Understanding the importance of the concept of the four quality paradigms (CFQP) in TQM and business excellence: a reaction to Sánchez-Franco et al. (2023) and Silvestri et al. (2024)

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

There is a gap in the discussion on what TQM is and on the paradigms that constitute it. Van Kemenade and Hardjono try to contribute and stimulate the dialogue. They developed a Concept of Four Quality Paradigms (CFQP). However, it does not appear to be easy to understand the importance of the concept. In their article in this journal A new holistic definition of TQM towards sustainability, Silvestri et al. review many articles on TQM. One of these is the Concept of the Four Quality Paradigms by Van Kemenade & Hardjono. They might have misinterpreted the concept which states that Total Quality Management is just the combination of all four paradigms, the empirical, the reference, the reflective and the emergence paradigm. In their article in this journal Clustering abstracts from the literature on Quality Management (1980–2020), Sánchez-Franco et al. analysed the Quality Movement. They compared their results with the paradigms by Van Kemenade & Hardjono. Surprisingly, the crucial emergence paradigm, is lacking. That leads to two conclusions: more discussion of the paradigms is needed and more research in TQM journals on the emergence paradigm is required since it relates to increasing uncertainty about solutions to our quality problems.