Comparative study of framework, criteria and criterion weighting of excellence models

Summary Purpose – This paper seeks to present a comparative study of framework, criteria and criterion weighting of 20 Excellence Models/National Quality Awards (EM/NQA), to identify their common features, contradictions and to propose suggestions for development and review of EM/NQA. It also aims to provide some clues to attain sustenance of business results. Design/methodology/approach – This study is based on a literature review using the internet and research databases (Emerald and EBSCO). Nine generic criteria are identified and their relative importance within each model is computed based on scores given to their respective contents in the criteria/sub-criteria of each EM/NQA. The average relative importance of nine criteria, discussions with experts and the author’s own experience helped to visualise the emerging scenario and suggest improvements. Findings – EM/NQA frameworks have different shapes. Most EM/NQA start with the criterion ‘‘Leadership’’ and end with ‘‘Results’’. Ancient wisdom emphasises that the ultimate goal of business is the wellbeing of society. Although the criteria of EM/NQA are similar, the criterion weighting changes due to external environment and cultural factors. The study classifies nine criteria into core criteria, i.e. the need for survival, internal environment criteria, i.e. differentiators, and goodwill criteria, i.e. ensuring sustainability. The focus on goodwill criteria needs to be enhanced to ensure sustainable business growth. Research limitations/implications – This study is an attempt to integrate the common learning/contradictions of EM/NQA and provide clues to achieving sustainability. Many EM/NQA custodian websites have limited information in the public domain. A periodic review of models made this study difficult. Future research may focus on studying the impact of criteria weighting in different countries/economic environments to enhance the effectiveness of excellence models. Practical implications – The study may help the GEM council, custodians and managers to review EM/NQA and develop strategies for sustainable results. Originality/value – This paper is based on a literature review, the author’s own experience, and interaction with experts. It provides an analysis of 20 EM/NQAs, highlights the need for a universally acceptable model, and suggests emerging dimensions of excellence.

[1]  Mohamed Djerdjouri National quality and business excellence awards in a developing country: the Fiji National Quality Award , 2004 .

[2]  Ismail Sila,et al.  An investigation of the total quality management survey based research published between 1989 and 2000: A literature review , 2002 .

[3]  Jens J. Dahlgaard,et al.  In Search of Excellence - Past, Present and Future , 2006 .

[4]  George P. Laszlo US and Canadian national quality awards: increased emphasis on business results , 1997 .

[5]  Philippe Hermel,et al.  The new faces of total quality in Europe and the US , 1997 .

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

[7]  P. A. Cauchick Miguel,et al.  Comparing the Brazilian national quality award with some of the major prizes , 2001 .

[8]  K. Tan,et al.  A comparative study of nine national quality awards , 1998 .

[9]  Juan Ramis‐Pujol,et al.  An evolution of excellence: some main trends , 2003 .

[10]  F. F. Reichheld,et al.  Zero defections: quality comes to services. , 1990, Harvard business review.

[11]  Gopal K. Kanji,et al.  Forces of excellence in Kanji’s Business Excellence Model , 2001 .

[12]  Hsien Hui Khoo,et al.  Factors affecting the development of national quality awards , 2003 .

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

[14]  M. Zairi,et al.  Sustaining and transferring excellence , 2002 .

[15]  R. H. Waterman,et al.  In search of excellence : lessons from America's best-run companies , 1983 .

[16]  David N. Halsall,et al.  Comparison of the 14 deadly diseases and the business excellence model , 2002 .

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

[18]  D. Garvin Competing on the Eight Dimensions of Quality , 1987 .

[19]  日本科学技術連盟 The deming prize , 1960 .

[20]  Ed Weymes Organizations which make a difference: a philosophical argument for the “people focused organization” , 2005 .

[21]  Balvir Talwar,et al.  Evolution of “Universal Business Excellence Model” incorporating Vedic philosophy , 2007 .

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

[23]  Kozo Koura,et al.  Comparing the UBEM Vedic matrix and the TQM elements deployment model using principal component analysis , 2008 .

[24]  Valeerat Sakornpant. Country paper : Thailand. , 1999 .

[25]  H. Eriksson Organisational value of participating in a quality award process: a Swedish study , 2004 .