TQM paradigm for higher education in the Philippines

Abstract

Purpose

Critical success factors (CSFs) in total quality management (TQM) implementation are vital to the quality improvement of organizations, including higher education institutions (HEIs). The present study aims to attempt to develop a TQM paradigm contextualized to HEIs in the Philippine setting.

Design/methodology/approach

A total of 309 randomly selected officials/faculty members from four public and four private HEIs participated in the study. Data were collected through self-administered questionnaires. Factor analysis, using principal components with varimax rotation, was used to extract the main CSFs for TQM.

Findings

Results showed the extraction of two principal components. The first component (accounting for 42.95 per cent of the variance in the model) consisted of 25 quality indicators generally considered to fall under “people empowerment” and “continuous quality improvement” (CQI), while the second component (accounting for 42.31 per cent of the variance in the model) consisted of 24 quality indicators that fall under “leadership commitment” and “stakeholder satisfaction”.

Research limitations/implications

The study was focused on determining the CSFs in the TQM implementation of Philippine HEIs.

Practical implications

Findings of this study may be used by HEIs as basis for planning, decision-making and in directing their strategies and resources in the integration of the paradigm in their business process.

Social implications

The proposed TQM paradigm, upon adoption by Philippine HEIs, may be used as a quality measurement tool to improve performance, embed and sustain quality culture.

Originality/value

This is the first study that developed a TQM paradigm for Philippine HEIs. The identified CSFs are basically the same as those in the cited studies but with relatively greater emphasis on people empowerment.

Citation

Rodriguez, J., Valenzuela, M. and Ayuyao, N. (2018), "TQM paradigm for higher education in the Philippines", Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 101-114. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-12-2015-0048