Search results

Through the analysis of different initiatives of all EU countries in relation to business excellence models, there is a need to map these initiatives and to compare the most “interesting” quality awards of European Union by means of their substantial differentiation from European Foundation of Quality Management (EFQM) model. The aim of this paper is to propose the necessity for a diverse business excellence system, which respects the cross‐cultural differentiations of EU countries.

This research is based on information gathered by means of structured questionnaires, telephone interviews with representative Quality Award organizations and other written material collected from literature.

The findings are summarized as follows. EU countries do not have a common framework to address business excellence, however the “European Quality Award” based on the “EFQM Excellence Model” is the most widespread in the previous decade. There is a tendency towards own developments on national quality awards in the current decade. There is a clear indication of Quality Awards “nature” across EU: there are the national ones which are supported by their governments in the sense of financial support to organizations and the private ones which are supported by associations, chambers, private organizations and non profit organizations. There is a tendency of all social and business partners (in the governmental and private sector) to participate in the organizations so as to administer and manage the awards and business excellence models. This participation varies according to the political system of the EU country.

This paper reviews only 31 major Total Quality Awards out of the 51 that are identified excluding entrepreneurship awards and regional ones that tend to represent their national quality awards. Future research could include a sector analysis, such as SMEs business excellence awards, or a thorough analysis of public sector awards.

The paper reviews all major NQAs in EU and indicates an inclination to move from EFQM model to a more dynamic system of business excellence, which respects the diverse cultures of EU nations. The models, which are called TQM models, business excellence models or national quality award ones are used throughout the paper with the same meaning.

This paper is based on both a structured survey and on literature review. It is the first time that is proposed to be published.

With the success of the Deming Prize, the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, and the European Quality Award, many other countries have developed or are in the midst of developing their own quality award programs. This article provides background information on 16 national quality awards (NQAs) and discusses the similarities and differences among them. Key strengths of each award are also highlighted. Recommendations for developing an NQA are provided based on the findings.

Ever since the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) was established in 1987, many other countries have developed their own version of a national quality award (NQA). These NQAs tend to follow the general framework of the MBNQA with different emphases on criteria items such as leadership, customer focus, resource management and impact on society. This paper is a comparative study of nine major national quality awards (three European, two North American, three Asia Pacific and one South American). It is instructive to note the differences in criteria item emphasis based on a country’s stage of economic development. Multinational companies may find it very useful when their overseas subsidiaries apply for the local NQA following the success of their home companies. Countries that have yet to develop an NQA stand to gain from the comparative information gathered.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and describe the symbolic value of quality awards as a key indicator of recognition that public organizations have reached in the scope of quality management and continuous improvement.

The paper provides a description of the evolution of the three series of healthcare quality awards that have been held to‐date in one of the biggest regions of Europe: Andalusia.

Theoretical analysis of an instrument conceived as an institutionalised way of recognizing quality assurance initiatives in the Andalusian Public Health System. At the same time, the article focuses on the importance of using a reference model to ensure that the process of assessing the projects is systematic and rigorous and therefore stands as a guarantee of transparency within a public administration.

The ultimate outcome is dependent of the geographical context and the behaviours and perceptions of people that have participated as assessment panels.

The conceptual framework provides guidance on what methodology is used to assess the quality projects (process to allocate projects to assessment panels and assessment criteria required) in a complex healthcare system. It serves as a managerial framework to enhance the continuous improvement in all health‐related services.

The paper contributes to create a structured debate between researchers and healthcare leaders regarding the assessment criteria to evaluate healthcare quality projects.

Most organizations recognize that total quality management (TQM) is important but many do not know where to begin or how to sustain it in the long run. There are many examples of organizations that have successfully implemented quality management but there are also as many organizations that have failed in their implementations and perhaps many more that hesitate to embark on the quality journey. In fact, the growth and adoption of TQM in companies have to be facilitated increasingly by national governments. National governments are increasingly playing an active role in promoting and encouraging organizations to embrace TQM practices. Many countries have established national quality awards or business excellence awards to recognize deserving companies. Presents an excellence model for implementing and sustaining business excellence through a structured approach in implementing some of the best practices in TQM found in national quality award winners. Hopes that such a model would guide aspiring organizations in their quality journey. Develops the model using a case study approach on four past winners of the Singapore Quality Award.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and empirically test a new framework that shows how different signals of movie quality along with key control variables affect consumers’ post-consumption evaluations, critics’ reviews (CR), and movie box office revenues.

The data set consists of a sample of 332 movies released between 2000 and 2008. Regression was used to test the study hypotheses.

The results suggest that the three signals of movie quality exhibit different effects on three movie performance measures. Of the three cues, the peripheral quality signal is positive related to movie box, moviegoers’ evaluations (ME), and CR. Furthermore, star performance quality is positive related to both ME and CR. Surprisingly, overall quality signal does not display any influence on movie performances.

The primary limitation is the use of cross-sectional study design and future research should apply for time-series technique to test the relationships between movie quality signals and movie performances.

The findings suggest that consumers and critics evaluate movie qualities based on various movie quality signals. Furthermore, the characteristics of movies also have mixed impacts on movie performances. Movie studios may take these findings into account to produce better movies.

This study proposes and empirically tests the impacts of three groups of movie signals – peripheral quality signal, star performance quality signal, and overall quality signal on motion picture performance. This study contributes to service quality literature and signal theory by categorizing different Academy Awards into three groups of quality signals and by empirically testing the proposed relationships.

One way for organisations to support total quality management, and hence try to increase customer satisfaction is to participate in a quality award process. The purpose of this study is to explore the organisational value of participating in a quality award process. The study is based on interviews at 29 organisations that have participated in the process of the Swedish Quality Award. The main conclusion is that most of the organisations consider the process orientation, customer orientation and improvement work to have been improved as a result of the participation in the quality award process. However, there are also obstacles to surmount in order to benefit fully from the process: difficulties in finding resources within the organisation to perform mandatory work and implement identified improvements, and difficulties in applying the circumstantial model used in the quality award process.

Deals with some of the quality award programmes applied worldwide. First, briefly describes five quality awards: the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award from the USA, the European Quality Award, the Deming Prize of Japan, the Canadian Quality Award and the Australian Quality Award. Second, presents the National Quality Award of Brazil. Outlines its criteria for performance excellence and some descriptors. Additionally, describes the application procedure, evaluation process, and the scoring methodology. Finally, performs a comparison between the major awards and the Brazilian programme in order to identify some similarities and differences among them. It can be remarked that the major internationally recognised quality awards use evaluation criteria which are similar in nature, when compared with the Brazilian award.

The purpose of the study is to describe the activities initiated based on participation in a quality award process and with the intention to improve performance.

This study presents a case study of three organisations that have participated in the Swedish Quality Award process. The cases were selected in order to clarify how this award process could be used to improve organisational performance.

Several examples of activities on how to improve organisational performance are provided. Specifically, the areas of customer orientation, process orientation, continuous improvement, committed leadership and participation by everyone have been improved due to the initiated activities. Furthermore, the studied organisations have been successful in their development and communication of visions, and in their empowerment of employees.

An interesting area of further research would be to compare different methodologies for performance improvement with one another.

Findings from the case studies, and of importance for organisations applying for quality awards, indicate that, if the goal is to get lasting results, it is not sufficient to participate in a quality award process only once. Instead one should participate in the process several times, with enough time in between the applications in order to complete as many as possible of the improvement projects resulting from the evaluations.

It is the authors' intention that the guidelines presented in the paper might be helpful for organisations considering a participation in a quality award process.

One way to stimulate total quality management (TQM) efforts in an organisation is to work with a quality award. This paper presents a case study, based on both interviews and document studies, of a unit within the Swedish National Road Administration that has worked with an in‐company quality award. The purpose of the case study was to study how a unit experiences and is affected by the work connected with an in‐company quality award. Some positive experiences and effects were recognised, such as a perceived improved customer orientation, a comprehensive view of the business, a degree of participation by everyone, systematic improvement work and an increase in the average score from the examiners. The perceived main disadvantage is the amount of work that the in‐company quality award requires, especially in the phase of description of activities.