TQM in the courts: maybe so, maybe not
By: Aikman, Alexander B.
Material type:
ArticlePublisher: 1996Description: p.1865-890.Subject(s): Judiciary - United States | Total quality management - United States | Total quality management | Courts
In:
International Journal of Public AdministrationSummary: Courts are prime candidates for the application of Total Quality Management (TQM) but also difficult settings in which to implement it. The leadership structure of courts discourages strong leadership but also requires negotiation and mediation to install new programs, so an effective chief judge can bring most of the governing body--the other judges--along when a decision is made to adopt TQM. As turnover on the bench is slow, the governing body remains throughout the period needed to institutionalize TQM. Courts already have a valuable and useful tool for thinking about "customers" and using data effectively in the Trial Court Performance Standards. Courts have been slow to adopt TQM to date, but there i s growing interest and several leadership courts using TQM to improve various court functions. Courts' work mostly is processed in assembly-line fashion; using TQM's principles can help courts improve productivity, recognize and respond to customer needs more readily, and generally be better able to obtain taxpayer support. The courts are at once prime candidates for Total Quality Management (TQM) and a setting in which TQM is a hard sell. This article will explore why both elements of this statement are true. Acknowledging the difficulties, this article nonetheless concludes that TQM can and should be sold and that the courts will be better for the effort. Most Americans do not understand how courts work. Even less do they understand how courts are managed or why courts should involve any different management issues from other public agencies. To understand both the difficulties in having TQM accepted in courts and the fertile ground they offer, it may help to explore briefly the management context. - Reproduced
| Item type | Current location | Call number | Vol info | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Articles
|
Indian Institute of Public Administration | Volume no: 19, Issue no: 10 | Available | AR32237 |
Courts are prime candidates for the application of Total Quality Management (TQM) but also difficult settings in which to implement it. The leadership structure of courts discourages strong leadership but also requires negotiation and mediation to install new programs, so an effective chief judge can bring most of the governing body--the other judges--along when a decision is made to adopt TQM. As turnover on the bench is slow, the governing body remains throughout the period needed to institutionalize TQM. Courts already have a valuable and useful tool for thinking about "customers" and using data effectively in the Trial Court Performance Standards. Courts have been slow to adopt TQM to date, but there i s growing interest and several leadership courts using TQM to improve various court functions. Courts' work mostly is processed in assembly-line fashion; using TQM's principles can help courts improve productivity, recognize and respond to customer needs more readily, and generally be better able to obtain taxpayer support. The courts are at once prime candidates for Total Quality Management (TQM) and a setting in which TQM is a hard sell. This article will explore why both elements of this statement are true. Acknowledging the difficulties, this article nonetheless concludes that TQM can and should be sold and that the courts will be better for the effort. Most Americans do not understand how courts work. Even less do they understand how courts are managed or why courts should involve any different management issues from other public agencies. To understand both the difficulties in having TQM accepted in courts and the fertile ground they offer, it may help to explore briefly the management context. - Reproduced
There are no comments for this item.