Figure 1. Relationship between QM and firm performance.Figure 2

June
2009
© 2008 The Authors
201
Journal compilation © 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and British Academy of Management
(Capon et al. 1995). Such practices have been documented and analysed empirically in measurement studies, as well as in studies that explored the relationship between QM and performance.
The measurement studies have developed an instrument for measuring QM and assessing its reliability and validity that can be applied to manufacturing firms (Ahire et al. 1996;
Curkovic et al. a Flynn et al. 1994) or to the manufacturing and service industries
(Badri et al. 1995; Black and Porter 1995,
1996; Conca et al. 2004; Grandzol and Gershon
1998; Quazi and Padibjo 1998; Quazi et al.
1998; Rao et al. 1999; Saraph et al. Table 1 shows the QM practices that are identified in these measurement studies.
As for QM–performance studies, those which measured QM as a multidimensional construct also identified QM practices. It can be inferred from these two groups of studies that the most QM dimensions cited most commonly in the literature are those reflected in
Table 2, i.e. people management (e.g. involvement, training and teams, information and analysis (quality data, measurement, statistical process control, feedback and benchmarking are factors linked to the management of information for decision-making), customer focus (aspects related to customer relationships),
leadership (dimension related to top management commitment, process management (this dimension considers process management and improvement, supplier management (this dimension represents relational practices associated with suppliers, planning (definition,
communication and review of objectives and plans, and product design (involvement of all

Download 276.85 Kb.

Share with your friends: