Cultural Differences Between TQ and Traditional
Organizations
Some of the contrasting differences between modern TQ organizations and traditional
organizations that pre-dated the quality revolution are summarized below. 1
Organizational structures: Traditional management views an enterprise as a collection of
separate, highly specialized individual performers and units, linked within a functional
hierarchy. Lateral connections are made by intermediaries close to the top of the
Role of people: Traditional management views people as a commodity, virtually
interchangeable, and to be developed based on the perceived needs of the enterprise.
People are passive contributors, with little autonomy, doing what they are told and
nothing more. TQ views people as the enterprise’s true competitive edge. Leadership
Definition of quality: In traditional management, quality is the adherence to internal
specifications and standards. The absence of defects, therefore, defines quality.
Inspection of people’s work by others is necessary to control defects. Innovation is not
Goals and objectives: In traditional management, the functional provinces are in a zero-
sum game in which there must be a loser for every winner. People do not cooperate
unless it serves their own or their unit’s best interests. Parochialism is a fact of business
life. In TQ, self-interest and the greater good are served simultaneously by serving one’s
customers. Everyone wins or no one wins. Cooperation takes the place of competition.
Knowledge: In traditional management, quality embodies knowledge applicable only to
manufacturing and engineering. In TQ, quality embodies knowledge applicable to all the
disciplines of the enterprise. All levels of management and the workforce must, as
Deming often said, “learn the new philosophy.”
Management systems: In traditional management, managers oversee departments or
functions or collections of individuals. The pieces do not know they are interdependent.
Reward systems: In traditional management, performance appraisal, recognition, and
reward systems place people in an internally competitive environment. This environment
Management’s role: Once the organization has found a formula for success it is reluctant
to change it. Management’s job, therefore, is to maintain the status quo by preventing
change. In TQ, the environment in which the enterprise interacts constantly changes. If
the enterprise continues to do what it has done in the past, its future performance, relative
Union-management relations: In traditional management, the adversarial relationship
between union and management is inevitable. The only area for negotiation lies in
traditional issues, such as wages, health, and safety. In TQ, the union becomes a partner
Teamwork: In traditional management, hierarchical “chimney” organization structures
promote identification with functions and tend to create competition, conflict, and
adversarial relations between functions. In TQ, formal and informal mechanisms
encourage and facilitate teamwork and team development across the entire enterprise.
Control: In traditional management, control is achieved by pre-established inflexible
responsive patterns laid down in the book of rules and procedures. People are customers
of the “book,” which prescribes appropriate behaviors. In TQ, control results from shared
values and beliefs, as well as knowledge of mission, purpose, and customer requirements.
Responsibility: In traditional management, the manager’s job is to do the subordinates’
planning, and inspect the work to make sure the plans are followed. In TQ, the manager’s
job is to manage his or her own process and relationships with others and give
subordinates the capability to do the same through empowerment. The manager must be a
coach and facilitator rather than a director.
Motivation: In traditional management, motivation is achieved by aversive control.
People are motivated to do what they do to avoid failure and punishment, rather than
contribute something of value to the enterprise. People are afraid to do anything that
1 Ed Baker, “The Chief Executive Officer’s Role in Total Quality: Preparing the Enterprise for
Leadership in the New Economic Age,” Proceedings of the William G. Hunter Conference on
Quality, Madison, WI (1989).