Adopting Quality Standard from Industry to Education: Which
Stages Need to be Adjusted?
Rr Sri Kartikowati
1
, Gimin Gimin
1
and Lei Suang
2
1
Faculty of Education,Universitas Riau, Jl HR Subrantas KM 12, Pekanbaru, Indonesia
2
Mutiara Harapan Schools, Pelalawan, Riau, Indonesia
Keywords: quality standard, industry, education, suggestion system, customer supplier relationship (C-SRs).
Abstract: Numerous concepts of quality standards, originally from the industry, have long been successfully adopted
by education. The success by educational administrators is used to improve quality within the organization.
However, does the implementation in education get the same sequence of stages as it is derived from the
industry? Which stages need to be adjusted? This study discusses two concepts of quality standards –
‘Suggestion System’ (SS) and ‘Customers–Suppliers Relationship’ (C-SRs) – that have been adopted in the
educational organization. This study aims to pro-vide decision-makers within organizations with a deeper
understanding of the adjustment that need to be considered in managing quality standard of SS and C-SRs.
The results of previous study become the main data; then the data is analysed through FGDs. The discussion
focused on some particular stages, as a fact finding, that cannot be treated the same stage as in industrial
world. We found that the stages need to be adjusted appropriately in accordance with local circumstances.
Those adjustment might consequently shift the customary practices that have long been recognized in the
industry.
1 INTRODUCTION
Term of quality has been discussed long time ago,
especially in industrial environment. It has been
generated many concepts of quality standard. When
we review the evolution of quality, there are many
concepts of quality standard emerged.
Some literatures of quality evolution might start
from the era of without quality where the product
was made without respect to quality. It was the era
of inspection by which quality was determined by
inspectors who have authority to decide the product
would be accepted or rejected.
Next evolution was the era where the
measurement of quality need more control and more
tools to guarantee products accepted. Some quality
concepts have been emerged, such as, quality
control, statistical process control, and others. This
was what we called the era of Statistical Quality
Control introduced by Shewart, (1930).
The third era is quality assurance where the
concept of quality was extended to service product,
such as units of Maintenance and Logistics. A
quality cost concept was recognized as prevention in
which reduce expenditure is better rather than
corrections on the defects occurred. Feigenbaum
(1950) introduced his paper about the concepts of
'total quality' that referred to the sentence of 'right
from the beginning'.
Nowadays, the latest era is known as Total
Quality Management (TQM). The TQM requests
involvement of top management to make quality as
the power of organizational competitiveness. This
TQM approach was understood as a strategic and
integrated management system that involves all
members of the organization in order to improve
organizational process in a sustainable manner to
meet customer expectations (Nasution. 2001; Sallis,
2002; Tjiptono, 2005; Dahlgaard et al., 2007; and
Knowles, 2011).
Through the evolution, enormous concepts of
quality standard have been initiated and discovered.
Concept of quality standard is defined as guidelines
or characteristics that able to meet its quality within
the product in order to meet the purpose of the
product, process or the service. Those quality
concepts up to the present time are increasingly
widespread and have been presented in many
literatures as well as have been practicing in
organizations.
Kartikowati, R., Gimin, G. and Suang, L.
Adopting Quality Standard from Industry to Education: Which Stages Need to be Adjusted?.
In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Economic Education and Entrepreneurship (ICEEE 2017), pages 641-648
ISBN: 978-989-758-308-7
Copyright © 2017 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
641

Industrial world more contribute to the birth of
new quality concepts. Some researchers are: Susan
(2017) on her writing about health care service
quality at hospital, TQM implementation in
manufacturing organization (Ariful & Anwarul
Haque: 2012), TQM and service quality in the
banking sector (Talib et al., 2012).
To the world of education, acknowledged,
quality achievement efforts are made by adopting
the concepts of quality standard that come from the
business world. Salis (2002). Many researchers have
studied in TQM implementation in various
educational organizations that published in journals.
Familiar researchers Quinn, at., al., (2009) have
been exploring in the area of service quality in
higher education; implementing quality system in
HE institution (Rosa at., al., 2012), and about
compatibility and challenges of implementing TQM
in education (Sohel-Uz-Zaman & Anjain: 2016). We
believe there are more other research result of TQM
in educational organizations.
The present study discusses two concepts of
quality standard - Suggestion System (SS) and
Customer-Supplier Relationship (C-SRs). Both
quality concepts are examined based on the result
research that have been conducted and have been
published. The former was conducted in 2015
(Kartikowati & Lei, 2015), while the later was
studied in 2016 (Kartikowati & Gimin, 2016).
Both studies described how the concepts of
quality standards derived from industry undeniably
could be applied to the world of education. The
study also verified that the implementation stages of
quality concepts that commonly applied in industrial
world could normally adopt in educational world.
However, the two previous researches were not
examined yet on - are there any different stages
(while the industrial quality concept was adopted by
educational) that need to be adjusted.
Methodically, since industrial and educational in
term of products (goods and services) have different
characteristics, some dissimilarity could be
happened. It is line with Lewis & Smith’s (1994)
statement that a framework for total quality can be
derived from business experiences, but it requires
more than adoption; it requires a major adaption in
order to work. Therefore, it is important to know and
understand stages that need adjustment when the
concepts of quality standards derived from industry
undeniably could be applied to educational
institutions.
The objective of this study is to analyze some
particular stages that should be adjusted when a
concept of quality standard is applied in educational
institutions. Moreover, the study is aimed to propose
decision-makers of educational institution with a
deeper understanding of the adjustment that need to
be considered in managing quality standard of SS
and C-S Relationship.
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
This literature session reviews two concepts of
quality standard discussed in this study – Suggestion
System (SS) and Customer-Supplier Relationship
(C-SRs).
2.1 Suggestion System (SS)
Miller (2003) writes down the meaning of the word
'suggestion system' from Japanese word 'soui kufuu
seido'. The word 'soui' means creative ideas; ‘kufuu’
means find out or figure out; and ‘seido’ means
system; so, the suggestion system or ‘soui kufuu
seido’ is a suggestion system that contains creative
ideas. Creative ideas are formally submitted by
employees to the leadership or units assigned; and
the Japanese call it as 'proposal'. The word 'proposal'
is considered closer to the concept of Kaizen
(continuous improvement).
Goetsch and Davis (2000) expresses the
definition of suggestion system (SS) as any vehicle
by which employees can channel their ideas for
workplace improvement. While Bob Scharz’s
suggestion, cited by Goetsch and Davis, defines SS
as the collection of processes used to solicit, collect,
evaluate, and adopt or turn down suggestions.
Similarly, Heath in Besterfield, et.al (2003) suggests
that SS is designed to provide an opportunity for
individuals to be involved in contributing to the
organization.
There is a connection among the three definitions
written above, Goetsch & Davis, Bob Scharz, and
Heath, that the concept of SS indicates ideas
generated from the thinking process, there are
employee as initiators, and there are objectives or
solutions for the problems occurred in organization
or workplace.
The SS is being operated differently by one
program to others and it can be carried out either by
a unit or a committee. A certain process, scheme, or
stage is developed mostly depend on typical
program. Detterfelt et al., (2009) conducted a
suggestion system to engineering designers by
taking in the social and organizational context into
the model. They advised three stages of SS:
Encouragement, Organizational support, and
ICEEE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Economic Education and Entrepreneurship
642

committed resources. The three stages was not a
unilateral process from left to right, it is instead
multilateral involving much interaction between
earlier and later ideas.
These 3-step of SS is not much different from
Keizan Teian-1 (1997) who suggested four stages of
SS implementation: (1) Persuade people to
Participate; (2) Motivate people to write proposals;
(3) Review, evaluate, and guidance; and (4) Award
payment.
More boarder view discussed by Goetsch &
Davis (2000) who emphasized supports from all
parties involved, such as management involvement
within planning and implementing of the SS.
According to them, there are seven steps in the
management roles in the Suggestion System,
namely: (1) Establish policies; (2) Set up the
suggestion system; (3) Promote the suggestion
system; (4) Evaluate suggestions and the system; (5)
Implement suggestions; (6) Rewards employees; and
(7) Refine and improve the suggestion system.
Additionally, Van Dijk (2002) presents three
stages of it, that still link to three former suggestion -
idea extraction, idea handling, and idea follow-up.
The early stage always started by initiation of idea.
This stage involves that the company must allow for
employees be creative, think solution and generate
ideas. The second one refers to the moment when
the employee has to be supported to interface with
the system. Last stage is implementation of the idea
where employee who participates in the program
will perceive a sense of satisfaction. Last but not
least, Nase & Fadavi (2015) studied an SS process
using software has showed that many professionals
participated in problem solving replaced the old
system where an SS was supported only by one
professional’s mind.
Based on various schemes suggested by
Detterfelt et al., Keizan, Goetsch & Davis, and Van
Dijk, it is understood that certain scheme could be
applied properly at specific organization as long as
adjustments are made.
2.2 Customer-Supplier Relationships
(C-SRs)
To Hoyle (2007), customer is an organization or
person that consumes or receives a product. They are
including client, end user, retailer, and purchaser.
Consumers as one party outside organization who
interacts with the company after the company
finishes the process of production. On the contrary,
external parties that also interact with the company
before the production process begins, called
suppliers (Tjiptono & Diana (2003) .Thus,
customers and suppliers alike interact with
companies but they apparently interact separately.
Description about the concept of 'C-S
Relationship' is very clear in the manufacturing
environment; however, it does not exist in education.
Consumers and suppliers meet and interact at the
same time they mutually obtain and deliver the
educational services.
Defining customer for educational institution is
not easy because the term of customer and shopper
in education is an unfamiliar term. The consumers,
according to Supriyanto (1999), can be classified
into primary, secondary and tertiary. Primary
customers are actual customers (those buying
services or goods directly from education), such as
students. Secondary customers are parties who
support our production process efficiently and
effectively, such as parents and government; while
the tertiary customers are those who indirectly have
a role, but have an important role in education such
as employees, government, and society. The
problem is that education services are consumed
during the education process in progress, and it is
not consumed after the education process is
considered complete. This means that the perceived
quality of education services lies in the process
when education is in progress.
Additionally, customer terms are more
appropriate for those who consume educational
services than the term consumer. According to Budi
H. (2016) customers are individuals or organizations
that have been effectively involved in the education
process because they have funds, authority, desires,
needs and information, while the consumer is an
individual or organization that still has the potential
to be involved in the education process. This is an
exclusive of customer education, i.e.: customers
consume education services during the education in
progress. Therefore, quality exists as part of those
process. Different views of customers between the
business world and education takes a special
attention from educational institutions about the
desires of its customers. It is important to develop
the mechanism of educational services provided.
Like other service organization, university
normally has two major service components – core
and supporting components. The latter, apparently is
less interactive amongst stakeholders within
university. The former, the core component which
represent the essential activity of an educational
higher education, i.e.: learning process or lecturing.
This means, major interaction of educational mission
where the quality standard carries on has moved into
Adopting Quality Standard from Industry to Education: Which Stages Need to be Adjusted?
643

the classroom. Having such way of thinking in a
learning process there is a relationship between
suppliers and customers. The learners are
customers of the lecturers and receive directly the
learning service. In this context, it is therefore
possible to identify a chain of customers and
suppliers.
How do they (students and lecturers) have their
relationship in the learning process has proven in the
study of Kartikowati & Gimin (2016). A relationship
between students and lecturer in the classroom could
be indicated through the pre-active, interactive, and
post-active stages, the study also showed a gap of
customer satisfaction.
In relation to previous research, this study
highlights the concept of the quality standard of
Customer-Supplier Relationship (C-SRs) to analyze
whether some stages need to be justified or shifting
if the concept is adopted in education.
To analyze, we refer to three governing
principles C-SRs under total quality suggested by
Evans RJ (2011). The first principle is recognition of
the strategic importance of the customers and
suppliers. Important to recognize that customers and
suppliers are absolutely crucial to success where
customer is the center of organization as well as
suppliers because they make it possible to create
customer satisfaction.
The second principle is the need to develop
mutually beneficial relationship between customers
and suppliers. The development itself should be
resulted on win-win relationship between customer
and suppliers. The third principle of effective CSRs
is that they must be based on trust rather than
suspension.
Most literatures of the concept of quality
standards can be applied in education environment.
The implementation of those concepts of quality
standard has their own stages.
This study is interested in proposing a deeper
understanding of the adjustment that need to be
considered in managing quality standard of
Suggestion system and Customer-Supplier
Relationship (CSRs). The objective of this study is
to analyze some particular stages that should be
adjusted when a concept of quality standard is
applied in educational institutions.
3 METHODS
This is a literature study where primary literatures
was readily available from two research results
conducted last years. Two concepts of quality
standard are Suggestion system (SS) and Customer-
Supplier Relationships (C-SRs). Research result of
SS was carried out by Kartikowati & Lei (2015), and
the C-SRs was conducted by Kartikowati & Gimin
(2016).
The study aims to propose decision-makers of
educational institution with a deeper understanding
of the adjustment that need to be considered in
managing quality standard of SS and C-S
Relationship.
The study highlights the sequence of stages at
two concepts applied in education as it is derived
from the industry. If the different existed, which
stages need to be adjusted?
Data collected of the study is highly relied on
informations provided from previous research
reports including the materials, notes, and facts
within the report. However, since the said research
report was not the only literature that giving an
understanding of research questions broadly, we
collected other data classified as conceptually
literature and from related journals.
Following data collected, data was analyzed
through some group discussion (FGDs) activities.
Prior to do so, the procedure was began with a
secondary data review of readily available previous
research results. It was followed by series activities
of FGDs which was focused based on. By doing
FGDs we determined which of the data we collected
was associated with our research questions - to
figure out the implementation stages of the SS and
C-SRs then discussed issues for better understand on
possible different stages.
Issues figured out during FGDs is linked up and
connected to theories. Some articles relevance is
used in this discussion process. We may find that
some adjustment might consequently shift the
customary practices that have long been recognized
in the industry.
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The results of two cases of quality standards were
discussed separately
4.1 Overview of Previous Study of SS
Previous study of the concept of quality standard
focused on Suggestion System (Kartikowati & Lei,
2015). It was started with the assumption that the
ways to achieve desired quality result in educational
organization mostly inspired from commercial or
industrial organizations. This assumption was not
ICEEE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Economic Education and Entrepreneurship
644

doubt anymore. This study has an aim which is
highly related to the current study - to provide an
empirical evidence by drawing up on how the
Suggestion System (SS) was being implemented.
The SS study was conducted at reputable school
located in Pelalawan Riau Indonesia. Since the
school is owned by a well-known pulp company it is
normal that the implementation of the SS at school
was adopted and based on daily practice in the
company.
We found that the SS program was implemented
on the basis of four major stages: Encouraging
people to participate; Motivate employee to write
proposals; Review, evaluate, and guidance; and
Rewards. That said stages, in this current study, is
displayed as part of important information that
further will be reviewed, as displayed on Figure 1
and Figure 2.
Figure 1 is about Stages of SS Implementation at
school suggested by a company. It was carried out
by the specific team formed by school board and
school coordinator. The stage started from received
improvement ideas from the employee and staff.
Prior to receiving ideas, there was some agendas of
socialization or dissemination of SS policy program
from the school board, the school coordinator, and
the SS Team. Through dissemination, it was
expected all employees’ involvement – the teachers
and staff –in contributing creative and innovative
ideas, to optimize the quality and service of the
school. Encouraging stage was a regular sharing
session, intended as a stage to invite, encourage, and
stimulate school community.
Following first stage is the stages which
motivated people to write proposals, starting with
the discussion about the idea of improvement with
the SS facilitator until it is approved. The motivation
stage is stopped when the idea was not approved
(meaning STOP) or approved (meaning continue to
the implementation step).
Stage 3 was Review, evaluate, and guidance,
which was consisted of implementing the idea which
was documented in the form of SS. Soon as the idea
has been implemented, it was verified based on two
aspects: originality and quality of the idea.
The next or last stage was Reward. Reward was
assessed and approved with 4 considerations: a
complete report of SS-version, creativity,
adaptability of the idea, and effect of idea (quality,
cost, time, volume, safety and moral).
The said assessment report is very crucial since it
may request the initiator return to make a revision
accordance with the values obtained; therefore a
second approval displayed was needed before
deciding reward.
Figure 1: Phases of SS implementation at school
suggested by company.
In general, the accepted idea will also be
recorded for later to be included in the teachers/staff
performance appraisal in the said semester
After the stages have been implemented, the
research found the follow New Phases. See Figure 2.
Adopting Quality Standard from Industry to Education: Which Stages Need to be Adjusted?
645

Figure 2: Phases of SS implementation at school
suggested by researchers.
Figure 2 displays Phases of SS Implementation
at school suggested by researcher. If it is placed next
to Figure 1 then there will be a noticeable difference
between the two.
4.2 Discussion 1 (SS)
Figure 1 has two phases of Decision (approved or
disapproved) while Figure 2 has one phase only of
Decision. It means that there is a simplification step
taken and thought by researchers. Phases on Figure 2
acquired based on empirical evidence analysis at
previous study. Why does the phase of SS at school
being simplified?
Simplification is a step of reducing the amount of
something. Work simplification, for example, is
common procedure at any organization. It is
intended to reduce process cycle time or budget
cutting; however, the simplification itself
supposedly keep direct to goal achievement
efficiently.
In this study the discussion of the
implementation of SS at school by adopting the best
practice of SS carried out by the company needs to
be simplified to some reasons:
4.2.1 Simplification for a Strategic Idea
Ideally any improvement ideas should be well
implemented and provide beneficial for the future of
the institution. To do so, the idea should be
calculated in detail; and practically the idea should
pass a session of test, trial-error, or pilot project.
This session is about activity in a small scale
preliminary study in order to evaluate feasibility,
time, and cost upon the ideas.
Work simplification is a normal way in industrial
field as long as it continues to support primary goal,
able to facilitate decision making, and allow
reaching greater productivity.
Session of trial-error and pilot project in term of
SS implementation at school would be considered as
an over excessive. Improvement ideas submitted
mostly are not addressed to influence the core
activity of the school in which directly influence the
institution strategically. Only a strategic idea that
requires a pilot project first, and such idea usually
need government rule or approval. One example is
curriculum development. The improvement idea that
is approved is the idea that contributes to the future
of the school. Therefore phases constructed in SS
implementation at school seems does need only one
phase of Decision (to be approved or disapproved).
4.2.2 Different Orientation of Quality
Measurement
Measurement of company's quality can be identified
from profit earned. Industry is more profit-oriented
than educational. The success parameter is
profitability. On the other hand, as a nonprofit
organization, the main measure of quality in
education is not merely financial but more to the
level of human development (students). The
concepts of quality standards used for the
achievement of school performance are not only
financial but also 'fitness for purpose, level of
perfection, or achieve the standard level or above the
standard.
With the difference in orientation of quality
measurement between industrial and education,
implementation stages in SS programs at school
doesn't emphasize to the operational procedure
ICEEE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Economic Education and Entrepreneurship
646

strictly especially if the improvement ideas are not
highlighted strategic matters. Therefore step of
simplification is needed in the implementation of SS
program at school.
4.3 Overview of Previous Study of C-
SRs
The previous study was attempted to describe how
the relationship between customers and suppliers (C-
SRs) in the educational context, to be precisely in
the classroom within a university. Is it possible to
define students as customers while lecturers as
suppliers? In teaching process, two parties were
involved – students are customers and lecturers are
suppliers. To understand the relationship between
them, the pattern of C-SRs was used.
Classroom in the universities atmosphere, two
parties are being involved. Group of students is one
party who attaining knowledge, obtain values of
manner, and practicing some vocation, talent in the
lab or sport field; on the other hand, a group of
lecturer, a party who develop knowledge, values of
attitude, and guidance skills/vocation of students.
Both students and lecturers engage each other to
make learning process beneficial; there must be ‘a
thing’ that make them working together side by side.
The form of a thing ideally should be discussed
together. That’s not merely a what (called material)
but also a ‘how’ to do, to assess, and further.
Relationship between the two parties is proven in
three stages of learning activities through the degree
of dissatisfaction or satisfaction gap. First was
planning or pre-active stage.
Secondly was execution or inter-active stage
where it recorded as satisfaction gap on the aspect of
Students-Centered approach. It means that the
relationship between C-S was identified on low
utilization of students-centered approach in lecturing
process. For example, lecturers' more dominant.
Thirdly was Feedback or Post-active stages. We
noted dissatisfaction on the aspect of
Feedback/Discussion. This means that bad
relationships occur because of low information from
lecturers about student achievement on certain
competencies.
4.4 Discussion 2 (CSRs)
In term of the SS adoption, we displayed Figure 1
about the Phases of SS implementation at school
suggested by company that was different with Figure
2 about the Phases of SS implementation at school
suggested by researchers. We considered that
particular stage need to be adjusted appropriately in
accordance with local circumstances of the school.
The adjustment taken was a work simplification that
was addressed to reduce process cycle time yet still
support to goal achievement efficiently. We
concluded that the implementation phases of the SS
programs at school did not emphasize to the
operational procedure strictly especially if the
improvement ideas are not highlighted strategic
matters. Therefore step of simplification is needed in
the implementation of SS program at school.
In term of the C-SRs adoption, we figured out
that a pattern of Customer-Supplier relationship was
existed in the three stages of learning activities –
pre-active, inter-active, and post-active – as
reflection of lecturer and students interaction at class
in the university. The said stages were identified
through customers’ satisfaction gap. In this study
dissatisfaction was recognized with the degree how
students are being serviced using a sentence of
customer is the king. Using three governing
principles C-SRs under total quality suggested by
Evans RJ (2011), we concluded that adopting the
quality standard of the C-SRs was not entirely
applicable because lecturers and students were
equally demanding the fulfillment of mutually
satisfactory. Students have to submit assignments on
scheduled while lecturers were requested to discuss
students’ achievement; this was to explain who
actually the suppliers and customers in the class
interaction between students and lecturers. We dealt
with a shift the customary practices that have long
been recognized in industrial about customer is the
king.
5 CONCLUSIONS
Some of the findings in this study show that only a
few parts of the industry quality component are used
in education. Ideally the idea of improvement
should be well implemented and benefit the future of
educational institutions. To achieve this, a number of
commitments from education managers are required.
Besides, it is also necessary to adapt to local
conditions that have an impact on cultural change.
REFERENCES
Ariful I. & Anwarul H. 2012. Key aspects of TQM
implementation in manufacturing organization - an
empirical investigation. IRACST - International
Adopting Quality Standard from Industry to Education: Which Stages Need to be Adjusted?
647

Journal of Research in Management & Technology
(IJRMT), Vol. 2 No. 3, June 2012, pp. 267-277
Besterfield, et.al. 2003. Total Quality Management. New
Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
Budi Haryono P.M., 2016. How to Win Customer through
Customer Service with Heart. Yogyakarta: ANDI.
Dahlgaard J. Jens, Kristensen Kai, and Kanji K. Gopal,
2007. Fundamentals of Total Quality Management:
Process analysis and improvement. London: Taylor &
Francis.
Detterfelt Jonas, Loven Eva, and Lakemond Nicolette.
2009. Suggestion System for Engineering Designers –
A Case Study. International Conference on
Engineering Design (ICED), 24-27 August 2009,
Stanford University CA, USA. p. 135-145.
Evans R. James, 2016. Quality Performance excellence:
Management Organization, and Strategy. Eight
Edition. Cincinati: Cengage Learning.
Goetsch, David L and Stanley B Davis. 2000. Quality
Management. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hoyle, D. 2007. Quality Management Essentials. Oxford:
Elsevier Limited.
Kartikowati, Sri. 2016. Pembelajaran Berfokus pada
Pelanggan. Jurnal PEKBIS - Pendidikan Ekonomi dan
Bisnis, Vol. 8 no.2 Juli 2016, ISSN 2085-5214
Kartikowati, Sri, & Gimin. 2016. ‘Analysis of Lecturing
Activities using the Pattern ‘Suppliers-Customers
Relationship’. Proceeding The 6th International
Conference Educational Management Administration
and Leadership. ICEMAL 2016. Bandung 28 August
2016, pp. 102-107
Kartikowati, Sri and Lei Suang. 2015. Pengelolaan Sistem
Saran di Organisasi Pendidikan: Diinspirasi oleh
Organisasi Bisnis. Proceeding: The 7th International
Seminar on Regional Education. Conducted by
University of Riau and Faculty of Education,
Pekanbaru 5-7 November 2015. Book 2. Publisher:
Universitas Riau Press. November 2015.
Kaizen Teian 1. 1997. Developing Systems for Continuous
Improvement through Employee Suggestions. Edited
by JHRA the Japan Human Relations Association.
Paperback printing. New York: Productivity Press.
Knowles, Graeme, 2011. Quality Management. E-book
Online. Available free at: bookboon.com. ISBN: 978-
87-7681-875-3.
Kolarik W.J. 1995. Creating Quality: Concepts, Systems,
Strategies, and Tools. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc,
p. 5. Cited from ‘Total Quality Management Guide’,
Washington DC Department of Defense Office for
TQM, DoD 5000.51.G, Final Draft, 1989
Lewis G. Ralph & Smith H. Dauglas. 1994. Total Quality
in Higher Education. Florida: St. Lucie Press.
Maheshwari, VK. “Phases of Teaching”, article online,
available at URL: http://www. kmaheshwari.com
/WP/?p=424, p.2
Miller, Jon, 2003. The Suggestion System is no Suggestion.
Third edition in November 2003. Mukilteo, WA:
Gemba Research LLC.
Nasution. 2001. Manajemen Mutu Terpadu (Total Quality
management). Jakarta: Penerbit Ghalia Indonesia
Nase S. Deris & Fadavi S. Mahboube. 2015. Enrichment
of Employees’ Suggestion System, European Journal
of Business and Social Sciences (EJBS), Vol. 4 No. 6
September 2015, pp.1-12.
Quinn A, Lemay G, Larsen P, and Johnson D.M., 2009.
Service Quality in Higher Education. Total Quality
Management. Vol. 20, No.2, February 2009, pp. 139-
152.
Rosa MJ, Sarrico CS, & Amaral A., 2012. Implementing
Quality Management Systems in Higher Education
Institutions, Quality Assurance and Management,
managed by InTech, pp. 129-146.
Sallis, Edward. 2002. Total Quality Management in
Education, Kogan Page Press, UK: London
Sohel-Uz-Zaman, Anjalin U, 2016. Implementing Total
Quality Management in Education: Compatibility and
Challenges. Open Journal of Social Sciences 4,
November 2016, pp.207-217.
Supriyanto, A. 1999. Total Quality Management di Bidang
Pendidikan. Malang: Jurusan Administrasi Pendidikan
Fakultas Ilmu Pendidikan Universitas Negeri Malang
Susan, M. & Ratnawati H., 2017. Health Care Service
Quality of Public Hospitals in Bandung as Part of
Public Services. Review Integrative Business &
Economic Research. Vol. 6 (1), pp.216-223.
Talib F, Z. Rahman2 & Qureshi MN. 2012. Impact of
Total Quality Management and Service Quality in the
Banking Sector. J Telecommun Syst Manage. An open
access journal, Volume 1 • Issue 2.
Thamizhmanii, S. and Hasan, S., 2010, A review on an
employee empowerment in TQM Practice, Journal of
Achievement in Materials and Manufacturing
Engineering (JAMME), Vol. 39, Issue 2 April 2010.
pp. 204-210
Tjiptono & Diana, 2003, Total Quality Management.
Yogyakarta: Andi.
Tjiptono & Fandy. 2005. Prinsip-Prinsip Total Quality
Service. Yogyakarta: CV Andi Offset
Van Dijk, Christiaan and Jan Van Den Ende. 2002.
Suggestion System: Transferring Employee Creativity
to Practicable Ideas. R&D Management 32, 5.
Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Ltd.
ICEEE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Economic Education and Entrepreneurship
648