This month we explore a renowned multiple-case study commonly assigned as foundational readings in organization studies programs. Mark Zbaracki’s “The rhetoric and reality of Total Quality Management” chronicled the development and introduction of Total Quality Management (TQM) into the corporate environment, only to find that in many cases its implementation did not align with the promises made by leaders about process improvements nor did firms fully exercise all the practices and activities that TQM required. The question that Zbaracki posed was more than to what extent did this rhetoric-reality unfold, but why?
Zbaracki framed the problem as one of institution theory, drawing from DiMaggio & Powell (see Episode 120), whereby “the symbolic value of something supplants its technical value” (Zbaracki, 1998, p. 603). In this case, organizations claiming to use TQM did so because it conferred legitimacy to stakeholders and potential customers, even though TQM implementation was flagging. The central importance of legitimacy meant that stories of success were likely to be espoused and shared, while failures would be suppressed and hidden away from view. Thus, as time moved along, the rhetoric-reality gap widened to the point where workers in some firms studied had little idea of what TQM was, let alone to what extent it was being exercised.
The multiple-case study approach used was uncommon. Rather than examine a multitude of similar organizations to triangulate commonalities, Zbaracki sought cases of organizations that had little in common with each other apart from their adopting TQM. The five sites included both government and commercial organizations, different reasons for adopting TQM, different levels of on-site expertise and methods of training and integration, and who were at different points of implementation. Some were in the early stages while others were more mature but each were experiencing various challenges such as unmovable barriers, manager or executive turnover, or internal resistance.
Zbaracki used an evolutionary model of change to structure the study but departed from the typical “survival of the fittest” metaphor. Rather he used it more dramaturgically, to tell the stories of how cycles of variation, selection, and retention explains decisions made at each step to separately manage the rhetoric and reality. What resulted is a rich model that shows how legitimacy drove decision making, especially when it came to making the organization look good at the potential expense of the organization’s actual performance. A terrific study that has relevance for understanding how some new ideas can go wrong.
You may also download the audio files here: Part 1 | Part 2 | Supplement
Read with us:
Zbaracki, M. (1998). The rhetoric and reality of Total Quality Management. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(3), 602-636.
To know more:
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1974). Neoclassical vs. evolutionary theories of economic growth: critique and prospectus. The Economic Journal, 84(336), 886-905.
