TQM, Six Sigma, and Lean Quality Management at Rubicon Group
This paper analyzes the customer service quality management challenges facing Rubicon Group, a Travelcom business unit formed through organizational integration. Using frameworks including Total Quality Management (TQM), Six Sigma's DMAIC methodology, lean process principles, and Balanced Scorecards (BSC), the paper diagnoses root causes of rising call volumes, customer dissatisfaction, and representative workload. It recommends constructing a TQM House of Quality as a foundational audit tool, followed by targeted Six Sigma projects to resolve system-of-record fragmentation and process gaps. The paper argues that only after establishing reliable metrics and integrated processes should Rubicon proceed to implementing balanced scorecards for ongoing performance measurement.
- Introduction: Overview of TQM frameworks applied to Rubicon Group
- Analysis of Rubicon Quality Management Problems: TQM House of Quality audit reveals root causes
- Applying Six Sigma and the DMAIC Methodology: DMAIC targets system-of-record and process gaps
- Prioritizing Customer-Centric Metrics and KPIs: Customer lifetime value guides metric selection
- Toward Balanced Scorecards and Sustainable Improvement: BSC implemented after Six Sigma stabilizes processes
- Conclusion: Quality frameworks restore profitability and customer control
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper sequences quality management frameworks logically — TQM House of Quality first, then Six Sigma, then lean, then BSC — showing why order of implementation matters rather than treating tools as interchangeable.
- It avoids purely symptomatic analysis by connecting observable problems (call volume, wait times, complaints) to underlying structural causes such as fragmented systems of record and missing process integration.
- Citations are woven into arguments rather than dropped in as decoration, with each source supporting a specific methodological claim.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates applied framework sequencing — the practice of arguing not just that multiple quality tools are useful, but that each tool must be deployed in a specific order because each one creates the preconditions the next requires. This is a more sophisticated analytical move than simply listing TQM, Six Sigma, and BSC as parallel recommendations.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a framing introduction that identifies the core assumption — that the value of customer service has fundamentally changed — before moving into a single extended analytical section covering TQM diagnosis, Six Sigma application, metric prioritization, and BSC sequencing. A brief conclusion ties profitability to the proposed framework. The structure is argument-driven rather than section-heavy, which suits the length and scope of the analysis.
Introduction
It is common for quality management symptoms and problems to appear when two or more organizations are integrated together, as is the case with the business units within the Rubicon Group. It is imperative, however, when assessing support services using quality management frameworks and techniques, not to focus too closely on the symptoms and thereby miss the greater strategic challenges and roadblocks standing in the way of higher levels of customer service quality (Sepic & McNabb, 1994). The intent of this analysis is to explain how Rubicon Group can use the frameworks of Total Quality Management (TQM), Six Sigma, lean principles, and Balanced Scorecards (BSC) to attain a higher level of performance and customer satisfaction.
Treating the symptoms will only carry the customer service team so far. A key underlying assumption of this analysis is that the fundamental nature of what is expected of customer service — and the value it delivers — has changed. Using these techniques, Rubicon can re-centre on customers and begin to build a more lean, efficient framework for serving customers and retaining them over the long term.
References
Apgar, D. (2011). Assumption-based metrics: Recipe for success. Strategic Finance, 93(5), 27–33.
Amado, C., Santos, S., & Marques, P. (2012). Integrating the Data Envelopment Analysis and the Balanced Scorecard approaches for enhanced performance assessment. Omega, 40(3), 390.
Dervitsiotis, K. (2011). The new imperative for leadership — advancing from quality to innovation. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 34(3), 11, 15–17.
Li, S., Wu, C., Yen, D., & Lee, M. (2011). Improving the efficiency of IT help-desk service by Six Sigma management methodology (DMAIC) — a case study of C. company. Production Planning & Control, 22(7), 612.
Maklan, S., & Klaus, P. (2011). Customer experience: Are we measuring the right things? International Journal of Market Research, 53(6), 771.
Ooi, K.-B., Lin, B., Tan, B.-I., & Chong, A. Y.-L. (2011). Are TQM practices supporting customer satisfaction and service quality? The Journal of Services Marketing, 25(6), 410–419.
Sepic, T., & McNabb, D. (1994). Applying TQM's golden rule to your support services. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 17(3), 44.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.