Essays on Managing Quality and Business Improvement Assignment

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Managing Quality and Business Improvement" Is a wonderful example of a Business Assignment. As Bell & Elkins, (2004) describe, an attempt to promote quality excellence in the USA, the MBNQA program was conceived in 1987. The Baldrige award framework has four basic elements: driver, system, measures of progress and goal. As described by Porter and Tanner (2005), there exist dynamic relationships among the criteria. Senior executive leadership sets directions, creates the values, goals, and expectations. The system consists of a set of well-defined and well-designed processes for meeting the company's customer and overall performance requirements.

Measures of progress comprise the control elements of the model. The measures provide the basis for determining the types of actions required in the pursuit of the two primary goals of the model; customer and marketplace performance, and business performance. The criteria are built upon a set of core values and concepts. Structurally, the most important difference in the frameworks is the complete separation of Enablers and Results in the EFQM Excellence Model. Separation of Enablers and Results generally improves the use of TQM frameworks in self-assessment and aids understanding by its specific focus on the 'hows' (Enablers) and Results.

However, it also requires the description of matching specific enablers to specific results in different criteria. The particular strength of the EFQM framework is that it explicitly addresses the performance of an organization in meeting the needs of all its stakeholders (Porter and Tanner 1998). In general, the contents of both models are similar, but some differences exist (Zink et al. 2004; Porter and Tanner 1998). The criterion on Leadership of the EFQM Excellence Model appears in the Baldrige with the same name but the EFQM framework considers a wider range of activities.

Baldrige also explicitly addresses the area of public responsibility and corporate citizenship (which constitutes by itself a unique criterion in the EFQM Excellence Model). The area 'policy and strategy' can be compared with the MBNQA criterion 'strategic planning'. The questions relating to 'people management' in the EFQM and those relating to 'people results' are to be found in the MBNQA. The comparison of the EFQM subject 'partnerships and resources' with the specific criteria within the MBNQA is difficult.

The contents dealt with in the EFQM model in this area are distributed over many criteria within the MBNQA (Arif, et al. 2005). The criterion 'processes' within the MBNQA is significantly more detailed. While the EFQM structures the criterion according to activities in managing processes, the Baldrige criterion is structured according to the kind of processes. Large differences between the MBNQA and EFQM framework are to be found in the context of the EFQM criterion 'customer results'. Within the EFQM Excellence Model, no relevant 'enabler' criterion is defined for the 'results' criterion but would be addressed by the critical processes.

The EFQM results in part 'society results' is missing in the Baldrige. Finally, no major differences are found in the criterion 'performance results', since both frameworks distinguish between financial and non-financial results.

References

Resources

Arif, Mohammed. Smiley, Frederick M. Kulonda, Dennis J.; Business and Education as Push-Pull Processes: An Alliance of Philosophy and Practice. Journal article by Education, Vol. 125, 2005

Bell, Robert R. Elkins, Susan A. ; A Balanced Scorecard for Leaders: Implications of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Criteria. Journal article by SAM Advanced Management Journal, Vol. 69, 2004

Conyers John G.; Thinking outside to Support Newcomers: Young Administrators Benefit from Confidential Mentoring by an External Protege. School Administrator, Vol. 61, June 2004

Garvin, D. A. 1988 Managing Quality. New York: Free Press.

Garvin, D. A. 1991 "How the Baldrige Award really works." Harvard Business Review, 69 (6): 80-93.

Ghobadian, A. and Woo, H. (1996) 'Characteristics and shortcomings of four major quality awards', International Journal of Quality, 13(2): 55-65.

Lehman, Kirby; Establishing a Framework for Quality: Using Data as a Basis for Decision Making Leads Jenks, Okla., to Continuous Improvement and a Baldrige Honor. School Administrator, Vol. 63, September 2006

Mcginnis, Patricia; Tougher Challenges-And Leadership to Match: Public Servants Are Using Innovative Techniques to Get Better Results Quickly and Cost-Efficiently, Improving Workforce Performance and Spanning Organizational Boundaries to Effect Much-Needed Changes. Journal article by The Public Manager, Vol. 35, 2006

Mullins, John M.; Developing Leaders for the Federal Inspectors General Community: How a New Curriculum That Goes beyond Traditional Competencies by Emphasizing Personal Leadership and Organizational Results Offers New Tools to Improve Governmental Programs and Operations and Build a Network for Governmentwide Collaboration. Journal article by The Public Manager, Vol. 33, 2004

NIST (2000) Baldrige National quality Program 2000 - Criteria for Performance Excellence, Gaithersburg, MD, US.

Porter, L. J. and Tanner, S. J. (2005) Assessing Business Excellence - a guide to self-assessment, Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Strach, Pavel. Everett, Andre M.; Is There Anything Left to Learn from Japanese Companies?

Journal article by SAM Advanced Management Journal, Vol. 69, 2004

Zink, K. J., Hauer, R. and Schmidt, A. (2004) 'Quality assessment: instruments for the analysis of quality concepts based on EN 29000, the Malcolm Baldrige Award and the European Quality Award', Total Quality Management, 5(5): 32.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us