Search results

This special issue of Personnel Review on “Quality and the Individual” is very different in style from the editor‐generated issues of this journal, but it has been designed for a very particular purpose. In the rush towards the achievement of high levels of “quality” among organizations, however this is manifested, the effects on the individual have largely gone unnoticed. We are all aware of the high rates of failure among quality management initiatives, and what is becoming clear is that successful organizations are harnessing the talents of individuals, whatever their status, to the quality cause from its very early stages.

Many organizations are investing much time and effort in the management of quality. A few enlightened ones even have a vision to be the best. G. Howland Blackiston, the president of the Juran Institute, noted recently that, “All around the world companies are waking up to ‘quality’. Everyone is touting quality. Many are attempting it. Some organizations have gotten enviable results by using the concepts of ‘managing for quality’ dramatically to lower their costs, increase their profits and become more competitive in an increasingly competitive market. For these winners, quality has become an integral part of their business strategy”.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an initial empirical insight into the mediating role of quality performance on the association between six specific organisational factors (top management support, employee involvement, employee empowerment, reward and recognition, training and customer focus) and competitive advantage.

A survey questionnaire was used to collect data from 179 garment organisations in a developing country, Bangladesh.

The results show that quality performance mediates the association between three specific organisational factors (top management support, employee involvement and reward and recognition) and competitive advantage. In addition, a fourth organisational factor, employee empowerment, exhibited a direct association with competitive advantage.

The findings provide managers of developing economies with an important insight into the critical role of quality in achieving competitive advantage. In line with the resources-based view, the findings suggest that managers should deploy their limited resources to focus on providing top management support for, encourage employee involvement in and provide adequate rewards and recognition in respect to quality initiatives.

That someone can make us feel good is a quality in itself. There has been much talk within British government circles, for example, about “the feelgood” factor, which is constantly reminding us that it is just around the corner! Whether or not we can believe in this is another matter but it certainly displays an awareness that making other people feel good can also have positive benefits for ourselves. How this can be achieved will differ depending on our particular line of business. Having a good‐quality product does not in itself guarantee success as service quality must also be taken into account. This is where the feel‐good factor comes into play. It is all very well, for example, going to a restaurant to have a top‐class meal (in that the food was good), only to have it thrown at you. Quality, therefore, must not be seen as a separate entity, but more as a package deal. Service quality is important if you wish to retain your customer base as acquiring new customers can be both time‐consuming and costly. It quite often takes very little apart from good manners to keep customer loyalty as in the case of the restaurant. Other factors can, however, start creeping into the framework such as efficiency, timeliness and good communication. Is there, for example, a time limit on how long you can reasonably be expected to wait for your meal before it arrives at the table, and if there is a delay is this communicated to you? In other words, we all have expectations as to what is acceptable and what is not. The clever part is for the organization to learn by what criteria the customer judges its service quality performance.

That someone can make you feel good is a quality in itself. There has been much talk within British government circles, for example, about “the feel‐good factor”, which is constantly reminding us that it is just around the corner! Whether or not we can believe in this is another matter, but it certainly displays an awareness that making other people feel good can have positive benefits for you also. How this can be achieved will differ depending on your particular line of business. Having a good quality product does not in itself guarantee success as service quality must also be taken into account. This is where the feel‐good factor comes into play. It is all very well, for example, going to a restaurant to have a top‐class meal (in that the food was good), only to have it thrown at you. Quality, therefore, must not be seen as a separate entity, but more as a package deal.

This study examines the impact of reward practices on the relationship between an organizational strategy based on the principles of total quality management (TQM) and perceptions of firm performance. Major findings include: higher levels of firm performance were significantly correlated with greater use of TQM practices, but not with greater use of quality rhetoric in either formal strategic documents or informal strategic discussions; the use of extrinsic reward practices – including profit sharing, gainsharing, employment security, and comp time – exhibited a significantly positive moderating effect on the relationship between TQM and perceived firm performance. Regarding implications for practitioners, it is insufficient to include quality rhetoric in the formal and informal strategy. As the anecdotal literature has often advocated, the current research provides empirical support that management must “walk the talk” with regard to TQM efforts. Further, in order to realize even higher levels of firm performance, an organization should utilize reward practices which specifically complement its TQM‐based strategy.

For many, quality circles have been a struggle, total quality management has been something to “get around to one day” and continuous improvement has just been another expression meaning total quality management, which, of course is something that we will “get around to one day”. Worse, the acronyms used ‐ QC, TQM, CI ‐ have joined such exotic practices as JIT (Just‐in‐Time inventory), CAD‐CAM (computer‐aided development and manufacturing) and more recently BPR (business process re‐engineering) in an alphabet soup of consultant‐led packages, available to the discerning manager ‐ at a price.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the influence of human factors in quality management on quality improvement practices and organisational performance in the Yemeni industrial sector.

Data were collected via a quantitative survey with a questionnaire distributed to 261 managers from 87 industrial companies. Replies from 210 managers give a response rate of 80 per cent. Data were analysed with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences 16.0, including factor analysis, reliability analysis, descriptive statistics, and correlation analysis. Structural equation modelling was carried out using Amos to evaluate the model and hypotheses.

Human factors influence positively quality improvement practices and organisational performance. Quality improvement practices positively influence organisational performance. Human factors indirectly and significantly influence organisational performance via the mediator of quality improvement practices.

The findings will be useful to both researchers and managers, especially those in Yemeni industrial companies. For further work, this study can be expanded to cover companies in other Middle East countries, and it may include more human factors.

The study is one of a few that investigate the influence of human factors on quality management. Additionally, this study is the first to carry out such research in the Yemen and the Middle East region.

Compares the traditional performance appraisal systems with Deming′s philosophy of operating a production system focused on quality for the consumer. W. Edwards Deming has long challenged the effectiveness of traditional performance appraisal systems used by American managers. He criticizes the traditional performance appraisal system of rewarding “win‐lose” results rather than supporting “win‐win” aims, thereby placing so much emphasis on judging and ranking people and using extrinsic motivational means. He recommends replacing the traditional performance systems that encourage win‐lose behaviour with systems that promote co‐operative and supportive behaviour. The Deming approach to performance appraisal involves a complete change of the traditional system to one that concentrates on managers being highly focused on quality and long‐term improvement. The successful implementations of Deming′s management approach in several American organizations were examined as available means of integrating performance appraisals into their quality system. The more successful companies have found remarkable improvement in consumer recognition, sales, market share, operating costs, customer satisfaction, employee morale, and of course quality. Such actions will not only help to strengthen these companies′ market position, but will help to improve the overall global competitiveness of American industry.

The ideas expressed in this work are based on those put into practice at the Okuma Corporation of Japan, one of the world′s leading machine tool manufacturers. In common with many other large organizations, Okuma Corporation has to meet the new challenges posed by globalization, keener domestic and international competition, shorter business cycles and an increasingly volatile environment. Intelligent corporate strategy (ICS), as practised at Okuma, is a unified theory of strategic corporate management based on five levels of win‐win relationships for profit/market share, namely: ,1. Loyalty from customers (value for money) – right focus., 2. Commitment from workers (meeting hierarchy of needs) – right attitude., 3. Co‐operation from suppliers (expanding and reliable business) – right connections., 4. Co‐operation from distributors (expanding and reliable business) – right channels., 5. Respect from competitors (setting standards for business excellence) – right strategies. The aim is to create values for all stakeholders. This holistic people‐oriented approach recognizes that, although the world is increasingly driven by high technology, it continues to be influenced and managed by people (customers, workers, suppliers, distributors, competitors). The philosophical core of ICS is action learning and teamwork based on principle‐centred relationships of sincerity, trust and integrity. In the real world, these are the roots of success in relationships and in the bottom‐line results of business. ICS is, in essence, relationship management for synergy. It is based on the premiss that domestic and international commerce is a positive sum game: in the long run everyone wins. Finally, ICS is a paradigm for manufacturing companies coping with change and uncertainty in their search for profit/market share. Time‐honoured values give definition to corporate character; circumstances change, values remain. Poor business operations generally result from human frailty. ICS is predicated on the belief that the quality of human relationships determines the bottom‐line results. ICS attempts to make manifest and explicit the intangible psychological factors for value‐added partnerships. ICS is a dynamic, living, and heuristic‐learning model. There is intelligence in the corporate strategy because it applies commonsense, wisdom, creative systems thinking and synergy to ensure longevity in its corporate life for sustainable competitive advantage.