Chapter 7: Conclusion and Recommendations

7.1 Summary of Key Findings

This study set out to understand how TQM operates at AAEL and what effect it has on
project management outcomes. The qualitative evidence gathered across three methods produced
a consistent and coherent picture, which can be summarised in six findings.
i. Leadership is the primary driver of quality culture at AAEL. Senior managers’
direct involvement in planning, inspections, and corrective action is the main
mechanism through which quality standards are maintained. This is among the
organisation’s most significant competitive assets.
ii. Informal continuous improvement practices exist but lack structure. Post-project
reviews and corrective action discussions take place, but inconsistently — particularly
on smaller installations. PDCA-type thinking is present but applied intuitively rather
than by design.
iii. Employee motivation is strong; formal training is not. Knowledge is transmitted
through experience and observation, producing capable individuals while leaving the
collective quality capability of the organisation uneven.
iv. Documentation practices are inconsistent and underutilised. Quality checks are
carried out, but the records they should produce are frequently incomplete or absent,
which prevents learning from accumulating across projects.
v. Customer focus is genuine but not yet formalised. Without structured feedback
mechanisms, client intelligence rarely finds its way back into the processes that could
be improved by it.
vi. Resource and schedule pressures periodically override quality discipline. Tight
deadlines, limited personnel, and budget constraints push quality management from a
preventive to a reactive footing, creating risks that structured approaches would largely
pre-empt.

7.2 Contributions to Knowledge

This research makes four distinct contributions to the academic and applied literature:
vii. It provides original qualitative empirical evidence on TQM in renewable energy project
organisations in Bangladesh — a combination that was conspicuously absent from the
published literature.
viii. It shows how TQM theory and project management success theory interact in
practice, tracing how leadership engagement, employee involvement, and customer
orientation shape real project outcomes in a developing economy setting.
ix. It draws attention to human capital — employee perceptions, capability, and
empowerment — as a critical variable in TQM effectiveness within small-to-medium
project organisations, a dimension that larger firm studies tend to underplay.
 x. It produces project-level empirical findings from solar EPC and BESS installations that
are directly applicable to industry practice and provide a sound basis for future
quantitative or comparative research.

7.3 Practical Recommendations

Five recommendations are offered, each grounded in the study’s findings rather than in
generic quality management prescription:
xi. Formalise TQM Policies and Procedures: Develop written quality manuals, project-
level quality plans, and standard operating procedures for core project activities.
Quality responsibilities should be clearly assigned for every role, and escalation
procedures established so that issues can be resolved through agreed channels rather
than improvised arrangements.
xii. Design and Deliver Structured Quality Training: Build a recurring training
programme covering quality planning tools (including PDCA), risk identification,
documentation practice, and customer service principles. Formal instruction should be
complemented by structured mentoring and deliberate cross-team knowledge sharing.
xiii. Standardise Project Documentation: Introduce mandatory templates for
inspection records, commissioning reports, non-conformance documentation, and
lessons-learned summaries. Run periodic documentation audits, make the archive
accessible to all project teams, and build PDCA review cycles into the standard project
close-out process.
xiv. Establish Customer Feedback Mechanisms: Design structured post-delivery
feedback processes and link findings to specific project KPIs. Use this data actively to
drive improvement in both technical and service quality.
xv. Resource Quality Assurance Properly: Quality assurance time, personnel, and budget
should be allocated in project plans from the beginning. Where feasible, digital project
management tools can support quality tracking, documentation compliance, and team
coordination across sites.

7.4 Directions for Future Research

xvi. Quantitative Analysis of TQM–Performance Relationships: Future work using
survey and statistical methods could test the relationships between specific TQM
practices and measurable project performance indicators across a larger sample of
Bangladesh-based renewable energy firms.
xvii. Comparative Multi-Firm Studies: Research spanning multiple renewable
energy companies would surface sector-wide patterns, identify the most broadly
applicable approaches, and illuminate what distinguishes higher-quality from lower-
quality project delivery across different organisational contexts.
xviii. Longitudinal Research: Following quality management practice and project
outcomes at AAEL or comparable organisations over time would yield insight into how
TQM embeds itself within an organisational culture and what genuine improvement
trajectories look like in the field.
xix. Employee-Centred Qualitative Research: Employee-centred qualitative work
focused specifically on the motivations, knowledge levels, and aspirations of technical
field staff would deepen understanding of the human capital dimension of TQM and
inform the design of training and empowerment programmes suited to that population.
References
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the crisis. MIT Press.
Flynn, B. B., Schroeder, R. G., & Sakakibara, S. (1994). A framework for quality management
research and an associated measurement instrument. Journal of Operations Management,
11(4), 339–366. [Link]
International Organization for Standardization. (2015). Quality management systems —
Requirements (ISO 9001:2015). ISO.
Juran, J. M. (1995). A history of managing for quality: The evolution, trends, and future
directions of managing for quality. ASQC Quality Press.
Kerzner, H. (2017). Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and
controlling (12th ed.). Wiley.
Love, P. E. D., Edwards, D. J., & Irani, Z. (2016). Forensic project management: An exploratory
examination of time-overrun claims in the construction industry. Project Management
Journal, 47(6), 55–70. [Link]
Oakland, J. S. (2014). Total quality management and operational excellence: Text with cases
(4th ed.). Routledge.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Pheng, L. S., & Teo, J. A. (2004). Implementing total quality management in construction firms.
Journal of Management in Engineering, 20(1), 8–14.
[Link]
Project Management Institute. (2021). A guide to the project management body of knowledge
(PMBOK® Guide) (7th ed.). PMI.
Rahman, M., & Islam, N. (2020). Quality challenges in renewable energy projects in
Bangladesh. Journal of Energy Studies, 12(3), 45–62.
Shenhar, A. J., Dvir, D., Levy, O., & Maltz, A. C. (2001). Project success: A multidimensional
strategic concept. Long Range Planning, 34(6), 699–725. [Link]
6301(01)00097-8
Talib, F., Rahman, Z., & Qureshi, M. N. (2013). Total quality management and operational
performance: Mediating role of quality management practices. International Journal of
Productivity and Performance Management, 62(3), 222–247.
[Link]
Zairi, M. (2000). Managing for excellence: The challenge of continuous improvement. Springer.
Zeng, S., Tian, P., Tam, C. M., & Tam, V. W. Y. (2017). Effects of supplier quality management
practices on project performance in construction projects. International Journal of Project
Management, 35(7), 1400–1413. [Link]
Appendix A1: Semi-Structured Interview Guide
for Key Informant Interviews (KII)
Target Participants: Senior managers, project managers, quality assurance personnel, and
senior engineers at AAEL.
Purpose: To gather strategic and operational insights on how TQM is understood and applied at
AAEL, and how it relates to project success.
Interview Questions:
xx. How is "quality" understood and communicated within AAEL's project management
practice?
xxi. Which quality management procedures are consistently followed during project
planning and execution?
xxii. How does leadership involvement shape quality outcomes across AAEL's
renewable energy projects?
xxiii. In your experience, how do quality management practices affect project delivery
in terms of schedule, cost, and client satisfaction?
xxiv. What are the most significant challenges that prevent AAEL from implementing
more formal quality management practices?
xxv. How are quality-related risks identified, evaluated, and managed during project
execution?
xxvi. What mechanisms currently exist for capturing and acting on client feedback?
xxvii. What changes to current practice would most meaningfully strengthen TQM
implementation at AAEL?
Appendix A2: Focus Group Discussion (FGD)
Guideline
Target Participants: Project engineers, site supervisors, and technicians directly involved in
renewable energy project execution at AAEL.
Group Size: 6–10 participants per session.
Purpose: To explore shared field-level experiences and collective perceptions of quality practice
within project execution teams.
FGD Guiding Questions:
xxviii. What quality standards or procedures do you routinely follow during installation
and commissioning activities?
xxix. How are quality expectations communicated from management to the project
team? Is the communication clear and consistent?
xxx. What difficulties arise when trying to maintain quality standards under tight
delivery schedules?
xxxi. How well do office-based and site-based teams coordinate on quality-related
issues? Where do communication gaps occur?
xxxii. Are field staff encouraged to report quality problems or propose process
improvements? What factors support or hinder this?
xxxiii. What type of training or practical support would most help you improve quality
performance in your daily work?
xxxiv. How does feedback from clients reach the project team, and how does it influence
what happens on-site?
Appendix A3: Open-Ended Questionnaire for
Field Staff
Target Participants: Field technicians, installation staff, and site engineers at AAEL project
sites.
Purpose: To collect individual qualitative perspectives from field staff where direct interview
participation was not feasible.
Please answer each question as fully and honestly as you can:
1. What does "doing quality work" mean to you in your day-to-day project activities?
2. What quality checks or verification steps are normally carried out before a project is handed
over to the client?
3. Have you received any formal training related to quality management? (Circle: Yes / No)
If yes, briefly describe what was covered:
4. What are the main obstacles you face in maintaining quality standards during project
execution?
5. When a quality problem or mistake is identified on-site, how is it typically handled?
6. In what ways does management support your efforts to maintain quality standards on-site?
7. What suggestions do you have for improving quality practices across AAEL's projects?