Little reliable longitudinal research has investigated the outcomes of participating in quality circles (QCs). This article reports the results of such a study whose evaluation criteria were developed according to a heuristic model of key cognitive, affective, and behavioral results of the QC process. A sample of 225 military and civilian employees of a U.S. Air Force base was evaluated using survey and performance appraisal measures administered within the framework of a non-equivalent control design. Analyses of covariance yielded evidence that QC participation significantly affected the study's criterion variables. The authors discuss the limitations and implications of their study and offer suggestions for future research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alexander, C. P.
(1981). Learning from the Japanese. Personnel Journal, 60, 616-619.
2.
Andrews, F. M.
, & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: Americans perceptions of life quality. New York: Plenum Press.
3.
Atwater, L., & Sander, S. (1984). Quality circles in navy organizations: An evaluation (Technical Report No. NPRDC TR 8453). San Diego: Navy Personnel Research & Development Center.
4.
Blair, J. D.
, Cohen, S. L., & Hurwitz, J. D. (1982). Quality circles: Practical considerations for public managers. Public Productivity Review, 6(1), 9-18.
5.
Blair, J. D.
, & Whitehead, C. J. (1984). Can quality circles survive in the United States?Business Horizons, 27(5), 17-23.
6.
Bradley, K.
, & Hill, S. (1983). After Japan: The quality circle transplant and productive efficiency. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 21, 291-311.
7.
Campbell, D. T.
, & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
8.
Cascio, W. F.
(1987). Applied psychology in personnel management (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
9.
Cartwright, D.
, & Zander, A. (1968). Group dynamics: Research and theory (3rd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
10.
Dewar, D. L.
(1980). The quality circle guide to participation management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
11.
Ferris, G. D.
, & Wagner, J. A. III. (1985). Quality circles in the United States: A conceptual reevaluation. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 21, 155-167.
12.
Goldstein, S. G.
(1985). Organizational dualism and quality circles. Academy of Management Review, 10, 504-517.
13.
Griffin, R. W.
, & Wayne, S. J. (1984). A field study of effective and less effective quality circles. Proceedings of the 44th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management (pp. 217-221).
14.
Homans, G. C.
(1950). The human group. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanavich.
15.
Howard, A.
, Shudo, K., & Umeshima, M. (1983). Motivation and values among Japanese and American managers. Personnel Psychology, 36, 883-898.
Juran, J.
(1967). The QC circle phenomenon. Industrial Quality Control, 23, 329-336.
18.
Juran, J.
(1980). International significance of the QC circle movement. Quality Progress, 13(11), 18-22.
19.
Latham, G. P.
, & Wexley, K. N. (1981). Increasing productivity through performance appraisal. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
20.
Lawyer, E. E. III
, & Mohrman, S. A. (1985). Quality circles after the fad. Harvard Business Review, 63(1), 64-71.
21.
Locke, E. A.
, & Latham, G. P. (1984). Goal setting: A motivational technique that works!Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
22.
Locke, E. A.
, Shaw, K. N., Saari, L. M., & Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal setting and task performance: 1969-1980. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 125-152.
23.
Marks, M. L.
, Mirvis, P. H., Hackett, E. J., & Grady, J. F., Jr. (1986). Employee participation in a quality circle program: Impact on quality of work life, productivity, and absenteeism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 61-69.
24.
Mento, A. J.
(1982). Some motivational reasons why quality circles work in organizations. Transactions of the 4th Annual Conference of the International Association of Quality Circles (pp. 75-88).
25.
Mento, A. J.
, & Steel, R. P. (1985). Conducting quality circles research: Toward a comprehensive perspective. Public Productivity Review, 9, 35-48.
26.
Mobley, W. H.
(1982). Employee turnover: Causes, consequences, and control. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
27.
Morris, J. M.
, & Sherman, J. D. (1981). Generalizability of an organizational commitment model. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 512-526.
28.
Mowday, R. T.
, Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247.
29.
Neilsen, E. H.
(1972). Understanding and managing intergroup conflict. In J. W. Lorsch and P. R. Lawrence (Eds.), Managing group and itnergroup relations (pp. 329-343). Homewood, IL: Irwin.
30.
O'Connor, E. J.
, Peters, L. H., Pooyan, A., Weekley, J., Frank, B., & Erenkrantz, B. (1984). Situational constraint effects on performance, affective reactions, and turnover: A field replication and extension. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 663-672.
31.
Ouchi, W.
(1981). Theory Z. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
32.
Peters, L. H.
, & O'Connor, E. J. (1980). Situational constraints and work outcomes: The influence of a frequently overlooked construct. Academy of Management Review, 5, 391-397.
33.
Rafaeli, A.
(1985). Quality circles and employee attitudes. Personnel Psychology, 38, 603-615.
34.
Rehg, V. R.
(1976). What are the tools of the QC circle? In D. M. Amsden & R. T. Amsden (Eds.), QC circles: Applications, tools, and theory (pp. 95-103). Milwaukee, WI: American Society for Quality Control.
35.
Robbins, S. P.
(1983). The Theory Z organization from a power-control perspective. California Management Review, 25(2), 67-75.
36.
Rosenberg, N. V.
(1957). Occupations and values. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
37.
Scott, K. D.
, & Taylor, G. S. (1985). An examination of conflicting findings on the relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 599-612.
38.
Shaw, M. E.
(1976). Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
39.
Sokol, M.
, & Hurwitz, J. V. (1982). Evaluation = Growth and survival. The Quality Circles Journal, 5(3), 15-20.
40.
Steel, R. P.
, & Mento, A. J. (1986). Impact of situational constraints on subjective and objective criteria of managerial job performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 254-265.
41.
Steel, R. P.
, & Mento, A. J. (1987). The participation-performance controversy reconsidered: Subordinate competence as a mitigating factor. Group and Organization Studies, 12, 411-423.
42.
Steel, R. P.
, Mento, A. J., Dilla, B. L., Ovalle, N. K., II, & Lloyd, R. F. (1985). Factors influencing success and failure of two quality circle programs. Journal of Management, 11, 99-119.
43.
Steel, R. P.
, & Ovalle, N. K., II. (1984a). A review and meta-analysis of research on the relationship between behavioral intentions and employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 673-686.
44.
Steel, R. P.
, & Ovalle, N. K., II. (1984b). Self-appraisal based upon supervisory feedback. Personnel Psychology, 37, 667-685.
45.
Steel, R. P.
, & Shane, G. S. (1986). Evaluation research on quality circles: Technical and analytical implications. Human Relations, 39, 449-466.
46.
Sullivan, J. J.
(1983). A critique of Theory Z. Academy of Management Review, 8, 132-142.
47.
Tharenou, P.
, & Harker, P. (1984). Moderating influence of self-esteem on relationships between job complexity, performance, and satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 623-632.
48.
Wagner, F. R.
, & Morse, J. J. (1975). A measure of individual sense of competence. Psychological Reports, 36, 451-459.
