The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0954-478X.htm

RESEARCH AND CONCEPTS

Graph theory and matrix

approach for performance
evaluation of TQM in Indian
industries

TQM in Indian
industries

509

Sushma Kulkarni
Rajarambapu Institute of Technology, Sangli, Maharashtra, India
Abstract
Purpose Once the decision is taken to implement total quality management (TQM) in any
organization, achieving TQM is a journey. It takes significant effort over an extended period of time.
Seeks to propose a TQM performance index.
Design/methodology/approach An industry TQM performance index evaluates and ranks the
various industries practicing TQM for a given period of time. Uses graph theory and a matrix
approach.
Findings The index is obtained from industry performance function, which is useful for
identification and comparison of the different industries for their TQM performance. If the TQM
evaluation is done correctly, the evaluation will present the profile of the organization to different
audience, i.e. the customers, governments, other industries, funding agencies and public.
Originality/value The model suggested for evaluation presents a logical approach to rank the
industries and other organization practicing TQM or other quality program.
Keywords Project evaluation, Total quality management, Graph theory
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Total quality management (TQM) is an all encompassing dynamic process in an
organization to promote never ending improvement in the effectiveness and efficiency
of all elements of a business (Hradesky, 1995). TQM is the integration of functions and
processes within an organization in order to achieve continuous improvement of the
quality of goods and services. The goal is customer satisfaction (CS) (Ross, 1996). A
companys continued success requires repeat business, which in turn depends upon the
customers. A strong customer focus is therefore imperative. TQM is a means to this
end, and an attribute of good management. TQM is essentially customer driven. It
takes a total system view. TQM measures are not merely confined to traditional rejects,
reworks, down grades and the like. They also include global, balance sheet parameters
such as profits, stock in trade, market share, etc.
The approach touches every operation, every individual and every activity. Each is
a link with the ultimate purpose to provide durable satisfaction to the existing and
potential customers. The concept of TQM hinges on continuous, improvement as the
core mission of the upper management. Zero defect or non-conformance is the
operational objective of an organization. It is not a static restrictive concept. In its
policy perspective and specification, the top management forges harmony between

The TQM Magazine

Vol. 17 No. 6, 2005
pp. 509-526
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0954-478X
DOI 10.1108/09544780510627615

TQM
17,6

510

zero defects as the operational, objective and continuous improvements as the

dynamics pursuit of the management (Bounds et al., 1994).
Some common principles that run through TQM interpretations (Dale and Cooper,
1997):
.
Every one in the organization is involved continuously improving the process
under his or her control and takes responsibility for his or her own quality
assurance.
.
Each person is committed to satisfying his or her customer (internal or external).
.
Team work is practiced in a number of forms. There is a commitment to the
development of employees through involvement.
.
Participation by everyone in the business is positively encouraged and practiced.
.
A formal program of education and training is in place and this is viewed as an
investment in developing peoples ability and knowledge and helping them
realize their potentials.
.
Suppliers and customers are integrated into the improvement process.
.
Honesty, sincerity, and care are integral part of daily business life and simplicity
in process, systems, procedures and work instructions are pursued.
Graph theory and matrix approach
Once the decision is taken to implement TQM in any organization, achieving TQM is a
journey (Juran Institute, 1992). It takes significant effort over an extended period of
time. The journey can be divided into five phases as per Dr Juran namely decide,
prepare, start, expand, integrate with a sixth phase as evaluation which will indicate as
to how effective the implementation is as compared to other organizations practicing
TQM. The model suggested for evaluation presents a logical approach to rank the
industries (other organization practicing TQM or other quality up gradation program)
using graph theory and matrix approach. Industry TQM performance index (ITQMpi)
is proposed which evaluates and ranks the various industries practicing TQM for a
given period of time. The index is obtained from industry performance function (IPF),
which is useful for identification and comparison of the different industries for their
TQM performance.
If the TQM evaluation is done correctly, the evaluation will present the profile of the
organization to different audience, i.e. the customers, governments, other industries,
funding agencies and public. The purpose served is given below.
.
Customer choice of best product from market and worth for money.
.
Government accountability, funding, policy and planning, national growth
and development.
.
Society accountability.
.
Funding agency funding R & D, expansion projects, new projects feasibility,
etc.
.
Industry for comparison in the competitive market.
Presently, bodies responsible for industrial development, quality control, etc. in India
like CII, QCFI, TPM, etc. have already started propagating TQM and its benefits by

conducting various training programs and various awards are also instituted at
national and international level to propagate and inculcate quality culture in Indian
organization. There is Malcom Balridge Award, European Quality Award, Japanese
Quality Award (Deming prize) at international level, Indian Juran Award, Dr Shah
Trust Award, etc. at national level.
But their evaluation procedure for award is elaborate, and still it is felt that there is a
need for simple and effective evaluation procedures. When TQM is implemented in any
organization, to evaluate its performance it is a total effect of large number of
parameter on each other as well as on the TQM performance. Thus the
interrelationship between the attributes (parameter) according to the importance of
one attribute over the other needs to be studied along with the independent effect of
each parameter on TQM performance evaluation. Thus, efforts need to be extended to
determine factors which influence an industrys performance based on TQM practice in
that particular organization for a particular period, using a logical approach to
appraise the organization of their standing in the national and international scenario
for improvement or sustaining the performance according to the performance of TQM
process evaluated.
Graph theory is a logical and system approach (Narsingh, 2001). The advanced
theory of graph and its application are very well documented. Graph theory is a very
natural and powerful tool in combinatorial operation research, transport network,
activity of stochastic process useful for modeling representation proved to be useful for
modeling and analyzing various kinds of system in many fields of science and
engineering. A graph G V ; E consists of a set of objects V {v1 ; v2 ; . . .} called
vertices, and another set E {e1 ; e2 ; . . .}; whose elements are called edges, such that
edge ek is identified with an unordered pair (vi, vj) of vertices. The vertices vi, vj
associated with edge ek are called end vertices of ek. The most common representation
of a graph is by means of a diagram, in which the vertices are represented as points and
each edge as a line segment joining its end vertices. Often this diagram itself is referred
to as graph. The object shown in Figure 1, e.g. is a graph. Matrix approach useful in
analyzing the graph models expeditiously is applied to derive useful system function
and system index to meet the objectives. The representations of graphs by matrices
offer case in computer handling. In view of their advantages, graph theory and
matrix approach is proposed for the evaluation and comparison of TQM in an
organization.

TQM in Indian
industries

511

TQM performance evaluation attributes

For the purpose of evaluation of TQM in an organization which is a set of process
implemented at all stages right from input to the final output going out from the

Figure 1.
Graph with five vertices
and six edges

TQM
17,6

512

system. Let us consider an industry as a system; the system input, process and output
variables for implementation of TQM is top management, infrastructure employee
empowerment (EE), supplier involvement (SI), strategic planning (SP) for TQM
vision/mission and goals, measurement and analysis of products and processes,
evaluation of cost of poor quality, quality culture, benchmarking and CS, etc. The
performance attribute can be defined as the system variable, input, output or the
process variable.
TQM evaluation attributes digraph
TQM evaluation attributes digraph is defined, which models the importance or
presence of attributes and their interrelationship for a given organization. Tracking
TQM can be tough. As one rolls out total quality initiative, one must continuously
monitor it on every front to ensure that the process is delivering the right results.
Concentrate on planning for quality but ignore infrastructure (IN) and the TQM
initiative will collapse. Allocate resources but forget to communicate with employees
and one will have a well budgeted, but utterly ineffective TQM exercise. May be
this is the reason that over 70 percent of the TQM initiatives in the world
eventually fail. To ensure that your TQM implementation is really working,
measure it not just in overall terms, but in each area covered by the TQM process
along with the importance of each parameter (attribute) over the other with all
attributes considered at a time.
A digraph (also called directed graph) G consists of a set of vertices V
{v1 ; v2 ; . . .}; a set of edges E {e1 ; e2 ; . . .} and a mapping function that maps every
edge onto some ordered pair of vertices (vi, vj). As in the case of undirected graphs,
a vertex is represented by a point and an edge by a line segment between vi and vj
with an arrow from vi to vj. In Figure 2, an edge for which the initial and terminal
vertices are the same forms the self loop, such as e7 and for edge e4, v3 is initial
vertex from where the edge is incident out and v4 is terminal vertex where the edge
is incident into.
Thus, TQM evaluation attribute diagraph consists of a set of nodes. E {ei };
with i 1; 2; . . . ; M and a set of edges, r {r ij }: A node Ei represents ith TQM
performance attribute (i.e. A i) and the edges represent the interrelationship among
the attributes. The number of nodes, M is equal to the number of TQM performance
evaluation attributes node j in the selection, then a directed edge or arrow is drawn
from node i to node j (i.e. rij). If j is having relative importance over i, then directed
edge or arrow is drawn from node j to node i (i.e. rij), e.g. for two nodes e1 and e2
the graph can be represented as follows as shown in Figure 3 with r12
indicating relative importance of e1 over e2 and r21 indicating relative importance of
e2 over e1.

Figure 2.
Diagraph with five
vertices and seven edges

To demonstrate the TQM evaluation attributes diagraph, an example of TQM

evaluation for a particular organization is considered. Suppose the most important
attributes for TQM evaluation are:
.
infrastructure (IN);
.
top management support (TMS);
.
strategic planning (SP);
.
employee empowerment (EE); and
.
customer satisfaction (CS).

TQM in Indian
industries

513

TMS is more important for TQM performance as compared to IN, however, IN is also
important in TQM performance, even though less important than the TMS. Thus, there
exists relative importance between these attributes in both directions. Similarly, the
attributes, EE and CS are equally important for the success of TQM in any
organization. Thus, the interrelations can be represented among the other attributes. A
TQM performance evaluation attribute diagraph is developed based on the above and
is shown in Figure 3. The five nodes represent the five selected attributes and the edges
their relative importance.
TQM performance evaluation attributes diagraph gives a graphical representation
of the attributes and their relative importance for quick visual appraisal. As the
number of nodes and their interrelations increases, the digraph becomes complex. In
such a case the visual analysis of the diagraph is expected to be difficult and complex.
To overcome this constraint, the diagraph is represented in matrix form as shown in
(1), where E 1 ; . . . ; E 5 are nodes showing attributes. r 12 ; r 13 ; r 14 ; . . . ; r 51 are edges
showing relative importance of attributes over each other.
Matrix representation
Matrix representation of TQM evaluation attributes diagraph gives its one to one
representation. A matrix called the TQM performance attributes matrix (TQMpam) is
defined. This is M M matrix and considers the presence of attributes (i.e. Ei) and
their relative importance (i.e. rij). This matrix A1 for TQM performance attributes
diagraph Figure 3 is represented as:

Attributes

IN

TMS

SP

EE

CS

IN

Ei

r 12

r 13

r 14

r 15

TMS

r 21

E2

r 23

r 24

r 25

SP

r 31

r 32

E3

r 34

r 35

EE

r 41

r 42

r 43

E4

r 45

CS

r 51

r 52

r 53

r 54

E5

Figure 3.
Relative importance
between edge and node

TQM
17,6

514

Where, Ei is the value of its attribute (A 1) represented by node and Ei and rij is the
relative importance of ith attribute over jth represented by the edge rij. Permanent of
this matrix A, i.e. per (A), is defined as TQM performance evaluation function.
Permanent is a standard matrix function and is used in combination mathematics
(Venkate Rao, 2000).
TQM performance evaluation function for matrix expression (1) is written as per
Jurkat and Ryser (1966) formula as:

PerA

5
Y

E i Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r ji E k E l E m E i E j E k E l E m r ij r jk r ki

i1

r ik r kj r ji E l E m
{Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r ji r kl r lk E m SSSSSr ij r jk r kl r li r il r ik r kj r ji E m }

{Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r ji r kl r lm r mk r km r ml r lk
Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r jk r kl r lm r mi r im r ml r lk r kj r ji }
Expression (2) is a complete expression as it considers attributes presence and at the
possible relative importance among attributes. The term is the sets of distinct diagonal
elements (i.e. Eis) and loops of off diagonal elements of different size (i.e. rijrji, rijrjkrkl,
etc.).
In general, if there are M number of TQM performance evaluation attribute for a
given organization and the interrelationship exist among all the TQMpea, there the
TQM performance evaluation attributes matrix B for the considered TQM
performance evaluation attribute digraph is written as expression (3):

Attribute

E1

r 12

r 13

r 1M

r 21

E2

r 23

r 2M

3
..
.
..
.

r 31
..
.
..
.

r 32
..
.
..
.

E3
..
.
..
.

r 3M
..

.
..

rM 1

rM 2

rM 3

EM

TQMP attribute functions for this matrix, B contains (M1) number of terms. In sigma
form, the TQM performance evaluation function is written as expression (4). This
expression contains (M 1) groupings.

PerB

M
Y

TQM in Indian
industries

Si Sj Sk Sm r ij E l E k E m SSS Sr ij r ji E k E l E m

a1

Si Sj Sk Sm r ij r jk r kl r ik r kj r ji E l E m E M
{Si Sj Sk SM r ij r ji r kl r lk E m E n E M Si Sj Sk SM r ij r jk r kl r li

r il r lk r ki r ji E m E n E M
}
{Si Sj Sk SM r ij r ji r kl r lm r mk r km r ml r lk E n E o . . .E M

Si Sj Sk SM r ij r jk r kl r lm r mi r im r ml r lk r kj r ji E n E o . . .E M
}
Expression (4) is a TQM performance evaluation function that ensures a realistic TQM
performance evaluation in terms of evaluation attributes. The expression contains
terms arranged in (M 1) groupings. The first grouping contains only one term and is
a set of presence of M attributes. The second grouping, is absent as there are no
self-loops in the digraph. The terms of the third grouping represent a set of two
attribute relative importance loops (i.e. rijrji) and is the resultant causality of attribute
i and j, and the severity of remaining M 2 2 attributes. Each term of the fourth
grouping is a set of three event relative importance loops (i.e. rijrjkrki or its pair rikrkjrji)
and the severity of remaining M 2 3 attributes. The terms of the fifth grouping are
arranged in two subgroupings, each term of the first subgrouping is a set of two
2-attribute relative importance loops [(i.e. rijrji) and (rklrlk)] and the severity of M 2 4
attributes. Each term of the second subgrouping is a set of 4-attributes relative
importance loop [(i.e. rijrjkrkirli) or its pair rilrlkrkirji)] and the severity of M 2 4
attributes. Similarly other terms of the expression are defined. Thus, the TQM
performance evaluation function characterizes an organization for its performance
evaluation as it contains all possible structural components of the attributes and their
relative importance.
TQM performance evaluation index (TQMpei)
TQMpei is a measure of the performance of an organization for its TQM processes. A
higher value of the index means better performance. The TQM performance evaluation
function defined above, i.e. expression (4) is appropriate for evaluation of the TQMpei as
it contains presence of their attributes and their relative importance. The numerical
value of the TQMpef (TQM performance evaluation function) is called the TQMpei. As
the TQMpef contains only the positive terms, therefore higher values of Eis and rijs
will result in increased value of the TQMpei. To calculate the TQMpei the required
information is the values of Eis and rijs.
The value of Eis should be obtained from the data provided by the organization
practicing TQM on the prescribed attributes evaluation from the ith attribute and such
quantitative value is then converted into a ranked value judgment on a scale, e.g. 0-10
may be adopted. Table I is suggested which represents the TQMpea on a qualitative
scale. It is seen that some of the attributes were not easy to measure in terms of
qualitative scale hence a questionnaire has been designed to measure each attribute in
terms of weightage (questionnaire enclosed in appendix). Each attribute has been

515

TQM
17,6

516
Table I.
Value of TQM
performance evaluation
attributes (Eis)

Qualitative measure of TQM performance

evaluation attribute

Attribute value of TQM performance

evaluation (Ei)

Exceptionally low
Extremely low
Very low
Below average
Average
Above average
High
Very high
Most high
Extremely high
Exceptionally high

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

measured in terms of eight subquestions each having a specified weightage. These

quantitative weightage are then required to normalize the quantitative value of the Ei
on the same scale as the qualitative value, i.e. 0-10. If E1 has range Eii and Eiu. The other
intermediate value Eii of the TQMpea is assigned the value in between 0 and 10 as per
the following:
E i {10=E iu }E ii

for E ii 0
5

{10=E iu 2 E il }E ii 2 E il

for E il . 0

Expression (5) is applicable for general beneficial attributes only, e.g. CS means, its
higher attribute values are more desirable for the given TQM performance evaluation
for a particular organization, whereas, non-beneficial attributes, e.g. decrease in market
share is the one, whose lower attribute values are desirable. Therefore, in case of non
beneficial TQMpea, the attribute value 0 (zero) on scale 0-10, is assigned to the highest
range value (Eiu) and value if 10 is assigned to the lower range value (Eii). The other
intermediate value (Eii) of the TQMpea is assigned the values in between 0 and 10 as per
the following.
E i 10{1 2 E ii =E iu }

for E i 0
6

10{10=E iu =E ii }E iu 2 E ii for E i . 0
The relative importance between two attributes (i.e. rij) is also assigned value on the
scale 0-10. The relative importance rij implies that an attribute i is compared with
another attribute j in terms of relative importance for the given organization. The
relative importance between i, j and j, i is distributed on the scale 0-10 and is defined as
r ji S 2 r ij

It means that a scale is adopted (0 to S) on which the relative importance values are
compared. If rij represents the relative importance of ith attribute over jth attribute,
then the relative importance of the jth attribute over ith attribute is evaluated using

expression (7). For example, if the jth attribute is slightly more important than ith
attribute then rji 6 and rij 4. Table II is suggested which aids in assigning rij
values based on the above.
The TQMpei value for each organization evaluated using expression (4) and
substituting the values of Eis and rijs. The organizations can be arranged in the
descending or ascending order of TQMpei, to rank them for their performance. The
organization, for which the values of TQMpei are highest, is the best TQM performance
standard organization. However, the final decision may depend on factors like
personnel interview of CEO, employees and some of the direct customers etc. and other
constrains. But TQMpei can surely guide and help to select the best standards of TQM
today.

TQM in Indian
industries

517

Methodology
A methodology for the selection of best TQM performing organization is suggested
based on digraph and matrix method. The main steps of the methodology are:
(1) Identify the TQM performance evaluation attributes (i.e. A1, A2, . . . ,AN) for the
given organization. Also consider relative importance among the attributes.
Obtain also the value of the attributes (Ei). Refer questionnaire Appendix and
their relative importance (rij). Refer Tables I and II for details.
(2) Develop the TQMpea diagraph considering the identified TQMpe attributes and
their relative importance. The number of nodes shall be equal to the number of
attributes considered in step 1. The edges and their directions will be decided
based on the interrelations among the attributes (rijs) (as explained earlier).
(3) Develop the TQMpea matrix for the TQMpea diagraph. This will be M M
matrix with diagonal elements as Eis and off diagonal elements as rijs.
(4) Obtain the TQMpe function for the matrix on the lines of expression (4).
(5) Substitute the values of Ei and rij, obtained in step 1, in expression (4) to
evaluate TQMpei for the organizations to be evaluated.
(6) Arrange the organizations in the descending order of the TQMpei. The
organization having the highest values of TQMpei is the best standard of TQM
organization. However, the final decision may depend on other factors like
personnel interview, etc.

Class description
Two attributes are of equal importance
One attribute is slightly important
One attribute is very important over the other
One attribute is most important over the other
One attribute is extremely important over the other
One attribute is exceptionally important over the
other

rij

Relative importance of
attributes
rij 10 2 rij

5
6
7
8
9

5
4
3
2
1

10

Table II.
Relative importance of
attributes (rijs)

TQM
17,6

518

Model suggested for TQM performance evaluation based on the data collected from
present research study
As per the methodology defined above, the first step is to identify the attributes
affecting the TQMpe for any organization or (industry):
.
strategic planning for TQM in organization (SPO);
.
top management support;
.
employee empowerment;
.
supplier involvement; and
.
customer satisfaction.
The data regarding the above attributes can be collected from the organization with the
help of questionnaire (Appendix) formulated on the basis of weightage. Each attribute
is evaluated on the basis of eight subquestions each carrying a maximum weightage of
five points hence maximum weightage given to each attribute is 40 points. Therefore,
for five attributes maximum total weightage is 40 5 200 points. Thus (for this
evaluation of Ei attributes one can use Malcom Balridge award criteria also) but the
questionnaire is designed as per study of TQM in Indian context.
Once the attributes are identified and the Ei are calculated, next step is to define the
relative importance of the attribute rij suggested as per Table II. With Eis and rijs
identified draw the TQMpea digraph showing the presence of Ei as well as relative
importance of the above attributes as shown in Figure 4. This diagraph consists of five
nodes 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 representing the above mentioned attributes, respectively. TQMpe
matrix, C, of this diagraph is written as matrix expression (8) on the lines of matrix
expression (3). The TQMpea are abbreviated as SPO, TM, EE, SI, and CS.
The quantitative values of these attributes as collected by the questionnaire
(Appendix) are tabulated in Table III (the data used in Table III are assumed values of
weightage). These values are to be normalized in the interval scale 0-10. In our five
attributes identified all the attributes are beneficial attributes (the questions in
questionnaire are formatted in that manner Appendix and higher values are desirable.

Figure 4.
Diagraph for TQMpef (five
attribute model) showing
relationship of one node
with all the other four
nodes

The attribute values are obtained using expression (5) and Table I. The values of these
attributes are normalized and given in Table IV in the respective columns.
Relative importance of attributes (i.e. rijs) is also assigned the values in the range
0-10, based on Table II and is given in Table V. Information collected from literature
review and based on data from present study, relative importance of attributes has
been assigned. For example, TMS is more important than the SI so a high value of
relative importance is assigned to the TMS over the SI, and the low value of relative
importance is assigned to the SI over the TMS. Similarly, the relative importance
among the other attributes can be explained. It may be mentioned here that the
relative values assigned are as per authors perception of TQM implementation
effectiveness. The award committee or various national institute can have their own
perception to decide properly the relative importance among the performance
evaluation attributes.
The TQMpef for the matrix, expression (8), can be written on the lines of expression
(4), and the value of TQMpei is calculated using Tables III and IV and the values of Eis

Organization

SPO

TM

EE

SI

CS

27
29
26
24
32

36
26
34
20
36

28
31
37
24
34

30
25
29
27
37

30
29
35
28
36

1
2
3
4
5

Attributes

SPO

TM

EE

SI

CS

SPO
TM
EE
SI
CS

5
5
5
5

4
6
6

5
6

5
7

5
4
5

5
4
3
5

Organization

SPO

TM

EE

SI

CS

4
6
3
0
10

10
4
9
0
10

3
5
10
0
8

4
0
3
2
10

3
1
9
0
10

1
2
3
4
5

TQM in Indian
industries

519

Table III.
Eis for various attributes
of the organization (five
attribute model) (collected
as per questionnaire in
annexure)

Table IV.
rijs for various attributes
of the organization (five
attribute model)

Table V.
TQMpea values (Eis) for
the organization (five
attribute model)
(normalized in the
interval scale of 0-10 from
Table III)

TQM
17,6

520

and rijs for each organization. A computer program has been developed for calculation
of the results to evaluate 5 5 matrix. The TQMpei values of different organizations
are then arranged in descending order.

Conclusions
(1) The proposed graph theory and matrix approach model is applicable to any
type of industry.
(2) TQM performance evaluation function is proposed and is characteristic of an
industry. This helps to obtain the TQM performance evaluation index, which
evaluates and ranks industries for a given period.
(3) The proposed method strengthens the existing procedures by proposing a
logical and rational method of performance evaluation of an industry with TQM
processes.
Sample calculations for TQMPEI for a five attribute model
I. Attributes defined
E1
E2
E3
E4
E5

strategic planning for TQM in organization (SPO);

top management support (TM);
employee empowerment (EE);
supplier involvement (SI); and
customer satisfaction (CS).

II. Diagraph for TQMpef (five attribute model) showing relationship of one
node with all the other four nodes (e.g. for node (1) (r12r21), (r13r31), (r14r41),
(r15r51), (r11)
III. Matrix-TQMpem for the diagraph (five attribute model)

Attributes

SPO

TM EE

SI

CS

SPO

Ei

r 12

r 13

r 14

r 15

TM

r 21

E2

r 23

r 24

r 25

EE

r 31

r 32

E3

r 34

r 35

SI

r 41

r 42

r 43

E4

r 45

CS

r 51

r 52

r 53

r 54

E5

IV. TQMpef for matrix expression (8) is written as

PerA

5
Y

TQM in Indian
industries

E i Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij E j E k E l E m Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r ji E k E l E m

i1

{Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r jk r kl r ik r kj r ji E l E m
{Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r ji r kl r lm E m Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r jk r kl r li r il r lk r kj r ji E m

521

{Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r ji r kl r lm r mk r km r ml r lk
SSSSSr ij r jk r kl r lm r mi r im r ml r lk r kj r ji }
V. Using the data from Tables III-V and the expression (9) the TQMpei can be
calculated with the following method for organization (1).
First grouping E 1 E 2 E 3 E 4 E 5 4 10 3 4 3 1; 440
Second grouping 0 self loop

Third grouping

5
X

r ij r ji E l E m E n 20; 814:

i1

Fourth grouping Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r jk r ki r ik r kj r ji E l E m 53; 490:

Fifth grouping Va Vb
Va Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r ji r kl r lk E m Va 42; 416:
Vb Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r jk r ki r lm r il r lk r kj r ji E m 59; 400:

Va Vb 42; 416 59; 400 101; 816:

Org
1
2
3
4
5

Grouping
Va

II

III

IV

1,440
0
7,290
0
89,000

0
0
0
0
0

20,814
4,820
64,985
0
83,400

53,430
16,970
103,710
0
218,560

42,416
28,274
60,154
3,400
84,890

Vb

VIa

VIb

Total

59,400
39,400
84,550
4,900
118,500

10
31,250
100
32,100
100

125
68,875
125
125
125

277,605
189,589
421,594
108,475
795,475

Table VI.

TQM
17,6

Sixth grouping
VIa Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r ji r kl r lm r mk r km r ml r lk 31; 250:
VIb Si Sj Sk Sl Sm r ij r jk r kl r lm r mi r im r ml r lk r kj r ji 68; 875:

522

[Total of I II III IV Va Vb VIa VIb

TQMpei PerA 277; 685:
VI. Similarly for other organization calculations can be performed. The values of the
grouping are tabulated in Table VI.
VII. Therefore, the ranks of the organization as per their TQMpei are given in
descending order.
(1) TQMpei (5)
(2) TQMpei (3)
(3) TQMpei (1)
(4) TQMpei (2)
(5) TQMpei (4)
Hence from the values of TQMpei, it is clear that the Fifth organization, i.e. TQMpei(5) is
indicating the best TQM performance and TQM has been implemented in the best way
in that particular organization.
References
Hradesky, J.L. (1995), TQM Handbook, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, pp. 2-3.
Ross, J.E. (1996), TQM Text, Cases and Readings, Vanity Books International, New Delhi, pp. 1-2.
Bounds, G., Yorks, L., Meladams and Ranney, G. (1994), Beyond TQM towards the Emerging
Paradigm, McGraw-Hill International Edition, New York, NY, pp. 44-62.
Dale, B. and Cooper, C. (1997), Human Resource and Total Quality An Executives Handbook,
Beacon Books, A Blackwell Asia Imprint, New Delhi, pp. 19-21.
Juran Institute (1992), Total Quality Management A Practical Guide, Qimpro Consultants Pvt
Ltd, Mumbai, April.
Narsingh, D. (2001), Graph Theory with Applications to Engineering and Computer Science, 22nd
ed., Prentice Hall of India private limited, New Delhi.
Venkate Rao, R. (2000), Graph theory and matrix approach for the performance evaluation of
technical institutions, Indian Journal of Technical Education, Vol. 23.
Jurkat, W.B. and Ryser, H.J. (1966), Matrix factorization of determinants and permanents,
Journal of Algebra, Vol. 3.

Appendix

TQM in Indian
industries

523

TQM
17,6

524

TQM in Indian
industries

525

TQM
17,6

526