DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY

RAMON V. DEL ROSARIO – COLLEGE OF BUSINESS

COURSE SYLLABUS

DEPARTMENT: DSI
COURSE CODE: TOTALQM/ QUALMAN
CLASS DAYS AND CLASS TIME:
ROOM:
INSTRUCTOR:

COURSE DESCRIPTION:
This course introduces the students to the concept of Total Quality Management, an approach to
long–term success that can be achieved through customer satisfaction. In a TQM system, everyone
in the organization participates and quality management is integrated into all activities and
functions aimed at improving processes, products, services, and the culture of the organization. The
course aims to familiarize the students to TQM philosophies, frameworks, methodologies, tools,
and techniques commonly used in a system of continuous improvement. The overall objective is for
students to develop an understanding of TQM principles for effective real life applications in both
manufacturing and service sectors.

LEARNING OUTCOMES (LO):

On completion of the course, the student is expected to be able to do the following:

ELGA LEARNING OUTCOME

Critical and Systematic thinkers
Social Catalyst and Lifelong
Learner
Technically proficient and
competent professionals
Effective Communicators
 Apply the scientific process in tackling quality-related
problems and opportunities.
 Understand the TQM tools and techniques by identifying
each, analyzing the results obtained, and determining the
significance to the organization.
 Develop an understanding of quality philosophies and core
values of quality management applicable to any sphere of
business and the public sector.
 Understand the need to balance economic, social, and
environmental performance/ gains.
 Appreciate the dynamic nature of businesses in continuous
pursuit of quality, and relate the implications of
improvements to modern-day organizations for the uplift of
society.
 Demonstrate quantitative reasoning and quantitative
literacy in solving real-world problems.
 Make decisions based on numerical information and
established quantitative methods.
 Identify and utilize quantitative models used in quality
control as valuable tools for problem identification,
decision-making, and process improvement.
 Understand the concept of teamwork and open
communication in relation to quality management and
recognizing the importance of collaborative effort in
arriving at solutions to cases and other group tasks.
 Work collectively to gather data, analyze, and transform
results into an effective quality improvement study, and
report this in accordance with pre-defined metrics.

FINAL COURSE OUTPUT:

As evidence of attaining the above learning outcomes, the students are required to do and submit
the following during the term.

1
 LEARNING OUTCOME
LO 1: Understanding of TQM
evolution, quality gurus and
their teachings, quality
management concepts, tools,
techniques, methodologies,
and systems.
LO 2: Recognize the value of
active participation and
teamwork as an integral
element in TQM and
collectively come up with
recommendations to practical
operational and quality related
issues.
LO 3: Ability to analyze data
and apply appropriate quality
control methods to assess
process stability and/or
capability.
LO 4: Conduct a study that
will highlight real-world
quality issues or areas for
improvement in an existing
process, product, or service.
This assesses the students’
ability to apply the theory and
concepts learned from the
course in practical situations.
REQUIRED OUTPUT DUE DATE
 Quizzes See Quizzes
 Assignments and other methods for Schedule
individual assessment.
 Students will be organized into teams to work TBA
on case studies, group discussions, short
presentations, and other activities that require
collaborative effort. Their respective
performance will be measured using the
established rubric for assessment.
 Problem Solving exercises Weeks 9 - 11
 Teams will undertake a Quality Improvement Weeks 12-13
Plan (QIP), a study with emphasis on
generating ideas and solutions from a
customer perspective. Applicable tools of
quality management will be used for
analytical approach and formulation of plans.
The Quality Function Deployment (House of
Quality) may be used as a framework to
match the voice of the customer with
technical response (producer), identify
targets, correlations, and competitive
benchmarks.

OTHER REQUIREMENTS:
Aside from the final output (QIP), the student will be assessed at other times during the term by the
following:
Class Participation/ Recitation
Final Departmental Examination

GRADING SYSTEM:
The student will be graded according to the following assessment:
Team Performance Individual Performance Overall
Final Class
Particulars Team Term Project Quizzes and Participation
Activities (QIP) Assignments
Departmental Recitation Total
Examination Attendance
% Weight 15% 15% 30% 30% 10% 100%

The established grading scheme shall apply:

% Points 0-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85-88 89-92 93-96 97-100
Grade
Equivalent
0.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

CLASS POLICIES:

Please check Student Handbook.

2
RUBRIC FOR ASSESSMENT

3
 LEARNING PLAN:
UNIT4TOPIC
- Exemplary
Thinking is exemplary, skilled,
marked by excellence in clarity, effective, accurate and clear,
I. FOUNDATIONS OFprecision,
accuracy, QUALITY relevance,
MANAGEMENT depth, breadth, logicality, and depth, precision, and insight
fairness
Purpose
A. History and Development
--Demonstrates a clear
B. Concept/ understanding
Definition/ofTQM Evolvement
the assignment’s understanding of the
C. Framework of Quality Management/ assignment’s purpose
purpose
Integrating Quality in the Value Chain /
Key Question, Problem, --Clearly defines the issue or
Quality inproblem;
Manufacturing and Service
or Issue accurately identifies the the core issues, but may not
D. Basic TQM coreElements
issues or Quality
--Appreciates depth and breadth of breadth
Managementproblem
Principles
--Demonstrates fair-mindedness
toward problem
Point of View --Identifies and evaluates relevant --Identifies and evaluates
significant points of view
--Is empathetic, fair in examining
II. QUALITY all PHILOSOPHIES
relevant points of view
A. Major gurus of quality management,
their contributions (Deming, Juran,
Information --Gathers sufficient, credible,
Crosby, Shewhart, Feigenbaum,
relevant information: observations, credible, and relevant
Ishikawa,statements,
Taguchi,logic,Shingo)
data, facts,
B. Other significant contributions
questions, graphs, themes, by other --Includes some information
assertions, descriptions, etc.
experts (Ohno, Garvin, Akao, Kano, etc.)
--Includes information that
opposes as well as supports the
argued position
--Distinguishes between
information and inferences drawn
from that information
Concepts --Identifies and accurately
explains/uses the relevant key
concepts
Assumptions --Accurately identifies
assumptions (things taken for
granted)
--Makes assumptions that are
consistent, reasonable, valid
Interpretations, --Follows where evidence and
Inferences reason lead in order to obtain
defensible, thoughtful, logical
III. PRODUCTconclusions
AND SERVICEor solutions DESIGNconclusions
--Makes deep rather than
QUALITY superficial inferences
A. Customer--Makes
Satisfaction
inferences that are
consistent
B. Determinants with one another
of Quality in Products
C. Determinants of Quality in Service
Implications, --Identifies the most significant
Consequences implications and consequences of
the reasoning (whether positive
and/or negative)
--Distinguishes probable from
improbable implications
QUIZ
Source: Foundation for Critical1Thinking, www.criticalthinking.org
IV. TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES FOR
QUALITY
A. Basic Seven Tools
B. New Seven Tools
C. House of Quality (QFD)
D. Supplemental Tools and Techniques
(Root Cause and Risk Analysis Tools
among others)
Last Edited by: JTALVAREZ / 01-03-2018
WEEK/S
3 - Satisfactory
Thinking is competent,
Weeks
but lacks 1-2
the exemplary
LO1consistent competence:
of a “4”
--Demonstrates an
--Defines the issue; identifies --Defines the issue, but
fully explore their depth and
--Demonstrates fair-
mindedness
relevant points of view
--Is fair in examining those
views Week 2
--Gathers sufficient,
information
from opposing views
--Distinguishes between
information and inferences
drawn from it
--Identifies and accurately
explains and uses the key
concepts, but not with the
depth and precision of a “4”
--Identifies assumptions
--Makes valid assumptions
--Follows where evidence
and reason lead to obtain
justifiable, logical
Week 3
--Makes valid inferences, but inconsistent, and/or Discussion
not with the same depth and LO2 superficial
as a “4”
--Identifies significant
implications and
consequences and
distinguishes probable from
improbable implications, but
not with the same insight and
precision as a “4”
Week 4
Weeks 5 - 6
LEARNING Learning Activities
2- Below Satisfactory and
1 - Unsatisfactory
Thinking is inconsistent, Thinking is unskilled and
OUTCOME Resources
ineffective; shows a lack of insufficient, marked by
Introduction
is to the course. lack of clarity,
imprecision,
often unclear, Historical
imprecise, perspective from illogicality, and
superficiality,
Craftmanship during
inaccurate, and superficial Middle
inaccuracy, and unfairness
--Is not completelyAges,
clear Industrial Revolution,
--Does not clearlyPost-
understand
about the purposewarof the the purpose
developments of thetoassignment
in Japan, the
assignment turn of the 20th century
developments relating to quality.
--Fails to clearly define the issue
5 Approaches/Perspectives in
poorly (superficially, or problem; does not recognize
Defining Quality (by David
narrowly); may overlook the core issues
some core issues Garvin – Managing --Fails toQuality)
maintain a fair-minded
--Has trouble maintaining a approach toward the problem
fair-minded approachMain: Ch. 1 (Evans/Lindsay)
toward
the problem Supplement:
--May identify otherCh.points --Ignores or superficially
6 (Heizer/Render)
of view but struggles
Ch. with evaluates alternate points of
9 (Stevenson/Sum)
maintaining fairmindedness;
Team view - may
Formation
LO1
may focus on irrelevant or --Cannot separate own vested
LO2 supplement discussion
insignificant points of view
on
interests and feelings when
importance ofevaluating
teams in other
TQMpoints
with of view
Ch. 4 (Evans/Lindsay)
--Gathers some credible --Relies on insufficient,
information, but not enough; irrelevant, or unreliable
some informationDiscussion
may be should highlight:
information
irrelevant Deming (14 points, PDCA,
--Fails to identify or hastily
--Omits significant Theory of dismisses
Profound strong, relevant
Knowledge)
information, including
Juransome counter-arguments
(10 steps, Quality Trilogy,
strong counter-arguments
Roadmap) --Confuses information and
--Sometimes confuses inferences drawn from that
Crosby (14 steps, 4 Absolutes,
information and the information
Zero
inferences drawn from it Defects, Vaccine)
Shewhart (SPC)
--Identifies some Feigenbaum
(not all) (TQC, Hidden Plant)
--Misunderstands key concepts
key concepts, but Ishikawa
use of (Quality Circle,
or ignores B7 key concepts
relevant
tools)and
concepts is superficial altogether
inaccurate at timesTaguchi (QLF, Taguchi Method,
--Fails to identify DOE) --Fails to identify assumptions
assumptions, or fails to (Poka--Makes
Shingo Yoke, JIT)invalid assumptions
explain them, or the
Cost of Quality Models
assumptions identified are
irrelevant, not clearly stated,
and/or invalid Main: Ch. 2 (Evans/Lindsay)
--Does follow some Supplement:
evidence --Uses superficial, simplistic, or
to conclusions, butCh. 9 (Stevenson/Sum)
irrelevant reasons and
inferences are more http://qualitygurus.com
often unjustifiable claims
than not unclear, illogical,
LO1 Individual and--Makes illogical, inconsistent
Team Activities.
inferences
should include the
--Exhibits closed-mindedness or
Model of customer satisfaction by
Noriaki Kano,
hostility to reason; regardless of
the evidence, maintains or
Garvin’s 8 Dimensions
defends views of Quality,
based on self-
SERVQUAL/interest RATER –(by
Zeithaml, Parasuraman
--Has trouble identifying & Berry),
--Ignores significant
significant implications and implications and consequences
Main: Ch. 3, 7,
consequences; identifies 8 (Evans/Lindsay)
of reasoning
improbable implications
Supplement:
Ch. 5 (Heizer/Render)
Ch. 4, 9 (Stevenson/Sum)
LO1 QIP Introduction
LO2 Project Proposals due
Practical Individual and Team
Activities or Assignments to apply
TQM tools
Main: Ch. 5, 6, 7, 11 (Evans/
Lindsay)
Supplement:
Ch. 6 (Heizer/Render)
Ch. 9 (Stevenson/Sum)
http://qfdonline.com
4
V. QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Week 7 LO1 Team reports/ Case Studies
AND STANDARDS LO2 6 Sigma Concepts: DMAIC, Belt
certifications, 6 Sigma Tools.
JIT and Lean concepts: Kaizen,
Kanban, Poka Yoke, 5S, 7Mudas,
A. Popular ISO Standards (9000, 14000, Keiretsu, Jidoka
22000, 45001, 27001, TS16949)
B. Six Sigma / Lean Sigma Main: Ch. 2, 5, 9, 10,
(Evans/Lindsay)
C. JIT and Lean Management Supplement:
D. Supplement: Overview of Quality Ch. 6, 16 (Heizer/Render)
Awards (MBNQA, Deming Prize, Shingo Prize, PQA, Ch. 9, 15 (Stevenson/Sum)
etc.) http://iso.org
http://leanmanufacturingtools.org
QUIZ 2 Week 8
VI. STATISTICAL PROCESS CONTROL Week 9 LO3 Problem Solving
A. Attribute and Variable Data Control Charts for Variables:
X-bar Chart, Range-bar Chart,
B. Common Cause vs. Assignable Cause Range Chart
C. Control Charts for Variables Control Chart for Attributes:
D. Control Charts for Attributes P – Chart, C – Chart
E. In-Control vs. Out-of-Control Situations
Main: Ch. 8 (Evans/ Lindsay)
Supplement:
Ch. S6 (Heizer/Render)
Ch. 10, S10 – (Stevenson/Sum)
VII. PROCESS CAPABILITY Week 10 LO3 Problem Solving
A. Process Capability Ratio Main: Ch. 8 (Evans/Lindsay)
Supplement:
B. Process Capability Index Ch. S6 (Heizer/Render)
Ch. 10 (Stevenson/Sum)

QUIZ 3 Week 11
Field Work for Term Project Week 12 LO2, LO4 Research and Analysis
Term Project Submission, Presentation, Week 13 LO2, LO4 Research and Analysis
and Course Synthesis
Final Exam Week 14

MAIN REFERENCE:
Total Quality Management
By James R. Evans and William M. Lindsay
9th (Philippine) Edition – Reprint 2016, CENGAGE
OBE Aligned

or

Managing for Quality and Performance Excellence by James R. Evans and William M. Lindsay.
9th /10th (International) Edition, South-Western – 2014/2017

SUPPLEMENTAL REFERENCES:
Principles of Operations Management
By Jay Heizer and Barry Render
11th Edition, 2014 (Chapters 5, 6, 6S, 16)

or

Operations Management by William Stevenson and Chee Chuong Sum

2nd Edition -2014 (Chapters 4, 9, 10, 10S, 15)

Last Edited by: JTALVAREZ / 01-03-2018 5

WEB RESOURCES:
• All about International Standards: http://www.iso.org
• Compilation of quality gurus, their contributions, quotes, quality terms, quizzes, and other
resources: http://www.qualitygurus.com
• Quality Function Deployment (QFD) templates and tutorials: http://www.qfdonline.com
• American Society for Quality website (tools, standards, case studies, research, etc.):
http://www.asq.org/
• Website of Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (training materials):
http://www.juse.or.jp/english/
• Lean Management and Tools: http://leanmanufacturingtools.org
• Juran Institute (free mobile app that contains tools and templates, case studies, powerpoints,
training videos, publications, etc.) : http://www.juran.com/resources/quality-essentials-app/
• Quality Award giving bodies:
https://www.nist.gov/baldrige/baldrige-award
https://www.juse.or.jp/deming_en/award/03.html
http://www.shingoprize.org/
https://www.jqac.com/en/
http://www.efqm.org/what-we-do/recognition/efqm-award-history
http://www.eoq.org/eoq_awards/european_quality_leader.html
https://www.excellence.ca/en/awards/
http://www.australianbusinessawards.com.au/
http://www.caq.org.cn/html/en/index.html
http://www.pqa.org.ph/

Last Edited by: JTALVAREZ / 01-03-2018 6