ISSN: 2222-6990
Open access
TQ/M is a style of management that has worked for several decades all over world and
is receiving growing attention, new some colleges and universities are beginning to recognize
that T.Q.M values are more compatible with higher education that many existing control
originally coined by Feigenbaum (1983), also used in higher education want the service we
provide to be the highest quality.
The purpose of this study was to provide an over view of T.Q. M thou (problems
solution method). It's feasibility for higher education and academic libraries, and the results of
its implementation by colleges and universities. And the change management helps to control
the success. Questionnaire was designed to measure the knowledge and perception of
academic library directors, dependent heads. Each college has framework which named
strategically planning concerned of the problem solving method. In the initial of the educational
stage of a process, improvement program, quick results are often obtained because the
solutions are obvious or someone has a brilliant idea... However long term, a systematic
approach will yield the greatest benefits.
In this research scientific method as applied used to constitute the improvement, on fact some
control chart can be used effectively utilized is more than one step of the method, while
process. Of improvement is the main goal, also in addition to management of changes are
mapping to be as way of improve the process and to increase the satisfaction of the performing
the process. Therefore the research is divided in to three parts
First part care of problem solving method and how to utilize of it in colleges, second
take the change management, third part applied among the stuffs of universities (120), who are
dealing of education. The data analysis yields the following results:
There was a significant differencing found among the respondents concerning their
option (member of colleges staffs) indicates that there is an evidence result of improvement
through the applied data, and the rest of results listed in the research .
1. Bladwin, G. and Mclnnis, c. (2002), The organization of the academic year, Trends
implications and issues department of education, science and training, commonwealth
of Australia.
2. Baillie, C. (2002) Enhancing Creativity in Science & Engineering, LTSN Composites
Workshop, London, 16/5/2002.
3. Caaig, Rusbult, 9 july, 2006), Thinking skills, problem solving method in education,
ASA./education/ thiking/ method.htm
4. Clark, B.(1998). Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: organizational pathways of
transformation. New York: Paragon.
5. Clark, Burton, R. (1983), The higher education system, Academic organization in cross
national perspective, university of California press, Berkely
6. Cugini, A. and Favotto, F. (2004), "Economic Measures in Universities: the Activity-Based
Costing Methodology in an Italian public School of Economics and Business" Workshop
On The Process Of Reform Of The University Across Europe. Siena, Italy-May 24-26.
7. Czarniawska B., Genell K. (2002), "Gone shopping? Universities: on their way to the
market", Scandinavian Journal of Management, 18; pp.455-474.
8. Caaig, Rusbult,9 July, 2006), Thinking skill, problem solving method in education,
ASA./education/ thinking/ method.htm
9. Deem, R., (2004), The Knowledge Worker, The Manager-academic and the
Contemporary University: New and Old Forms Of Public Management?. Financial
Accountability &Management, vol 10, n. 1.
10. - - EL-Kawas, Elaine et al (1998), Quality Assurance in higher education, Recent progress:
challenge, Ahead, The world Bank, Washington D.C.
11. Gibbons, Michael, (1998), higher education Relevance in the 21 th century, world bank.
Washington.
12. {Gil and Melz 1996} Gil, Y., and Melz, E. "Explicit representations of problem-solving
strategies to support knowledge acquisition". In Proceedings of the Thirteenth. National
Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-96).
13. Guthrie, J. (2001) 'The Management, Measurement and the Reporting of Intellectual
Capital'. Journal of Intellectual Capital. 2:1 pp27-41
14. Jones J and Taylor J. (1996), Performance Indicators In Higher Education: UK
Universities, Open University Press.
15. Lawrence S., and Sharma, U., (2002), "COM modification of education and academic
labourusing the balanced scorecard in a university setting". Critical Perspective on
Accounting, 13(5-6), pp. 661-677.
16. Lindsay, A. and Neumann, R. (1988). The Challenge for Research in Higher Education:
Harmonizing Excellence and Utility. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 8.
Washington: ASHE-ERIC.
17. Macgregor 1991} Macgregor, R. "The evolving technology of classification-based
knowledge representation systems". In Sowa, J., ed., Principles of Semantic Networks
18. Mann, D. (2004) Hands-On Systematic Innovation for Business and Management, IFR
Press, Cleve don, UK.19. Neumann, R. (1992). Perceptions of the teaching-research nexus: A Framework for
analysis. Higher Education, 23, 2, 159-171
20. Parker, L.D. (2002) 'It's Been a Pleasure Doing Business With You: A Strategic Analysis
and Critique of University Change Management,', Critical Perspectives on Accounting,
13:603-619
21. Rantanen, K. & Domb, E. (2002), Simplified TRIZ: New Problem-Solving Applications for
Engineers and Manufacturing Professionals, St Lucie Press (CRC Press, Boca, Raton,
USA).
22. Robst, J. (2001). Cost Efficiency in Public Higher Education Institutions. The Journal of
Higher Education, 72,6,730-750.
23. Schweitzer, S., High-Tech Industrial Policy: Can Health Lead the Way? Edward Elgar
Publishers (Cheltenham, UK).
N/A
Copyright: © 2012 The Author(s)
Published by HRMARS (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode