The Quality Maturity Model: your roadmap to a culture of quality
| Pages | 258-267 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-09-2014-0102 |
| Published date | 09 March 2015 |
| Date | 09 March 2015 |
| Author | Frankie Wilson |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Librarianship/library management,HR in libraries |
The Quality Maturity Model:
your roadmap to a culture of
quality
Frankie Wilson
Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to present the complete details of the Quality Maturity Model
(QMM), and the associated Quality Culture Assessment Instrument (QCAI). The QMM provides a
framework for libraries to self-assess their progress towards achieving a culture of quality.
Design/methodology/approach –The research used a Design Science approach and predominantly
grounded theory methodology to develop the QMM as a roadmap that defines an ordinal scale for
measuring the maturity of an academic library’s quality culture.
Findings –The QMM describes seven facets of quality culture, and five levels for each facet.
Practical implications –The QCAI enables libraries to locate themselves within the quality
maturity landscape. They will then be able to use the QMM as a roadmap to plan their route to
improvement. Such a strategic approach to improvement allows libraries to make sense of the
literature in terms of what is appropriate for them, so avoiding expensive irrelevancies.
Originality/value –The QMM is unique. There are other models that assess quality culture, but the
details of these models are kept secret and the only way to be assessed is by paying a consultancy fee.
There are other models that make their details public, but they describe only one or two aspects of
quality culture, not all.
Keywords Culture, Library, Assessment, QMM, Quality culture assessment instrument,
Quality Maturity Model
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Everything that we do in a library is done by people. Library staff makes every
decision from building design to what books to buy, from how to design an education
session to the priorities for spending. Even when so much in libraries is automated; a
self-issue machine may check out the books, but it is a person who decided which
machine to install, how many to have, where to put them, the impact on the staffed
service points, how often they are serviced, and what to do when one breaks down.
A person decided the rules that the machine operates by –how many books you
can check out, for how long, and what you are charged if you fail to return them on
time. If a customer is unhappy with their experience of borrowing a book, it is not the
fault of the machine, but of the decision makers. There is no such thing as “comp uter
says no”.
In an environment where quality is defined by the customer, and people are crucial
to performance, the management of the library must ensure their staff members make
the appropriate decision each and every time. But, as everyone who manages people
knows, it is not that simple. You can have rules, procedures, manuals, notices and
training events, but still people will do it their own way. The key to modifying
behaviour is to understand that it is not driven by formal instructions, but by
organisational culture (Schein, 1990). If you want to improve the quality of your library
service, then you must improve the organisational quality culture.
Library Management
Vol. 36 No. 3, 2015
pp. 258-267
©Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0143-5124
DOI 10.1108/LM-09-2014-0102
Received 2 September 2014
Revised 2 September 2014
Accepted 26 September 2014
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-5124.htm
258
LM
36,3
To continue reading
Request your trial