Cultural Assumptions of TQM

One aspect of total quality management (TQM) that doesn’t seem to be addressed is the cultural assumptions made by its proponents. By this I don’t mean the quality-focused culture, or the corporate culture that TQM seeks to replace (or at least modify). Instead, I mean national culture.

Both W. Edwards Deming (1900-1993) and Joseph M. Juran (1904-2008) developed their managerial theories over their entire lifespans, based on their experience working at Western Electric and for the U.S. Government, but it was in post-war Japan that they had their first opportunities to implement their theories.

Much later (in the 1980s) did American industrialists begin requesting the services of Deming. According to Goetsch & Davis (2021, p. 12), Deming was not received as warmly by Americans as he was by the Japanese. In fact, “Deming’s attitude toward corporate executives in the United States can be described as cantankerous at best.”

How much of Deming and Juran’s theories of management hinge on their experience in post-war Japan? Japanese culture has a reputation for being hierarchical which implies deference. According to Chara Scroope (2025):

Japanese society is generally collectivistic, whereby people often view themselves and others as members of a collective unit or group (whether it be uchi or soto groups, a family group or a broader social group). In this sense, members of a group hold collective responsibility (rentai sekinin) for the performance and actions of an individual. For instance, if one or a few members of the group indulge in poor behaviour, all others are collectively blamed. In turn, harmony (wa) is an important part of interpersonal relationships. As a cultural concept, harmony implies a sense of unity and conformity within a group, whereby interdependence may be emphasised over independence.

At the time Deming and Juran were teaching the Japanese about TQM, Japan had just lost World War II. They were a beaten people, an occupied nation. In fact, Deming's first visit to Japan was in July 1950, and the Allied occupation wouldn't end until 8 September 1951. Emperor Hirohito, their leader throughout the war, was considered divine in Japanese culture. Following Japan's surrender in World War II, the U.S. pressured Hirohito to renounce his divinity.

This is diametrically opposite to American culture, where rugged individualism reigns. The self-made man is an American invention, and our freedom and independence follow from this.

Does it even make sense to apply a management philosophy to Americans that was developed and tested on a culture so different from ours?

References

Goetsch, D. L., & Davis, S. B. (2021). Quality management for organizational excellence: Introduction to total quality (9^th ed.). Pearson.

Scroope, C. (2025). Japanese Culture – Core Concepts. Cultural Atlas. https://culturalatlas.sbs.com.au/japanese-culture/japanese-culture-core-concepts