An evaluation of alternative business excellence models using AHP

The purpose of this paper is to compare some major National Quality Award/Business Excellence Models (NQA/BEM) in terms of the criteria employed and their relative weights. It shows that these models vary both in terms of criteria and their weights. Whereas some of them are changing weights frequently, others are almost static. It employs the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to allocate scores to 12 criteria identified in the model by Agrawal et al. (1998) to propose a modified quality award model similar to that. The six quality award models used in the USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, Japan and India are compared with the proposed model using AHP and their relative rankings are obtained.,First, a literature review is done to identify various quality award models globally, with their features being compared. Furthermore, paired comparison technique is used to rationalize the relative weights of proposed 12 criteria, and then AHP is again used to rank this proposed model with six major award models.,This paper shows that the six NQA models vary substantially on parameter weights. They do not include some relevant criteria to evaluate the organizational performance holistically. It also reveals how some models have been revising criteria weights very frequently, whereas others are static. In some models, the results get much higher weightage than enablers, and hence the performance may not be sustainable. The modified Agrawal et al. (1998) model is taken as a base model, with weights rationalized in it using the AHP. The rankings obtained using AHP reveal that proposed model scores over the other six prominent quality award models. The result also reveals that for organizational excellence, the quality of people plays a major role in the successful implementation of quality processes. Hence, it is very important to focus on improving the quality of people before expecting improvement in the quality of products and services.,The paired comparison results are based on the researchers’ own perception and do not consider interdependence among the criteria, which is a limitation of AHP. Analytic network process can be further explored to overcome the limitation. The proposed model has not been tested in a variety of real-world situations, which can constitute a scope for further work in the direction.,The proposed model framework and weightages evolved using AHP can provide a universally acceptable quality award model framework. The companies can adopt it with or without modifications to address their contextual adaptation. It can possibly become a standard model framework globally. This model does not capture the measurement of the softer aspects that impact the people quality. As people play an important role in the success of the implementation of any practice, hence measurement of people quality is another important aspect that can be further studied and researched.,This comparative study & analysis of National Quality Award/Business Excellence Models using AHP is presented for the first time. The authors have not come across any such studies in their literature review. This paper is an original conceptualization of the application of the AHP on the various Quality Award model parameters, and it has been submitted exclusively to JAMR for publishing.

[1]  Roger G. Schroeder,et al.  A FRAMEWORK FOR QUALITY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH AND AN ASSOCIATED MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENT , 1994 .

[2]  Vince Thomson,et al.  A review of research on cost of quality models and best practices , 2006 .

[3]  V. M. Rao Tummala,et al.  Strategic Quality Management, Malcolm Baldrige and European Quality Awards and ISO 9000 Certification: Core Concepts and Comparative Analysis , 1996 .

[4]  Subhash Kakkar,et al.  Recommending a TQM model for Indian organizations , 2007 .

[5]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[6]  George P. Laszlo Quality awards ‐ recognition or model? , 1996 .

[7]  K. Tan A comparative study of 16 national quality awards , 2002 .

[8]  D. Tripathi,et al.  Relationship between TQM and TPM implementation factors and business performance of manufacturing industry in Indian context , 2005 .

[9]  Daniel Carnerud,et al.  25 years of quality management research – outlines and trends , 2018 .

[10]  Jeffery S. Smith,et al.  A quality system’s impact on the service experience , 2017 .

[11]  Roberto Filippini,et al.  TQM impact on quality conformance and customer satisfaction: A causal model , 1998 .

[12]  L. J. Porter,et al.  Identification of the Critical Factors of TQM , 1996 .

[13]  Sang M. Lee,et al.  Impact of Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Criteria on organizational quality performance , 2003 .

[14]  M. Carvalho,et al.  Quality and supply chain management: integration challenges and impacts , 2016 .

[15]  Jayant V. Saraph,et al.  An Instrument for Measuring the Critical Factors of Quality Management , 1989 .

[16]  Tito Conti,et al.  A history and review of the European Quality Award Model , 2007 .

[17]  Angappa Gunasekaran,et al.  Impact of quality management systems on firm performance , 2018 .

[18]  V. Mavroidis,et al.  A comparative analysis and review of national quality awards in Europe , 2007 .

[19]  Darshak A. Desai,et al.  Critical review and analysis of measuring the success of Six Sigma implementation in manufacturing sector , 2018, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management.

[20]  George A. Bohoris,et al.  A comparative assessment of some major quality awards , 1995 .

[21]  Kathryn M. Zuckweiler,et al.  Modernization of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award , 2006 .

[22]  Amos Notea,et al.  A hierarchical model for quality management systems in global organizations , 2018, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management.

[23]  Mehran C. Ferdowsian Total business excellence – a new management model for operationalizing excellence , 2016 .

[24]  S. S. Rao,et al.  A Framework for International Quality Management Research: Development and Validation of a Measurement Instrument , 1999 .

[25]  James R. Evans,et al.  An empirical investigation of the Baldrige framework using applicant scoring data , 2018, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management.

[26]  Anjali Awasthi,et al.  Assessing relationship between quality management systems and business performance and its mediators , 2018, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management.

[27]  S. Wongrassamee,et al.  Performance measurement tools: the Balanced Scorecard and the EFQM Excellence Model , 2003 .

[28]  Jaime Pérez Martín-Gaitero,et al.  The relationship between EFQM levels of excellence and CSR development , 2018, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management.

[29]  John C. Anderson,et al.  A Path Analytic Model of a Theory of Quality Management Underlying the Deming Management Method: Preliminary Empirical Findings* , 1995 .

[30]  Balvir Talwar,et al.  Comparative study of framework, criteria and criterion weighting of excellence models , 2011 .

[31]  Balvir Talwar,et al.  Business excellence models and the path ahead , 2011 .

[32]  Kanwal Nasim,et al.  Role of internal and external organizational factors in TQM implementation , 2018 .

[33]  Abby Ghobadian,et al.  Characteristics, benefits and shortcomings of four major quality awards , 1996 .

[34]  Hiroshi Osada,et al.  Self‐evaluation model for TQM activity , 2000 .

[35]  Hsien H. Khoo,et al.  Indian society, total quality and the Rajiv Gandhi National Quality Award , 2002 .