The paper "Exploring Quality Using Kelemen’ s Dimensions " is a great example of management coursework. Quality as a word has diverse interpretations depending on the circumstance under which it is used. Jain (2006) defines quality as the extent to which a commodity or service satisfies the needs of a client. He further argues that, even if the commodity produced meets all the required standards, it won’ t be deemed to have the quality component if it makes to the market late and if it is not affordable. Johnson (2015) in his tutorial slides on operations and quality management defines quality as the level to which a commodity or service complies with a planning requirement.
With the advent of technology, quality needs to be the core of every producer because, with new advanced technologies, quality problems of products land at the consumers’ doorsteps very fast. A firm which puts quality first in the production of its products saves, on average, $350 million annually in fixing quality mistakes compared to a firm which shelves quality (Ashwin and Bryan 2014). Kelemen (2003) agrees with the various definitions that exist in trying to define quality.
He advises those searching for a single globally accepted definition of quality to quit the search and assent to the fact that quality is elusive, multidimensional and an incidental concept. Garvin (1984) agrees with Kelemen by suggesting that reliance on a single definition of quality often results in problems. That is why in his attempts to define quality, he came up with five approaches to do the same. It is on these very five approaches that Kelemen builds his 8 dimensions of defining quality.
Sower (2011) throws in his support for numerous definitions of quality by asserting that quality is a term to which each and every individual has his or her own definition. This essay will explore quality using Kelemen’ s dimensions as a foundation in understanding its fluid, contextual and perceived nature. Quality can be looked at using two perspectives, the managerial perspective and the critical perspective. The managerial perspective is termed so because it tends to look at quality as a something which is distinct, functioning, measurable and controllable whereas the critical perspective views quality as having social, political and cultural components (Kelemen 2003). Managerial perspectives on Quality This perspective of looking at quality is made up of four approaches; product-based approach, manufacturing-based approach, value-based approach and user-based approach (Kelemen, 2003). The product-based approach This approach looks at quality as something which is exact and can be quantified on a scale.
Varying levels of quality of a product is as a result of varying quantities of the required substance present in that product (Abbott 1955). For instance, the quality of coffee is determined by the amount of caffeine; the higher the amount of caffeine in the coffee the better the quality of the coffee.
It is possible to control and vary the quality of a product by varying the amounts of the active ingredient in that particular product. So when trying to define quality, this dimension need not be taken lightly because customers tend to understand the quality of a product by the number of its constituents. Deducing from this dimension one is bound to conclude that the higher the quality the costly the product is since higher quality products contain more quantities of the required ingredients and these ingredients cost more to produce.
Also deduced from this dimension is that quality is looked as a naturally occurring component of the product instead of something imputed to them (Ashwin and Bryan 2014).
Abbott, L 1955, Quality and Competition, Columbia University Press, New York.
Ashwin, S and Bryan, K 2014, Creating a Culture of Quality, Harvard Business Review, viewed 28 February 2015, http://hbr.org/2014/04/creating-a-culture-of-quality
Bayton, JA 1958, Motivation, Cognition, Learning- Basic Factors in Consumer behaviour, Journal of Marketing, vol.22, no. 3, pp. 282-289.
Beckford, JLW 2010, Quality- A critical Introduction, Routledge, New York.
Bucklin, LP 1963, Retail Strategy and the Class of Consumer Goods, Journal of Marketing, vol. 27, pp. 51-56.
Calfa, JM 2010, Product Quality by Dr. Garvin (1984), viewed 28 February 2015, http://www.onquality.info/2010/04/product-quality-by-dr-garvin-1984_23.html.
Crosby, PB 1979, Quality is Free: The Art of Making Quality Certain, McGraw-Hill, Michigan.
Dale, BG, Wiele, TW and Iwaarden, JV 2007, Managing Quality, Blackwell, Oxford.
Garvin, DA 1984, What does Product Quality Really Mean?, viewed 28 February 2015, http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/what-does-product-quality-really-mean.
Gilmore, HL 1974, Product Conformance Cost in Quality Progress, Qual, New York.
Gronroos, C 1983, Strategic Management and Marketing in the Service Sector, Marketing Science institute, Massachussetts.
Jain, PLJ 2006, Quality Control and Total Quality Management, sixth edition, Tata McGraw- Hill, New Delhi.
Johnson, P 2015, Introduction to Quality: tutorial slides on Operations and Quality management, Springer, New York.
Juran, JM 1992, Quality by Design: The new steps for planning Quality into Goods, Simon and Schuster, New York.
Kelemen, ML 2003, Managing Quality, Sage, London.
Sower, VE 2011, Essentials of Quality: With Cases and Experiental Exercises, Wiley and sons, New Jersey.
Walton, M 1986, The Deming Management Method, Berkley publishing group, New York