An exploration of quality management practices, perceptions and program maturity in the supply chain

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine differences among industry classes and supply chain positions in order to gain insight into quality management program maturity across industries and within supply chains.

Design/methodology/approach

Data for comparison in this study comes from an e-mail survey of professionals across the USA, employed primarily in sourcing or logistics (i.e. Institute for Supply Management (ISM) and Council for Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP)).

Findings

This study found that quality maturity varies by industry class. While prior studies have found differences by industry class, they have been limited to at most three classes, while this study examined 17 classes. This study also examines quality maturity by supply chain position, with the finding that quality maturity differed by supply chain position depending on how position is defined. Questions are raised regarding the proper characterization of supply chain position.

Research limitations/implications

The sample group represents members in only two professional groups, ISM and CSCMP. Not all industry groups or supply chain positions were well-represented due to some small sub-group sizes.

Practical implications

Quality program maturity is generally not uniform and there are potentially many opportunities for substantial improvement across various sectors by specific industry. Partnering with suppliers is a recommended approach for sectors lagging in quality maturity.

Originality/value

This research extends the examination of quality management practice in the supply chain by studying a large number of industry classes and supply chain positions and assesses differences in quality maturity across these classes and positions.

Citation

A. Dellana, S. and F. Kros, J. (2014), "An exploration of quality management practices, perceptions and program maturity in the supply chain", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 786-806. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-03-2013-0105