A systematic review of humanistic discourse analysis for SDG-aligned total quality management in manufacturing organizations
Main Article Content
Abstract
This systematic review surveys literature that highlight the intertwined and overlapped relations among humanistic discourse analysis, Total Quality Management (TQM), and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in manufacturing contexts. It adopts PRISMA methodology for analysing 78 peer-reviewed articles (2010-2023) with the aim of identifying dominant discourses, their philosophical frames, and their implications for SDG alignment. The findings of the present study have underscored three basic discursive frameworks: instrumental humanism, where humanistic principles serve efficiency goals; ethical humanism, highlighting dignity and rights; and transformative humanism, supporting systemic change. The present study has also identified a critical gap between aspirational SDG discourse and operational TQM practices, known for semantic decoupling and rhetorical compliance. The review contributes to humanities scholarship by revealing how discourse analysis foreground the contested terrain of "quality" and "sustainability" in manufacturing, proposing a framework for critical discursive praxis that bridges humanistic values with sustainable production systems. The present study argues that manufacturing organizations need more than technical integration—they need discursive transformation to align TQM with SDGs.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
You are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
How to Cite
Share
References
Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2000). Varieties of discourse: On the study of organizations through discourse analysis. Human Relations, 53(9), 1125–1149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726700539002
Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. (1992). Critical management studies. Sage.
Banerjee, S. B. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and the ugly. Critical Sociology, 34(1), 51–79. https://doi.org/10.1163/156916308X254156
Banerjee, S. B. (2011). Embedding sustainability across the organization: A critical perspective. (Provide full source details as used in your manuscript.)
Bansal, P., & Knox-Hayes, J. (2013). (Provide full source details as used in your manuscript.)
Bansal, P., & Song, H. C. (2017). Similar but not the same: Differentiating corporate sustainability from corporate responsibility. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 105–149.
Bowie, N. E. (2017). Business ethics: A Kantian perspective (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Dahlgaard-Park, S. M. (2011). The quality movement: Where are you going? Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 22(5), 493–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2011.578449
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Fernando, S., & Lawrence, S. (2014). A theoretical framework for CSR practices: Integrating legitimacy theory, stakeholder theory and institutional theory. Journal of Theoretical Accounting Research, 10(1), 149–178.
Ferrón-Vílchez, V., & Ortiz-de-Mandojana, N. (2022). Green innovation through humanistic management? A review of humanistic management literature. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(3), 969–981. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2924
Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B. L., & de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge University Press.
Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M. P., & Hultink, E. J. (2017). The circular economy—A new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 757–768.
Gladwin, T. N., Kennelly, J. J., & Krause, T.-S. (1995). Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: Implications for management theory and research. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 874–907.
Grant, D., Hardy, C., Oswick, C., & Putnam, L. (Eds.). (2004). The Sage handbook of organizational discourse. Sage.
Greenwood, M. (2022). (Provide full source details as used in your manuscript.)
Hardy, C., & Thomas, R. (2015). Discourse in a material world. Journal of Management Studies, 52(5), 680–696.
Melé, D. (2016). Understanding humanistic management. Humanistic Management Journal, 1(1), 33–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41463-016-0001-7
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
Milne, M. J., Kearins, K., & Walton, S. (2006). Creating adventures in wonderland: The journey metaphor and environmental sustainability. Organization, 13(6), 801–839. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508406068502
Sen, A., & Nussbaum, M. (Eds.). (1993). The quality of life. Oxford University Press.
Shore, C. (2008). Audit culture and illiberal governance: Universities and the politics of accountability. Anthropological Theory, 8(3), 278–298.
Spicer, A., Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2009). Critical performativity: The unfinished business of critical management studies. Human Relations, 62(4), 537–560.
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), 45.
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Zbaracki, M. J. (1998). The rhetoric and reality of total quality management. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(3), 602–636.