Pay‐off selection criteria for quality and improvement initiatives

Pay‐off selection criteria for quality and improvement initiatives Purpose – The variety of possible quality management (QM) and continuous improvement (CI) initiatives and their various possible permutations can make it difficult for a company to choose the best approach for their requirements. This paper aims to address the selection issue by presenting a method to compare popular QM and CI initiatives from the perspective of the pay‐offs, or expected benefits, to an organisation which successfully adopts the approach. Design/methodology/approach – The relevant QM and CI literature was analysed, examining key initiatives and their reported pay‐offs to the organisation. A matrix diagram approach is introduced which presents the extent and credibility of arguments advanced for these initiatives, in seven categories of pay‐off. A system of assessment is proposed, which quantifies the extent and weight of empirical evidence and estimates the strength of the claim for each pay‐off. Findings – The pay‐off matrix summarises the claims in each of the pay‐off categories, assesses their credibility, and displays the similarities and differences for six key initiatives: total quality management, six sigma, ISO 9000, business process reengineering, lean and business excellence. Graphical pay‐off profiles are presented. Significant differences between the claimed pay‐offs for these initiatives are identified, analysed and discussed. Research limitations/implications – The proposed matrix and assessment system attempts to support a comprehensive and rational approach to assess the pay‐offs of QM and CI initiatives. As with any analysis of literature, there is inevitably an element of selection, but this approach consciously attempts to avoid omission and promote objectivity. The analysis is based on articles published between 1990 and 2005. Hence, new research and additional evidence may change the weight and credibility of claims. Originality/value – This paper suggests a way in which evidence from the literature might be most effectively used by managers for decision support in the choice of quality and improvement initiatives. A similar approach might also be used for other areas, where businesses face choices and a considerable body of evidence exists to assist the decision‐making process . http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management Emerald Publishing

Pay‐off selection criteria for quality and improvement initiatives

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/pay-off-selection-criteria-for-quality-and-improvement-initiatives-VrlZ2AH316
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0265-671X
DOI
10.1108/02656710810865258
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – The variety of possible quality management (QM) and continuous improvement (CI) initiatives and their various possible permutations can make it difficult for a company to choose the best approach for their requirements. This paper aims to address the selection issue by presenting a method to compare popular QM and CI initiatives from the perspective of the pay‐offs, or expected benefits, to an organisation which successfully adopts the approach. Design/methodology/approach – The relevant QM and CI literature was analysed, examining key initiatives and their reported pay‐offs to the organisation. A matrix diagram approach is introduced which presents the extent and credibility of arguments advanced for these initiatives, in seven categories of pay‐off. A system of assessment is proposed, which quantifies the extent and weight of empirical evidence and estimates the strength of the claim for each pay‐off. Findings – The pay‐off matrix summarises the claims in each of the pay‐off categories, assesses their credibility, and displays the similarities and differences for six key initiatives: total quality management, six sigma, ISO 9000, business process reengineering, lean and business excellence. Graphical pay‐off profiles are presented. Significant differences between the claimed pay‐offs for these initiatives are identified, analysed and discussed. Research limitations/implications – The proposed matrix and assessment system attempts to support a comprehensive and rational approach to assess the pay‐offs of QM and CI initiatives. As with any analysis of literature, there is inevitably an element of selection, but this approach consciously attempts to avoid omission and promote objectivity. The analysis is based on articles published between 1990 and 2005. Hence, new research and additional evidence may change the weight and credibility of claims. Originality/value – This paper suggests a way in which evidence from the literature might be most effectively used by managers for decision support in the choice of quality and improvement initiatives. A similar approach might also be used for other areas, where businesses face choices and a considerable body of evidence exists to assist the decision‐making process .

Journal

International Journal of Quality & Reliability ManagementEmerald Publishing

Published: Apr 18, 2008

Keywords: Quality management; Continuous improvement; Benefits

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off