published by Sciedu Press 105 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

 www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

Table 2. Selection and analysis of QM framework

Authors / QMPs Customer Employee Leadership Process Results Strategic Supplier

factors focus Relations quality Planning quality
management management
Ahire et al. (1996) 1 1 1 1 1 1
Anderson et al. (1995) 1 1 1
Black & Porter (1995) 1 1 1 1 1 1
Crosby (1979) 1 1 1 1 1 1
Deming prize 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
EFQM (European 1 1 1 1 1 1
Quality Award)
Feigenbaum (1991) 1 1 1 1 1 1
Flynn et al. (1994) 1 1 1 1 1 1
Ishikawa (1985) 1 1 1 1 1
Ismail (2006) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Juran (1988) 1 1 1 1 1 1
Kaynak & Hartley 1 1 1 1 1 1
(2005)
King Abdullah II Award 1 1 1 1 1 1
for Excellence
Malcolm Baldrige 1 1 1 1 1 1
Award (U.S.)
Prajogo & Sohal (2006) 1 1 1 1 1 1
Rao et al. (1999) 1 1 1 1 1
Samson & Terziovski 1 1 1 1 1
(1999)
Saraph et al. (1989) 1 1 1 1 1
Sureshchandar et al. 1 1 1
(2001)
Tar et al. (2007) 1 1 1 1 1 1
Xingxing Zu (2009) 1 1 1 1 1
Zhang et al. (2000) 1 1 1 1 1
Deming (1986) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
ISO standards 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Powell (1995) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Sila & Ebrahimpour 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
(2005)
Agus et al. (2009) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Sila (2007) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Published by Sciedu Press 106 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

 www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

Table 3. Operationalization of the constructs QM

Dimension of QM Definition Related Studies
Leadership Acceptance of quality responsibility by top management. Evaluation of top Saraph et al.(1989); Ahire
management on quality. Participation by top management in quality et al. (1996); Flynn et al.
improvement efforts. Specificity of quality goals. Importance attached to quality (1994,1995); Agus et al.
in relation to cost and schedule. Comprehensive quality planning (Saraph et al., (2009); Kaynak & Hartley
1989, p. 818). (2005); Tar et al. (2007);
Strategic planning Strategic quality planning is defined by Strategic Quality Planning is a Kaynak (2003); Zu
structured process for establishing long-range quality goals, at the highest levels (2009).
of the organization, and defining the means to be used to reach those
goals.(Juran, 1993, p. 300)
Customer focus Customers involvement in product or service design. Use of customer
satisfaction surveys. Focusing on achieving greater customer satisfaction (Ahire
et al., 1996; Powell, 1995).
Employee relation Implementation of employee involvement and quality circles. Open employee
participation in quality decisions. Responsibility of employees for quality.
Employee recognition for superior quality performance. Effectiveness of
supervision in handling quality issues. On-going quality awareness of all
employees (Saraph et al., 1989, p. 818).
Process management Clarity of process ownership, boundaries, and steps. Less reliance on inspection.
Use of statistical process control. Selective automation. Fool-proof process
design. Preventive maintenance. Employee self-inspection. Automated testing
(Saraph et al., 1989, p. 818).
Supplier quality Fewer dependable suppliers. Reliance on supplier process control. Strong
interdependence of supplier and customer. Purchasing policy emphasizing
quality rather than price. Supplier quality control. Supplier assistance in product
development (Saraph et al., 1989, p. 818).

Table 4. Reliability analysis

Variable Cronbach's alpha No. of items
Net benefit (Net) 0.86 4
Top management (TOP) 0.757 6
Strategic planning (PS) 0.704 6
Customer focus (CUS) 0.828 5
Employee relation (EMP) 0.787 4
Supplier quality (SUPL) 0.715 4
Process management (PRO) 0.70 3
OP (dependant variable) 0.874 4

Table 5. Results of descriptive statistics of overall QM dimensions

Variables Mean Std. Deviation
Top management (TOP) 4.20 .408
Strategic planning (PS) 4.14 .388
Quality management overall (QM) 4.11 .301
Customer focus (CUS) 4.09 .432
Supplier quality (SUPL) 4.09 .472
Employee relation (EMP) 4.07 .435
Process management (PRO) 4.05 .522
Valid N 384

Published by Sciedu Press 107 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

 www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

Table 6. Results of correlation test between QM variables and OP

Correlations
TOP PS CUS EMP SUPL PRO QM OP
OP Pearson Correlation .768** .705** .860** .856** .071 .056 .771** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .166 .270 .000
N 384
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 7. Results of multiple regression analysis between QM variables and OP

Model Summary
Change Statistics ANOVA
Std. Error R
of the Square Sig. F
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Estimate Change F Change df1 df2 Change F Sig.
1 .860a .740 .739 .186 .740 1085.563 1 382 .000 1.086E3 .000a
2 .890b .792 .791 .166 .052 95.303 1 381 .000 724.428 .000b
3 .911c .829 .828 .151 .037 82.960 1 380 .000 614.498 .000c
4 .921d .848 .847 .142 .019 48.385 1 379 .000 530.440 .000d
a. Predictors: (Constant), CUS
b. Predictors: (Constant), CUS, TOP
c. Predictors: (Constant), CUS, TOP, EMP
d. Predictors: (Constant), CUS, TOP, EMP, PS
e. Dependent Variable: OP

Table 8. Results for multiple regression analysis between QM variables and OP

Coefficients
Unstandardized Standardized 95% Confidence
Coefficients Coefficients Interval for B Collinearity Statistics
Lower Upper
Model B Std. Error Beta T Sig. Bound Bound Tolerance VIF
4 (Constant) .360 .087 4.140 .000 .189 .531
CUS .210 .039 .249 5.397 .000 .133 .286 .187 5.337
TOP .230 .026 .258 8.913 .000 .179 .281 .476 2.102
EMP .298 .036 .356 8.234 .000 .227 .369 .214 4.681
PS .174 .025 .185 6.956 .000 .125 .223 .564 1.773
a. Dependent Variable: OP

Published by Sciedu Press 108 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031

www.sciedu.ca/ijfr International Journal of Financial Research Vol. 4, No. 1; 2013

Table 9. Summary of the results of the hypothesis

(IV) T Sig. Beta Results
Customer Focus 5.397 .000 .249 Accepted
Top Management 8.913 .000 .258 Accepted
Strategic Planning 6.956 .000 .185 Accepted
Employee Relation 8.234 .000 .356 Accepted
Supplier Quality -.996 0.32 -0.05 Rejected
Process Management -0.05 0.96 -.003 Rejected
DV: OP

Qualitymanagementdimensions OrganizationalPerformance

1 Topmanagement(leadership)
2 Strategicplanning
3 Customerfocus
4 Processmanagement
5 Supplierquality
6 Employeerelation

Figure 1. Research framework

Published by Sciedu Press 109 ISSN 1923-4023 E-ISSN 1923-4031