EXPLODING THE MYTH: DO ALL QUALITY MANAGEMENT PRACTICES CONTRIBUTE TO SUPERIOR QUALITY PERFORMANCE?
ABSTRACT In his landmark article on total quality management, Powell (1995) lamented the lack of large scale studies investigating quality management practices and performance. This study begins to fill that void using a large, random sample of manufacturing sites. The results show that quality practices can be categorized into nine dimensions. However, not all of them contribute to superior quality outcomes. “Employee commitment,” “shared vision,” and “customer focus” combine to yield a positive correlation with quality outcomes. Conversely, other “hard” quality practices, such as “benchmarking,” “cellular work teams,” “advanced manufacturing technologies,” and “close supplier relations” do not contribute to superior quality outcomes.
SourceAvailable from: Juan José Tarí
Conference Paper: An empirical investigation of the China Quality Award causal model[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The objective of this study is to analyze the causal relationship among categories in the China Quality Award (CQA) model. The survey instrument consists of 65 questions from the seven CQA categories. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is used to analyze the empirical data and esti-mate the path coefficients among CQA categories. This study identifies seven factors from seven CQA categories; Leadership, Strategic Planning, Human-Resource Focus, Process Management, Cus-tomer & Market Focus, Information & Analysis, and Results. Extending the basic Baldrige theory “Leadership drives the system that creates results”, this study divides systems into Direction (Strateg-ic planning), Foundation (Information & Analysis), and System (Human Resource Focus, Process Management, and Customer & Market Focus). The results support the Baldrige theory. First, Leader-ship has not only a direct influence on Results, but also has an indirect influence on results through system. The causal relationships between Leadership (Driver) and Information and Analysis (Founda-tion) and Strategic Planning (Direction) were statically significant. Second, Strategic Planning (Direc-tion) affected Human Resource Focus and Customer and Market Focus of system while had no influ-ence on Process Management. Third, Human Resource Focus and Customer and Market Focus both affected Process Management, and Process Management had a significant impact on results. Fourth, Information and Analysis (foundation) affected all of the categories of Direction and System.The 5th Asian Quality Congress, Incheon, Korea; 10/2007
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This paper discusses the relationship between the implementation of Total Quality Management (TQM) and innovation performance. The discussion arises primarily based on the considerable controversy concerning this relationship that appears in the literature. As of interest to resolve this controversy, a research framework is developed preceded by a theoretical discussion of the multidimensionality of TQM when applied in different organizational contexts. The primary proposition of this framework is that the implementation of TQM practices will be influenced by the external and internal environment as well as the strategy adopted by the firm. The model of TQM implemented is then reflected in terms of different outcomes relating to quality performance and innovation performance.Technovation 09/2001; 21(9):539-558. DOI:10.1016/S0166-4972(00)00070-5 · 2.70 Impact Factor