e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

The Challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Sharjah University in UAE
Dr Abdel Moneim M. B. AHMED Bashar I. HAMDOON

By

WP-0102062007

1

The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

The Challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Sharjah University in UAE
Dr Abdel Moneim M. B. Ahmed Bashar I. Hamdoon

By

WP-0102062007

The working paper series are produced by the e-TQM College and are to be circulated for discussion purposes only. Their contents should be considered preliminary. The papers are expected to be published in due course, in a revised form and should not be quoted without the author’s permission. E-TQM College working paper series is available through www.etqm.ae/qme

2

The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

The Challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Sharjah University in UAE Dr Abdel Moneim M. B. AHMED Director of Graduate Studies e-TQM College P.O. Box 71400, Dubai, UAE E-mail: A.Ahmed@etqm.ae Bashar I. HAMDOON University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE

ABSTRACT The importance of the higher education for the development of our lives and civilizations is beyond dispute. The current higher education is running on a declined line. One of the most likely treatments is the adoption of industry-successful quality systems and specifically TQM. The research tries to investigate the challenges and obstacles of TQM implementation in higher education institutions in UAE. To do so a survey is conducted at a leading institution, University of Sharjah, using multiple parts questionnaire. The results after analysis indicated that there is a semi consensus among the staff on the importance of adapting quality system to the institutions after they acknowledge the conjuncture of higher education. Almost all obstacles that cited in the questionnaire considered as real obstacles, by the staff, and most likely hard ones preventing the successful implementation of quality system in the institution. However, the results mentioned, in the same time, that staff knowledge level about TQM terms or aspects was simple. The results are supported by a theoretical background about variety perspectives of the research subject, which is stated at the beginning of the research with reference to Arabic and non-Arabic researchers’ works. Conclusions and proper recommendations concluded the research. Keywords Insurance Industry, Questionnaires Performance Management, Performance Appraisal System,

3

The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

1. INTRODUCTION As TQM became an important or most important approach in managing organizations (in all sectors and especially in industry) a lot of researchers emphasize the importance of adopting TQM in managing higher education institutions to achieve and maintain its competency and high performance level especially in today’s continuously changing and challenging world. The attempt or trials to implement TQM approach become necessary as per many researchers. Therefore, this research is attempts to identify the challenges and obstacles that are facing successful TQM implementation process in higher education institutions in United Arab Emirates through studying the first rank university (in number of accredited under and postgraduate programs) which is University of Sharjah. The study used a questionnaire, which was designed to investigate mainly the knowledge about, the obstacles of implementing and the importance of TQM in higher education institutions. The questionnaire was distributed to the academic and non-academic staff in UoS and 181 out of about 600 have responded. The research consists of three main chapters. The first is about the literature and background of the subject “quality in higher education.” Also in this section a sort of description of higher education in Arab, homeland and UAE are given followed by some related statistics. Second chapter includes the theoretical aspects of the subject, like definitions of higher education, quality and TQM plus TQM implementation models, CSF and obstacles. In addition, it includes the importance of quality in higher education, its expected benefits, and variety of examples about implementation of TQM in higher education. Third chapter is for the statistical analysis and discussion of the results of the survey, followed by the conclusions and recommendations. Finally important to mention that the way of referencing in this research is adopted for more than, one of them is to reduce the number of words and make sure it is not exceeding the limit (which is successfully done) especially because of large number of references. However, large number of these references aren’t been read by the researcher but cited through other references, which the research read. 2. RESEARCH PROBLEM Higher education is suffering of many problems, while its outcomes are of low level and in a declined path. On the other hand number of students, programs and research fields are increasing continuously. The community needs for development process, skilled work force, applied researches, and variety of educational services put higher education institutions under high pressure if the globalization effects are considered as well. Most of researchers see that the solution of this crisis is by adopting the industry successful approach, which is total quality philosophy. The research tries to investigate the obstacles and challenges that are facing the successful implementation of TQM in higher education institutions in UAE specifically. 4
The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

2.1 Research Questions In the light of above discussion, the research is trying to answer the following questions: • What is institution staff’s level of knowledge about quality methodology? • What are the obstacles that are facing the TQM implementation in UAE higher education? • What is the hardness of these obstacles? • Are the determined results affected by variables like: o Position o Gender o Academic rank o Scientific qualification o Country of study o Field of specialization 2.2 Research Methodology The research is of exploratory and analytic type. Population of survey All university staff whether academic, administrative or technical as well as the top management personnel. The total number of survey population is around 600. Population sample The questionnaire was distributed almost to all university staff in order to get the largest number of responses. The larger number of responses (the larger size of sample) will give more accurate statistical results. The university management supports the research by stimulating all faculty members to respond. Finally, the number of respondents is 181, which makes the population sample size as large as 33% of the total population of survey. Time constraint The survey conducted in spring and summer semesters of the academic year 2005 2006 Place constraint The survey conducted only in the University of Sharjah in United Arab Emirates in all of its colleges in the main campus except the community college, which has different campuses other than the main one. Human constraint Only university staff is surveyed. Students are excluded.

5

The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

Therefore, the results of this research reflect the situation as that time in that particular institution. 3. LITERATURE REVIEW TQM (or some of its components) is entitled as the third wave after industrial revolution and computer revolution (Al Khatib A, 2000; Howard Smith and Peter Fingar, 2002); the value of quality is the value of this era (Al Alami Bou Dharsa, 2005), after quality became the characteristic for our current time (Bousnaina A. ,2001; Hijazi B., 2005). Shortly this is quality era (Sadkhan S. and Fadhil S., 2006). Several causes lead to the wave of quality in higher education, like direct actions of the national agencies to assess quality in higher education, and the pressure of expansion, diversification, and reduction in financial support (Brennan J. and Shah T., 2000). In fact, quality in higher education was a discussion matter since the 2nd world war, when the nations realize that the civilized building is not related to win a war but to quality of education, which provide conditions of superiority in civilized and technological competition (Barajil A., 2005). Therefore, quality in higher education has been placed squarely on the contemporary agenda in higher education (G.Srikanthan, John Dalrymple, 2002). This situation exaggerated because of new challenges and changes in new millennium. So nations started to develop partially or totally their education system (Abdul Ra’oof T., 2005), and its quality which is highly required to face the challenges of the globalization (Barajil A., 2005), where economic pressure is one of them (Hamich A., 2005), and the increase in number of students in from 13 million in 1960 to 82 million in 1995 (Bnoud A., 2000), is another one. In addition, it can be said with confidence that reduction in institutions’ budget and then downsizing are among the reasons that forced the institutions to turn to TQM programs as a source of relief. The literature from late 1980s suggests considerable interest in the higher education sector in industrially popular ‘Total Quality Management TQM’ model, as alternative methodology for governance (G.Srikanthan, John Dalrymple, 2002). Only since late eighteens, the higher education sector started adopting the principle of total quality management (Al-alawi H., 1998). Until 1993, only 220 institutions had adopted this concept in USA (Lewis R.G. and Smith D.H., 1994), notably research universities and community colleges (Motwani J., Kumar A., 1997). However this number increased very quickly, so in 2003 the number of higher education institutions adopted total quality in united states became thousands (Al Shalabi S., 2005), this fact can give an idea about the most used and useful way to deal with higher education challenges. The most important result of education effectiveness (quality) in the fifteenths of last century was launching ‘Sputnik’ the first spaceship in 1957 (Barajil A., 2005). That scientific pioneering was a proud for educational outcomes of the (previous) Soviet 6
The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

Union, which was successfully, produced scientists who can forereach (Tigzi M., 1994). In fact, we can improve our management of higher education by emphasizing our values regarding the importance of people, knowledge, and continuous improvement (Lawrence A. S; G. G. Lozier, 2006) The researchers see that quality in higher education institutions became a ‘must’ or ‘important’ for any institution and staying away from it means getting out of the competition (Sa’eed E., 2006). This ‘must’ of adopting quality isn’t only in higher education but also in all life aspects (Sukkar N., 2006). This necessity for quality emerges because it is the way to achieve higher education goals (Esamuldin Adam, 2005), and should be given a priority in all countries especially the developing countries (Abdulghani A., 2005). Specifically after quality of education becomes an important issue in discussing remedy of higher education, which became a serious matter in developing countries (Esamuldin Adam, 2005). That is why, to raise the higher education sector, it is important to initiate a serious dialog about quality in higher education and improving the evaluation culture in the universities (Al Alami Bou Dharsa, 2005). The analysis of these problem of the higher education pointed out that all problems and critiques in universities (Algerian for example), in its core, a matter of quality (Al Alami Bou Dharsa, 2005). To discuss this issue an international conference for higher education in 21 century was held in 1998 in Paris by UNESCO. It predicts the role of higher education as “serve the individual, society and scientific research and transfer, keep and produce knowledge and adopts continuous education” (Al Aghbari B., 2005). A large international firm, which is International Bank, indicates the necessity of investing in higher education and assures its quality to assure social development and economic growth (Eliane E., 1998). In order to assure the quality in Higher Education and help in applying it, new and specialized agencies (at different levels in different countries) have been found to establish and enhance the standards and quality of HE (Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, 2004). There is an important point here, which is, as higher education is the main supplier of the work force and the unemployment problem is, to large extent, because of low quality of the work force (graduates) then the need to have national and international quality firms emerges to look for quality standards in higher education (Al Sheikh A., 2005). That is why Owain A. calls Arabic countries to give the first priority to education and especially higher education (Owain A., 2005). Since what is required from Arabic higher education institutions are not only achieving quality standards at local level but at international level also because of globalization effects (Abu Fara Y., 2006). TQM approach became widely applied in higher education institutions in many countries (Lewis R.G. and Smith D.H., 1994). Where it strives to maintain their competency and enable the institution to face the new challenges in university industry, which forces the university to offer its services in best quality and proper fee 7
The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

(Bresler W., 1993). More specifically Al Azzawi M. mentioned that many universities tried to implement quality assurance system by using ISO 9001 since 1992 (Al Azzawi M., 2006). As universities and colleges, increasingly face demands to be accountable to their stakeholders (Chris Papenhausen and Walter Einstein, 2006). And to deal with the other external challenges, a rapidly increasing number of colleges and universities are borrowing an approach from business called Total Quality Management (TQM), Total Quality, the Deming Management Method, Kaizen, Continuous Quality Improvement, or other terms (Cornesky, Robert A., et al., 1990), (Cornesky, Robert, Sam McCool, Larry Byrnes, and Robert Weber, 1991), (Seymour, Daniel T., 1992), (Sherr, Lawrence A., and Deborah J. Teeter, eds. 1991). Quality and quality assurance clearly have become key issues for higher education in the 1990s, both in the Asia and Pacific region and more globally (Craft, 1994), (Craft, 1992). Hereafter Malcolm Baldrige award recognizes the importance of application of this approach in the universities so the standards for quality in higher education institutions were stated (Lewis R.G. and SMITH D.H., 1994). 4. HIGHER EDUCATION STATUS IN THE ARAB WORLD Most of Arab universities are new. 57% of them their age are 15 years so they don’t spend enough time to establish its institutional structure (UNDP, 2003). Higher education sector in Arab countries expands in both number of students and number of institutions i.e. number of universities is duplicating every 11 years in the second half of the last century (Elholy O. and Abu Dagga S., 2006). Number of universities was only 10 at the beginning of 50s and it increases to 175 in 1996 (Elholy O. and Abu Dagga S., 2006) to 200 in 2004 (see table 1.3). 35% of them are private (Al Aghbari B., 2005). Number of students increased by 4.65% per year and it is expected to be six millions in 2010 (Al Aghbari B., 2005). The fund increased also but still below the international average as it increased by 50% to 1.25 of national income (Elholy O. and Abu Dagga S., 2006). Through researches it is approved that the outcomes of the Arabic higher education are of low level that caused by different causes (Esamuldin Adam, 2005). Some researchers see that all problems and critiques in our national universities, in its core, a matter of quality (Al Alami Bou Dharsa, 2005). So applying total quality standards in education institutions became a necessity for any Arabic institution, if it likes to improve its outcomes efficiency and serve its community and reach the international level (Hareb S., 2005). Hence Quality in higher education became one of the public issues in Arab homeland (Elholy O. and Abu Dagga S., 2006). As a result of this status, and although TQM in higher education is a new concept to both institutions and societies in Arab homeland (Hareb S., 2005), the higher 8
The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

education sector respond positively to this challenge in governmental level, institution level and individual faculty level. However the private universities were faster in adopting TQM in higher education (Hareb S., 2005). So many countries found accreditation agencies as well as the institutions adopt self evaluation and outcomes assessment processes and found units for quality assurance. Some advanced trials can be seen also, like the project of implementing quality systems of e-learning and training to standardize learning and training process (Al Harbash J., 2005), and developing a new model for quality in designing Arabic courses (Al Ma’ber S., 2005). But the most important and successful trial in this regard was the customization of ISO 9001 standards to fit higher education and implement them in computer science department at university of technology in Iraq in 2002, where the leader of this project Al Azzawi M. reported many achievements (Al Azzawi M., 2006). In Arab homeland, quality in higher education became one of the public issues (Elholy O. and Abu Dagga S., 2006); because clearly it became necessary for any Arabic institution, if it likes to improve its outcomes efficiency and serve its community and reach the international level (Hareb S., 2005). So one of the biggest challenges that higher education leaders are facing is the quality issue (Sadkhan S. and Fadhil S., 2006), especially after the increase of the competency among the higher education institutions because of many reasons one of them is the steep increase in the number of universities. That is why managers in education are increasingly talking about TQM and Continuous Quality Improvement ‘CQI’ (Mike P. and Jane S., 2006). In Arabic world there are some advanced trials to adopt quality in higher education. The most important and successful trial in this regard was the project of customizing and adopting of ISO 9001 standards to fit higher education characteristics and implementing them in computer science department at university of technology in Iraq in 2002, where the leader of this project, Al Azzawi M., reported many achievements (Al Azzawi M., 2006). 4.1 Statistics Education and higher education is today, to a great extent, a system for mass education, involving a large proportion of the population.
Year Developed countries World 1980 34 51 1985 35 60 1990 40 68 1993 42 76 1994 42 77

Table 1: Number of students enrolled in higher education in millions (UNESCO, 1996). 9
The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007 Year Developed countries World 1980 36.1 12.2 1985 38.7 12.8 1990 44.2 13.7 1993 47.4 14.9 1994 48.0 15.3

Table 2: Estimated gross enrolment ratios (the proportion of the population of relevant age) for higher education (UNESCO, 1996). In the Arabic countries there was a large expansion in higher education sector.
Year Universities 1950s 11 1970 33 1985 69 1993 132 2004 200

Table 3: Number of universities in Arabic world (Al Khori B., 1991), (Dakhil H., 1988), (Madkhor A., 2000), (Mahmoud A., 2004) Higher education has an important and seemingly increasing role in society. One expression of this is the observation that during the last decades, the proportion of the youth entering higher educational institutions has increased in most developed countries (OECD, 1997).
Year Japan Sweden United Kingdom United States 1975 4.3 5.6 2.5 6.6 1985 5.2 6.5 2.9 7.4 1990 7.1 6.7 3.4 8.2 1994 8.5 5.7 5.3 8.8

Table 4: Number of students enrolled in higher education per 100 persons in the population aged 5-29 (OECD, 1997). 5. HIGHER EDUCATION STATUS IN UAE In UAE specifically the number of higher education institutions increased from only one in 1977 to 39 plus 3 federal institutions in 2006 (MOHE, CAA, 2006), all of them are licensed and they are offering more than 230 accredited programs (MOHE, CAA, 2006). The private institutions are 93% of higher education sector in UAE. However, this is not the same ration of students’ distribution in public and private institutions. In 1977 the number of students was only 502 and increased to more than 34 thousands in public sector only in 2006 (Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, 2005). For the purpose of enhancing quality of higher education institutions, the Commission for Academic Accreditation is found to licensing the institutions and accrediting their programs using a set of published standards.

10 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007 Country Algeria Bahrain Djibouti Egypt (p) Iraq Jordan (p) Kuwait Lebanon Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Mauritania Morocco Oman Palestinian Autonomous Territories Qatar Saudi Arabia Sudan Syrian Arab Republic ... Tunisia (p) United Arab Emirates Yemen Total Enrolment 716,452 18,524 1,134 2,153,865 412,545 186,189 42,076 154,635 375,028 9,292 343,599 33,807 121,928 8,648 573,732 ... ... 263,414 68,182 192,071 5,675,121

Table 5: Number of enrolled students in higher education in Arab countries in 2004 (UNISCO, 2006). The number of students in the UAE has increased also in direct proportion to number of institutions (public and private). The table below shows the number of enrolled students in the governmental institutions only.
Year 1999 – 2000 2000 – 2001 2001 – 2002 2002 – 2003 2003 – 2004 2004 - 2005 Number 27696 29670 31430 33384 33498 34207

Table 6: Number of enrolled students in public sector only (Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, 2005) 5.1 University of Sharjah University of Sharjah, which is found in 1997, is the largest institution in UAE in number of accredited programs. It constitutes of 13 college, more than 370 faculty and more than 7300 students. It found a unit for institutional research to set up and follow quality procedures to improve the academic programs quality in variety of aspects. In a parallel way the number of students in UoS has increased as shown below. 11 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007 Year 1997 – 1998 1998 – 1999 1999 – 2000 2000 – 2001 2001 – 2002 2002 – 2003 2003 – 2004 2004 – 2005 Number 676 830 1230 1219 1297 1370 1487 1871

Table 7: Number of enrolled students in UoS (University of Sharjah, 2006) 6. STATISTICAL DESCRIPTIONS AND TESTS The questionnaire is designed of four parts. The first contains information about the respondent, which represent the independent variable. Second, third and fourth parts contain the questions related to TQM knowledge, TQM implementation’s obstacles and importance of TQM respectively. These represent the dimensions or the dependent variables that to be investigated under the effect of the independent variables. At the end three general questions are put for more elaboration about TQM, University and the higher education sector. Two free spaces are given to enable the respondent to add, in the first one, another obstacle (if there is) and to add, in the second one, any general comment about the subject of the questionnaire. The questionnaire designed after reading up several questionnaires related to the subject, and after making several interviews with some managers in the university. The questionnaire is anonymous (in name, department and college) to give more freedom to the respondents in selecting the proper choice corresponding to each statement. At the end 181 responses is collected form allover the university, and the data is fed into a sheet of data view in SPSS software, which is designed by the researcher to fit the need of the analysis part of the research. 6.1 Questionnaire scales and weighs As the questionnaire consists of three main parts and each part has its own nature of questions and probable answers then the scale is differ for different parts as shown in table 8. 6.1.1 Reliability of Questionnaire Using alpha Cronbach's test, 6 values of Cronbach's alpha based on standardized items have been computed then the average of them is determined and its value is 0.718 out of 1.000. 6.1.2 Validity of Questionnaire Using content validity method, the questionnaire is submitted to about 10 persons in different colleges and departments with in the university and from different specializations and having different scientific qualification levels. They filled the pilot 12 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

version of the questionnaire and gave their feed backs. Almost all feed backs from them hav been considered to produce the questionnaire in its final form and format.
Part (about) 2 (Knowledge of TQM) 3 (Obstacles of implementing TQM) Choices Don’t know Know, simple Know, medium Know, deep Don’t know Not obstacle Obstacle, simple Obstacle, medium Obstacle, hard Obstacle, very hard Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly disagree Weights 0 1 2 3 0 0 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5

4 (Importance of TQM for HE)

Table 8: weights of questionnaire's choices 6.1.3 Statistics Software The analysis is conducted using the “Statistical Package for Social Studies, SPSS” software. Officially SPSS for windows release 14.0.1 (18 Nov. 2005). 6.1.4 Statistical Analysis In analyzing the data the following tests and measures are used: • Mean • Mode • Percentage • Chi2 test • Chi2 test under crosstab test • One sample T test • Independent sample T test • Pearson correlation • Spearman correlation The data are originally of ordinal type. To do the analysis they have been given weights (as shown above). But for statistical analysis the parametric tests can’t be applied, as the data are not of scale type. Although the researcher found some published researches had used parametric test (like T test and ANOVA test) for this type of data. There was some doubt about whether it is right to use parametric test with ordinal data especially the statistics’ references put some conditions to use these tests which are not satisfied by the ordinal data. The researchers do some scientific consultation and test the results of the parametric and non parametric 13 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

tests on the data by themselves, and then it was obvious that the non parametric tests should be used as they give more accurate results as expected. Then nonparametric tests like Chi2 test is used to investigate the significance of the data analysis and Chi2 test under crosstab function is used to investigate the relations between the independent variable and the dependent ones. The T test has been used also but only to support the results of Chi2 test, and when there is a contradiction the results of Chi2 test is considered. Finally the correlation test is used to find the strength of the relation (if it exists) between the dependent and independent variables. In correlation test the Spearman test is used as the basic test as it is specialized for the ordinal data and its results is supported by the Pearson test. The analysis is divided according to the parts of the questionnaire. 6.2 Sample characteristics
Q1 Position Frequency % 1 Top management 14 7.7 2 Academic staff 85 47.0 3 Administrative staff 82 45.3 Total 181 100

Table 9: respondents’ distribution according to position There is a balance between the academic and administrative staff. The percentage of the top management is quite fair.
Q2 1 2 3 4 Scientific qualification Ph.D. Masters Bachelors Diploma Total Frequency 66 29 75 11 181 % 36.5 16.0 41.4 6.1 100

Table 10: respondents’ distribution according to scientific qualification This distribution reflects the nature of the organization as a higher education institution. Most of the bachelor group is from administrative side.
Field of specialization Humanities Basic/applied sciences Medical sciences Administrative sciences Total System missing Total Q3 1 2 3 4 Frequency 75 47 11 42 175 6 181 % 41.4 26.0 6.1 23.2 96.7 3.3 100

Table 11: respondents’ distribution according to field of specialization 14 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

Among respondents there was 23.2% are specialized in administrative sciences i.e. they (most likely) had studied the quality subject. That means that quarter of the respondents is from or near to the field of quality subject. This fact will increase the reliability of the responses.
Country of study Arabic countries US/Canada UK Western Europe Australia Other countries Africa Total System missing Total Q4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Frequency 120 25 22 7 2 2 1 179 2 181 % 66.3 13.8 12.2 3.9 1.1 1.1 .6 98.9 1.1 100

Table 12: respondents’ distribution according to country of study The percentage of respondents that are studied in countries implementing the TQM in its various organizations (Northern America, Western Europe, and Australia) i.e. they are expected to be familiar with quality issues is 31 %, this fact also increases the reliability of the responses.
Professor Associate professor Assistant professor Lecturer Manager Executive Staff Total System missing Total Q5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Rank Frequency 13 20 30 22 8 4 80 177 4 181 % 7.2 11.0 16.6 12.2 4.4 2.2 44.2 97.8 2.2 100

Table 13: respondents’ distribution according to rank The majority of the respondents 53.6 % are academic staff, managers or executives who are usually high educated people this fact also increases the reliability of the responses.

15 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007 Q6 1 2 Gender Male Female Total System missing Total Frequency 85 88 173 8 181 % 47.0 48.6 95.6 4.4 100

Table 14: respondents’ distribution according to gender There is a balance among respondents from gender point of view.
Q7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Experience in TQM is gained through No experience Academic study Training Planning Implementing Assessing General knowledge Two choices Three choices Four choices Five choices Six choices Total System missing Total Frequency 23 19 8 2 5 3 42 35 19 10 4 1 171 10 181 % 12.7 10.5 4.4 1.1 2.8 1.7 23.2 19.3 10.5 5.5 2.2 .6 94.5 5.5 100

Table 15: respondents’ distribution according to experience 12.7 % only among the respondents have no experience in TQM, while 81.8 % have. This fact increases the reliability of the responses. 38.1% of the respondents gained their experience in TQM through more than one means (field), while 43.7 % experienced TQM through one means (field). 6.3 Statistical Analysis Methodology The analysis will be conducted as follows: First: scientific statistics method This is the normal statistical analysis used to find the dominant (highest frequency) response among the responses. Whether it is confident or not, its steps are as follows: 1. Starting with the description of the responses for each question. 2. Determination of the mode (the highest frequency choice). 3. The mode will represent the considered choice to be investigated. 4. Using Chi2 test (through frequency values) the confidence of this choice will be investigated i.e. does this choice have maximum frequency because of significant difference among respondents not by accident? 16 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

5. Using one-sample T test (through mean values) the confidence of this choice will be investigated again to assure the correctness of the conclusion Second: artificial statistics method This is the artificial or (suggested) statistical analysis used to find an indication about the average response among the responses and whether it is confident or not. Its steps are as follows: 1. Starting with the description of the responses for each question. Determination of the mean of the weighted choices. 2. 3. The average choice will be the choice of nearest weight to the mean value. This method is artificial as the numbers (weight) subjected to analysis are artificial. But the reason behind this method is the fact that it is not possible to find the average of the opinions as they are subjective or qualitative data (ordinal) not objective or quantitative data (scale) so overall opinion will remain unknown. The researcher suggested this very simple method to find a roughly approximated indicator about what is the overall opinion. But it is worthy to repeat that this method, pure statistics speaking, is not accurate. For the use of this method, the following intervals corresponding to the different choices are assumed, (interval length is 1 and the interval midpoint is the weight of the choice):
Choice Don’t know Simple Adequate Deep Interval -0.5 – 0.5 0.5 – 1.5 1.5 – 2.5 2.5 – 3.5

Table 16: Artificial intervals 7. ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES 7.1 Knowledge of TQM terms In order to explore the knowledge level of the respondents about TQM, eight questions are presented, asking them to evaluate their knowledge in some wellknown terms or aspects of TQM by ticking the proper choice. Then the results of the descriptive and analytical statistics are stated below, followed by summary and conclusions. Chi2 test Null hypothesis H0: there is no significant difference among frequencies. i.e. the respondents’ opinions about a specific statement are the same and any difference in numbers is due to chance only without any meaning. Alternative hypothesis H1: There is a significant difference among frequencies. i.e. the respondents’ opinions about a specific statement are different due to significant difference not due to chance. 17 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

Condition of rejecting H0 and accepting H1 is α calculated < α assumed or x calculated > x tabulated Confidence interval = 95 % i.e. α assumed = 0.05 T test Null hypothesis H0: there is no significant difference between the (artificial) mean and the middle value. Alternative hypothesis H1: there is significant difference between the (artificial) mean and the middle value. Condition of rejecting H0 and accepting H1 is α calculated < α assumed or t calculated < -tα Test value = 1.5 (the middle point on the scale of choices); Confidence interval = 95 % i.e. α assumed = 0.05; and tα value (from table) = 1.645 [212])
Q8 Data Wei type ght 0 1 2 3 Valid Missi ng Knowledge of ISO Don’t know Simple Adequate Deep Total System Total Total Frequ ency 50 51 62 10 173 8 8 181 % 27.6 28.2 34.3 5.5 95.6 4.4 4.4 100 Mea n Mod e Media n SD

1.18

2

1

0.922

Table 16: description, Q8 The dominant opinion of the respondents is ‘adequate’ as the mode is 2. However, it is worthwhile to notice that 68.0% of respondents indicate that they ‘do know’ ISO. While only 27.6% ‘don’t know’. i.e. most of the responses ‘do now’ this TQM part (ISO).

Q 8

x2calculated 36.133

df 3

P value 0.000

Explanation Significant

Opinion Adequate

Table 17: Chi2 test, Q8 Chi2 test results indicate that P value (which is α calculated) is zero so it is less than α assumed i.e. there is a significant difference among frequencies so the dominant opinion (knowledge level) is ‘adequate’ for this particular statement.

18 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

Q 8

tcalculated 4.496

df 172

P value 0.000

Explanation Significant

Opinion Adequate

Table 18: T test, Q8 T test results indicate that tcalculated and α calculated are less than their corresponding values i.e. there is a significant difference between the mean and the middle point so the dominant opinion (knowledge level) is ‘simple’ for this particular statement. The last step is to check the mean (1.18), which gives that in average the level of knowledge about ISO is simple as the mean is 1.18 which lies in the interval (0.5 – 1.5).
Q9 Data Wei type ght 0 1 2 3 Valid Missi ng Knowledge of PDCA cycle Don’t know Simple Adequate Deep Total System Total Total Frequ ency 68 44 51 11 174 7 7 181 % 37.6 24.3 28.2 6.1 96.1 3.9 3.9 100 Mean Mode SD

1.03

0

0.970

Table 19: description, Q9 68.6% ‘do know’ and 37.6% ‘don’t know’.

Q 9

x2 39.379

df 3

P value 0.000

Explanation Significant

Opinion Don’t know

Table 20: Chi2 test, Q9

19 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007 Knowledge level Simple Simple Don’t know Don’t know Don’t know Simple Simple Don’t know

Q 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

tcalculated 4.496- 6.407 - 21.813 -22.950 -20.911 -11.082 -5.179 -22.874

df 172 173 170 166 167 167 172 168

P value 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Significance Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant

Mean 1.18 1.03 0.34 0.29 0.33 0.7 1.11 0.31

Table 21: T-test results’ summary of part2 These results show consistence with Chi2 test results in five statements but not for other three. Summary
% of do know responses 68.0 58.6 20.9 17.1 18.8 37.6 61.3 19.3 38.95 % of don’t know responses 27.6 37.6 73.5 75.1 74.0 55.2 34.3 74.0 56.4

Q 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Avr

Mean 1.18 1.03 0.34 0.29 0.33 0.7 1.11 0.31 0.66

Mode 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

P value 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig.

Knowledge level Adequate Don’t know Don’t know Don’t know Don’t know Don’t know Don’t know Don’t know

Table 22: Description and Chi2 test results’ summary of part2. The summary shows that from statistics point of view the dominant opinion (knowledge level) of the respondents concerning presented TQM issues is ‘Don’t know’ for all statements except the first statement. This conclusion has been arisen after investigation of the frequency of the responses by Chi2 test, which also shows that the difference in the opinions of the respondents belongs to a significant difference not to chance. 20 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

However if these results are connected with proportions of the ‘do know’ and ‘do not know’ then the final decision about the knowledge level of the respondents will be changed in questions 9 and 14 from ‘don’t know’ to ‘do know’. But it is not possible to mention in which level this knowledge is (simple, adequate or deep). Then to solve this problem the artificial mean of responses for each question will be used. According to the previously suggested intervals each mean will have the description of the interval in which it lies. As the means are 1.03 and 1.11 both lie in the interval (0.5 – 1.5) then the corresponding knowledge level is ‘simple’. These results are supported by T-test results. From the table above the respondents (in general) showed ‘simple’ level of or no knowledge with respect to all statements mentioned in this part of the questionnaire. However even for these adjusted results the lack of knowledge about TQM issues still clearly large. So the programs of training and awareness are highly recommended.

Q 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Avr

% of do know responses 68.0 68.6 20.9 17.1 18.8 37.6 61.3 19.3 38.95

% of don’t know responses 27.6 37.6 73.5 75.1 74.0 55.2 34.3 74.0 56.4

Mean 1.18 1.03 0.34 0.29 0.33 0.70 1.11 0.31 0.66

Mode 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

P value 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig.

Knowledge level Adequate Do know (simple) Don’t know Don’t know Don’t know Don’t know Do know (simple) Don’t know

Table 23: Description and Chi2 test results’ summary of part2 after adjustment. 7.2 TQM implementation obstacles In order to explore the opinion of the respondents about TQM implementation obstacles, this part is designed and divides the obstacles into four categories according to whom or what the obstacle is related to. So the four categories are: • Obstacles related to Top Management. • Obstacles related to the Organization (university). • Obstacles related to the Staff (academic or administrative). • Obstacles related to the TQM initiative. 21 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

The questionnaire asks the respondents to indicate whether the stated obstacle is really obstacle. And if so how much is it hard? Each choice (including ‘don’t know’) has been given a weight. Choices and their weights are:
Choice Don’t know Not obstacle Simple obstacle Medium obstacle Hard obstacle Very hard obstacle Theoretical Weight 0 1 2 3 4 5 Actual Weight Missing 0 1 2 3 4

Table 24: weights of third part choices The theoretical and actual weights are used for descriptive and analytical statistics respectively. Same statistical procedures will be used the only change is in value of x2 = 9.48773. A- Obstacles related to Top Management (TM.) In order to explore whether there are some obstacles related to the Top Management and if so to what extent they are difficult, six questions presented to the respondents to mention their proper choice.
Q16 Data Wei type ght 0 1 2 3 4 Valid Missing No full commitment Not obstacle Simple obstacle Medium obstacle Hard obstacle V. Hard obstacle Total Don’t know System Total Total Frequency 12 16 36 45 19 128 41 12 53 181 % 6.6 8.8 19.9 24.9 10.5 70.7 22.7 6.6 29.3 100 Mea n Mod e SD

2.34

3

1.159

Table 25: description, Q16 64.1% agreed that the statement is an obstacle. 35.4% feel it is hard or very hard one. Mode of 3 indicates that the highest frequency opinion is ‘hard obstacle’. Only 6.6% do not agree with this opinion, noticing that 29.3% of the responses considered as missing data.

22 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007 Difficulty level Hard

Q 16

x2 31.453

df 4

P value 0.000

Explanation Significant

Table 26: Chi2 test, Q16 Summary
Q 16 17 18 19 20 21 Avr %of ‘don’t know’ responses 22.7 15.5 12.7 11.6 11.6 7.7 13.6 % of ‘not obstacle’ responses 6.6 9.4 3.3 5.0 4.4 4.4 5.5 % of ‘obstacle’ responses 64.1 68.5 77.9 77.3 75.7 81.8 74.2 Mean 2.34 2.45 2.61 2.66 2.77 2.96 2.63 Mode 3 3 3 3 4 4 P value 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Obstacle difficulty level Hard obstacle Hard obstacle Hard obstacle Hard obstacle V. Hard obstacle V. Hard obstacle

Table 27: Description and Chi2 test results’ summary of part 3A From the table above, all issues mentioned in this part of the questionnaire (obstacles related to Top Management) are indicated as obstacles by most of the respondents (74.2 % in average). The respondents consider all these obstacles as hard or very hard ones (according to the mode which is either 3 or 4). Although it is not needed, but it is interesting to mention that the artificial average mean indicates that these obstacles are hard ones. 5.5 % (in average) consider these issues as not obstacles. While 13.6 % of respondents say they ‘don’t know’ and 6.7 % didn’t answer. This conclusion has been arisen after investigation of the frequency of the responses by Chi2 test, which also shows that the difference in the opinions of the respondents belongs to a significant difference not to chance.

23 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

T- test
Q 16 17 18 19 20 21 t-value 3.28 4.168 6.706 7.062 7.748 10.226 df 127 140 146 148 144 155 P-value 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Explanation Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Obstacle difficulty level Hard obstacle Hard obstacle Hard obstacle Hard obstacle V. Hard obstacle V. Hard obstacle

Table 28: T- test results’ summary of part 3A From the table above the respondents (in general) agreed that all obstacles mentioned in the questionnaire related to Top Management are obstacles. B- Obstacles related to the organization (institution) In order to get explore whether there are some obstacles related to the organization and if so to what extent they are difficult, eight questions presented to the respondents to mention their proper choice. Then the results of the descriptive and analytical statistics are stated below, followed by summary and conclusions.
Q22 Data Wei type ght 0 1 2 3 4 Valid Missing The academic nature Not obstacle Simple obstacle Adequate obstacle Hard obstacle V. Hard obstacle Total Don’t know System Total Total Frequency 53 20 30 27 7 137 27 17 44 181 % 29.3 11.0 16.6 14.9 3.9 75.7 14.9 9.4 24.3 100 Mean Mode SD

1.38

0

1.312

Table 29: description, Q22 46.4 % of respondents agreed that ‘The academic nature’ represents an obstacle. 18.8 % of them feel it is hard or very hard. Mode of 0 indicates it is ‘not obstacle’. 29.3 % do not agree with this opinion.

24 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007 Difficulty level Not obstacle

Q

x2

df

P value

Explanation

22

41.358

4

0.000

Significant

Table 30: Chi2 test, Q22 Summery
Q 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Avr % of ‘don’t know’ responses 14.9 12.2 14.9 9.9 11.0 10.5 12.7 15.5 12.7 % of ‘not obstacle’ responses 29.3 6.6 8.3 7.7 11.6 5.5 6.1 6.6 10.2 % of ‘obstacle’ responses 46.4 74.1 67.9 74.6 69.1 67.8 74.0 69.1 67.9 Mea n 1.38 2.46 2.41 2.64 2.24 2.91 2.69 2.54 Mode 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 P value 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Obstacle difficulty level Non Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard

Table 31: Chi2 test summary results, part 2B From the table above, all issues mentioned in this part of the questionnaire (obstacles related to organization (institution)) are indicated as obstacles by most of the respondents (67.9 % in average). The respondents consider most of these obstacles as hard ones (according to the mode of 3), except the first statement where the respondents consider it as a ‘not obstacle’. On the other hand, only 10.2% (in average) consider these issues as not obstacles, while 10.2 % of respondents say they ‘don’t know’ and 9.2 % didn’t answer. So the difficulty level of this part of questionnaire can be considered ‘hard’.

25 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

T- test
Q 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Mean 1.38 2.46 2.41 2.64 2.24 2.91 2.69 2.54 SD 1.312 1.175 1.242 1.180 1.294 1.145 1.199 1.312 t-value -5.533 4.718 3.906 6.664 2.239 9.735 6.926 4.820 df 136 145 137 148 145 148 144 136 P-value 0.000 0.000 0000. 0000. 0.027 0000. 0000. 0000. Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Obstacle difficulty level Simple or non Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard

Table 32: T-test summary results, part 2B From the table above the respondents (in general) agreed that all obstacles mentioned in the questionnaire related to the organization (institution) are obstacles and all of them except the first one have hard level of difficulty. This result enhances the previous one. C- Obstacles related to Staff Then the results of the descriptive and analytical statistics are stated below, followed by summary and conclusions.
Q30 Data Wei type ght 0 1 2 3 4 Valid Missing The staff have already many tasks Not obstacle Simple obstacle Adequate obstacle Hard obstacle V. Hard obstacle Total Don’t know System Total Total Frequency 22 20 40 32 24 138 32 11 43 181 % 12.2 11.0 22.1 17.7 13.3 76.2 17.7 6.1 23.8 100 Mean Mode SD

2.12

2

1.307

Table 33: description, Q30 64.0 %) agreed that ‘Strong resistance from faculty members’ represents an obstacle and 31.0 % of them feel it is hard or very hard. Mode of 2 indicates it is ‘medium obstacle’. 12.2 % do not agree. 26 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007 Difficulty level Medium

Q 30

x2 9.971

df 4

P value 0.041

Explanation Significant

Table 34: Chi2 test, Q30 Chi2 test results indicate a significant difference. From the table 35, all issues mentioned in this part of the questionnaire (obstacles related to staff) are indicated as obstacles by most of the respondents (75.1% in average). The respondents consider most of these obstacles as hard ones (according to the mode which is 3 in most cases) except the first and the sixth statements where the respondents consider them as medium obstacles. Summery
%of ‘don’t know’ responses 17.7 7.2 9.9 8.3 8.3 13.3 13.3 15.5 11.7 % of ‘not obstacle’ responsesa 12.2 3.9 5.5 6.1 3.3 6.1 6.1 9.4 6.6 % of ‘obstacle’ responses 64.0 83.4 77.9 79.5 80.7 74.0 74.6 66.3 75.1 Mea n 2.12 2.69 2.71 2.62 2.70 2.23 2.49 2.18 2.47 P value 0.04 1 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.32 Obstacle difficulty level Medium obstacle Hard obstacle Hard obstacle Hard obstacle Hard obstacle Medium obstacle Hard obstacle Hard obstacle

Q 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Avr

Mode 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 3

Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig.

Table 35: Chi2 test summary results, part 2C On the other hand, only 6.6 % (in average) consider these issues as not obstacles, while 11.7 % of respondents say they ‘don’t know’ and 6.6 % didn’t answer.

27 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

T- test

Q

Mean

SD

t-value

df

P-value

Explanation

Result No difference s Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard No difference s

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

2.12 2.69 2.71 2.62 2.70 2.23 2.49 2.18

1.307 1.139 1.129 1.152 1.091 1.059 1.187 1.267

1.042 7.611 7.713 6.691 7.956 2.588 4.948 1.685

137 157 150 154 151 144 145 136

0.299 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.011 0.000 0.094

Not significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Not significant

Table 36: T test summary results, part 2C From the table above the respondents (in general) agreed that all obstacles mentioned in the questionnaire related to the staff are obstacles and most of them have hard level of difficulty. For the first and last statements there is a contradiction between the results of Chi2 test and T test. In such cases the results of the Chi2 test will be considered, as Chi2 test is more reliable in testing ordinal data as those of this study. This decision is supported by the values of both mean and mode of the data. D- Obstacles related to Quality Initiative itself In order to explore whether there are some obstacles related to the Quality Initiative itself and if so to what extent they are difficult? Six questions presented to the respondents to mention their proper choice. Then the results of the descriptive and analytical statistics are stated below, followed by summary and conclusions.

28 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007 Q38 Data Wei type ght 0 1 2 3 4 Valid Missing The goal of TQM implementation is unclear Not obstacle Simple obstacle Adequate obstacle Hard obstacle V. Hard obstacle Total Don’t know System Total Total Frequency 17 17 35 53 23 145 26 10 36 181 % 9.4 9.4 19.3 29.3 12.7 80.1 14.4 5.5 19.9 100 Mean Mode SD

2.33

3

1.219

Table 37: description, Q38 70.7% say it is an obstacle and 42.0 % of them feel it is hard or very hard.
Difficulty level Hard

Q 38

x2 32.276

df 4

P value 0.000

Explanation Significant

Table 38: Chi2 test, Q38 Summery
%of ‘don’t know’ responses 14.4 12.7 8.3 11.6 12.7 8.8 11.4 % of ‘not obstacle’ responses 9.4 8.3 4.4 7.2 9.9 7.2 7.7 % of ‘obstacle’ responses 71.7 73.5 81.2 75.7 70.9 56.3 71.5 P value

Q

Mean 2.33 2.55 2.66 2.23 2.24 2.26 2.38

Mode

Sig.

Difficulty level Hard obstacle

38 39 40 41 42 43 Avr

3 3 3 2 3 2

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig. Sig.

Hard obstacle Hard obstacle Medium obstacle Hard obstacle Medium obstacle

Table 39: Chi2 test summary results, part 2D 29 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

From the table above, all issues mentioned in this part of the questionnaire (obstacles related to Quality Initiative) are indicated as obstacles by most of the respondents (71.5 % in average). The respondents consider most of these obstacles as hard ones (according to the mode which is 3 in most cases) except the fourth and the sixth statements where the respondents consider them as medium obstacles. On the other hand, only 6.6 % (in average) consider these issues as not obstacles, while 11.7 % of respondents say they ‘don’t know’ and 6.6 % didn’t answer. T- test Test value = 2.0
Q Mean t-value df P-value Explanation Difficulty level

38 39 40 41 42 43

2.33 2.55 2.66 2.23 2.24 2.26

3.269 5.786 7.683 2.660 2.337 2.331

144 147 154 149 147 114

0.001 0.000 0.000 0.009 0.021 0.022

Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant

Hard Hard Hard Medium Hard Medium

Table 40: T-test summary results, part 2C From the table above the respondents (in general) agreed that all obstacles mentioned in the questionnaire related to the staff are obstacles and most of them have hard level of difficulty. 8. CONCLUSIONS There is a real need for a big change in higher education management style. TQM and other quality system could be the most useful way to make this change, provided the availability of CSF. There is a big lack of knowledge about quality systems among the higher education staff (top management is not an exception). So training and awareness programs are highly critical for TQM success in higher education. 30 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

However, the staff is aware about the challenges facing the institutions and the importance of adopting quality systems and its implementation obstacles. This awareness is independent of the factors like gender, rank, scientific qualification, etc. i.e. all staff of institutions are aware of the problems and obstacles. This will encourage them to participate actively in the quality initiative if they have a visionary leadership. Finally the obstacles that cause unsuccessful adopting and implementing TQM in academia are (but not limited to): • The nature of the academia world, which makes the change process slow. • The resistance of academicians to change, so to learn about the new method of doing things. • The nature of some institutions as non-profit organization, which reduce the motivation to adopt new management methodology. • The concentration of the academicians (in their readings and researches) on their narrow specializations. • The relative success in managing things using old methods encourages continuity of using them. • The TQM methodology and tools are relatively new especially in the developing countries. • High turn over rate of staff, which prevents accumulation of experience and sustain the momentum of change. • The absence of employees (units) who are specialized in TQM. The common administration problem, is putting a high rank and qualified personnel in the leading position depending on their previous experience not on their specialization. i.e. the leaders of the institution could be specialized in art, physics, anatomy or any other field but not in management and specifically in higher education management. REFERENCES Al Khatib A. (2000) “Total quality management”. None published paper council of Arab universities union, Beirut, Lebanon, Cited in Hareb S. (2005). Howard Smith and Peter Fingar (2002) “Business Process Management: the Third Wave”, ISBN 0-929652-33-9 Off-press, Meghan-Kiffer Press, [Online] Accessed in 09/09/2006. Available at website: http://www.fairdene.com/ Al Alami Bou Dharsa (2005) “Quality in Higher education, from diagnosis of education quality to improving quality culture”, 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon.

31 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

Bousnaina A. (2001) “Vision in quality control to develop higher education and scientific research”, Arabic journal for education, Cited in Al Aghbari B (2005) Hijazi B. (2005) “TQM role in activating higher education institutions’ management”, 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon. Sadkhan S. and Fadhil S. (2006) “System approach for total quality management in engineering education in Arab homeland universities”, 1st Arab conference for university quality and licensure and accreditation requirements’ proceedings, Sharjah, UAE. Brennan J. and Shah T. (2000) “Managing quality in higher education: an international perspective on institutional assessment and change”, Open University press, Buckingham, UK, ISBN 0 335 20673 5. Barajil A. (2005) “Quality in higher education between reality reality’s contradictions and future imaginations: higher education in Algeria as a case study” 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon. Hamich A. (2005) “Distance learning, experience of Islamic universities”, 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon. Bnoud A. (2000) “Scientific research and its role in industrial growth”, Work paper, 1st Arabic conference about universities and research institutions and their role in research and development activities, Cited in Bnoud A. (2005). G.Srikanthan, John Dalrymple, (2002) “Developing a Holistic Model for Quality in Higher Education”, Centre for Management Quality Research, RMIT University, Australia, [online] Accessed in 31/08/2006, Website: http://www.cmqr.rmit.edu.au/publications/gsjdicit02.pdf Abdul RA’OOF T. (2005) “Suggested idea to develop admission system in higher education” 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon. Al-alawi H. (1998) “Total quality management in higher education institutions”, Center of scientific publishing, King Abdul Aziz University, Jeddah, KSA. Lewis R.G. and SMITH D.H. (1994) “Total quality in higher education”, St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, Florida, USA, Cited in Al-alawi H. (1998) Motwani J., Kumar A. (1997) “The need for implementing total quality management in education”, International Journal of Educational Management 11,3 [1997] 131– 135 © MCB University Press, [ISSN 0951-354X]. 32 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

Al Shalabi S. (2005) “Total quality stands in Arab universities”, 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings. Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon. Tigzi M. (1994) “Does the usage of strategic goals have a relation with gained achievements, readings in educational goals”, Society of social and educational repair, Batna, Algeria. Lawrence A. S.; G. G. Lozier “Total Quality Management in Higher Education”, [online] Accessed in 30/08/2006, Website: http://campus.umr.edu/assess/tqm/tqmhed.html Sa’eed E. (2006) “Case of quality and excellence management in Holy QURAN and Islamic Science University”, 1st Arab conference for university quality and licensure and accreditation requirements’ proceedings, Sharjah, UAE Sukkar N. (2006) “Assessing the performance of university of Gaza, step towards achieving its total quality”, 1st Arab conference for university quality and licensure and accreditation requirements’ proceedings, Sharjah, UAE Esamuldin Adam (2005), “Reality of higher education outcomes from total quality standards perspective”, 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon Abdulghani A. (2005) “Quality assurance and in higher education and scientific research institutions”, Work paper, meeting of the national council of higher education and scientific research, Sudan, Cited in Esamuldin Adam (2005) Al Aghbari B. (2005) “Quality in higher education”, 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon Eliane E. (1998) “Assurance de la qualite daws l’enseignement superieur: progress recents et defis a venire”, Conference mondiale sur l’enseignement superieur Paris, France, Cited in Bnoud A. (2005). Al Sheikh A. (2005) “Academic accreditation why? What?” 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon. Owain A. (2005) “Towards enhancing post graduate programs”, 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon Abu Fara Y. (2006) “Students perceptions in assessing quality of higher education”, 1st Arab conference for university quality and licensure and accreditation requirements’ proceedings, Sharjah, UAE 33 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, (2004) “Handbook for academic review: England, 2004 for review of directly funded higher education in further education colleges”, Mansfield, UK. ISBN 1 84482 212 5, [Online] Viewed in 02/01/2006, Website: www.qaa.ac.uk. Lewis R. G. and SMITH D. H. (1994) “Total quality in higher education”, St. Lucie Press,Delray Beach, Florida, USA. Cited in Al-alawi H. (1998) Bresler W. (1993) “Editor Note”, Educational record, v 9, no 3 Al Azzawi M. (2006) “Implementing university quality management system”, 1st Arab conference for university quality and licensure and accreditation requirements’ proceedings, Sharjah, UAE Cornesky, Robert A., et al. (1990) “W. Edwards Deming: Improving Quality in Colleges and Universities”. Madison, Wis.: Magna Publications, Cited in Chaffee E. E. and Sherr L. A. (1992). Cornesky, Robert, Sam McCool, Larry Byrnes, and Robert Weber (1991) “Implementing Total Quality Management in Higher Education”, Madison, Wis.: Magna Publications, Cited in Chaffee E. E. and Sherr L. A. (1992) Seymour, Daniel T. (1992) “On Q: Causing Quality in Higher Education”, New York: ACE/Macmillan, Cited in Chaffee E. E. and Sherr L. A. (1992). Sherr, Lawrence A., and Deborah J. Teeter, eds. (1991) “Total Quality Management in Higher Education”, New Directions in Institutional Research No. 71, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Cited in Chaffee E. E. and Sherr L. A. (1992) Chris Papenhausen and Walter Einstein (2006) “Insights from the Balanced Scorecard Implementing the Balanced Scorecard at a college of business”. Measuring Business Excellence, V 10, No.3, [online] Accessed in 03/09/2006, Website: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?Filename=/published/e meraldfulltextarticle/pdf/2670100302.pdf Craft, (1994) “International developments in assuring quality in higher education”, Falmer, London, Cited in Grant Harman (1996). Craft, (1992) “Quality assurance in higher education”, Falmer, London, Cited in Grant Harman (1996). Lewis R.G. and SMITH D.H. (1994) “Total quality in higher education”, St. Lucie Press,Delray Beach, Florida, USA. Cited in Al-alawi H. (1998) 34 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

UNDP (2003) “Human Development Report”, cited in Al Aghbari B. (2005). Elholy O. and Abu Dagga S. (2006) “Towards an Arabic model to evaluate an academic program”, 1st Arab conference for university quality and licensure and accreditation requirements’ proceedings, Sharjah, UAE Al Aghbari B. (2005) “Quality in higher education”, 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon. Hareb S. (2005) “Quality in higher education”, 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon Al Harbash J. (2005) “Experience of general foundation for technical education and professional training in elearning and training process”, 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon Al Ma’ber S. (2005) “Quality in designing the Arabic language courses in higher education”, 2nd Arabic forum for education proceedings, Arab thought foundation, Beirut, Lebanon. Mike P. and Jane S. (no date) “Beware! TQM is Coming To Your Campus”, [online] Accessed in 27/08/2006, Website http://www2.nea.org/he/tqm.html. MOHE, CAA, (2006) “Licensed Institutions”, [online] Accessed in 13/09/2006, available at: http://www.caa.ae/caa/institutions.aspx MOHE, CAA, (2006) “Accredited Programs”, [online] Accessed in 13/09/2006, available at: http://www.caa.ae/caa/institutions.aspx Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research (2005) “Enrollment & graduation statistics on higher education institutions for the years 1999 – 200”, [online] Accessed in 19/09/2006, Available at website: http://www.uae.gov.ae/mohe/introduction1.html UNESCO (1996) “Statistical yearbook”, UNESCO Publishing & Bernan Press, Paris & Lanham, ISBN 92-3-003344-8 & 0-89059-064-8, Cited in Robert Lundqvist (1997). Al Khori B. (1991) “Strategy of science and culture development in Arab homeland”, ESISCO, Tunis, Cited in Al Aghbari B. (2005). Dakhil H. (1988) “Higher education in Arab homeland, a futuristic look”, Journal of union of Arab universities, No 23, Cited in Al Aghbari B. (2005)

35 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon

e-TQM College Working Paper Series WP- 0102062007

Madkhor A. (2000) “Higher education in Arab homeland, a way to future”, Dar Al Fikr Al Arabi, Cairo, Egypt Mahmoud A. (2004) “About the development of higher education in Arab homeland”, Al Arabi magazine, Kuwait, Cited in Al Aghbari B. (2005) OECD (1997) “Education at a glance – indicator P1: Participation in formal education”, URL: http://www.oecd.org/els/stats/eag/ind_p1.exe, Cited in Robert Lundqvist (1997). UNISCO (2006) “GLOBAL EDUCATION DIGEST, Comparing Education Statistics Across the World”, [online] Accessed 17/09/2006, Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001457/145753e.pdf University of Sharjah (2006) “Facts and Figures”, University of Sharjah, Institutional Research unit, Sharjah, UAE

36 The challenges and obstacles of TQM Implementation in the Higher Education Institutions: The Case of
Sharjah University in UAE By Dr Ahmed and Hamdoon