Chapter 1
Differing Perspectives on Quality
S. Thomas Foster, Jr.
Boise State University
Slides Prepared by
Bruce R. Barringer
University of Central Florida
©2001 Prentice-Hall
Chapter Overview
Slide 1 of 2
• Recognizing Different Perspectives
on Quality
• What is Quality?
• Differing Perspectives on Quality
• Is Quality Management Its Own
Functional Discipline?
• The Three Spheres of Quality
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-2
Chapter Overview
Slide 2 of 2
• Other Perspectives on Quality
• Arriving at a Common
Understanding of Quality using a
Contingency Perspective of Quality
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-3
The reasons perceptions differ is
1. Backgrounds
2. Tastes and preferences
3. Attitudes and feelings
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-4
Recognizing Different Perspectives on
Quality
Slide 1 of 3
• Different Perspectives on Quality
– There are many different definitions and
dimensions of quality.
– For the present, you should view quality
as a measure of goodness that is inherent
to a product or service.
– Employees working for the same firm
often view quality differently as
illustrated in the next slide.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-5
Recognizing Different Perspectives on
Quality
Slide 2 of 3
Different View of Quality that can Exist in the
Same Firm
Engineering
A product
engineer might
associate
quality with
product design
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Marketing
A marketing
executive
might
associate
quality with
quick design
time
Accounting
An accountant
might
associate
quality with
low product
cost
Transparency 1-6
Recognizing Different Perspectives on
Quality
Slide 3 of 3
• As Illustrated in the Proceeding
Slide, Perceptions on Quality Can
Vary
– In order to communicate effectively
about quality, managers need to
recognize that differences in
perceptions of quality exist.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-7
Recognizing Different Perspectives
on Quality
•
•
•
•
Page 4
A Closer look at Quality 1.1
Which are Better, CDs or LPs?
What is clear is that the meaning of quality
varies drastically from person to person.
• It is left to each of us to decide.
• Which do we like best?
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-8
Recognizing Different Perspectives
on Quality
• Perceptions affect every aspect of our world –
including the business world.
• Managers need to recognize that differences in
perceptions of quality exist.
• Many managers have strong opinions about what
quality is.
• These opinions can be variance with the beliefs of
the majority of their customers.
• This may hurt the competitiveness.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-9
Product Quality Dimensions
(David Garvin) Slide 1 of 2
1. Transcendent Definition
– Quality is something that is intuitively understood
but nearly impossible to communicate such as
beauty or love.
2. Product-Based Definition
– Quality is found in the components and attributes
of a product.
3. User-Based Definition
– If the customer is satisfied, the product has
good quality.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-10
Product Quality Dimensions
Slide 2 of 2
4. Manufacturing-Based Definition
– If the product conforms to design
specifications, it has good quality.
5. Value-Based Definition
– If the product is perceived as providing
good value for the price, it has good
quality.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-11
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions
(David Garvin) Slide 1 of 4 ( Table 1.1)
1. Performance
2. Features
5. Durability
3. Reliability
6. Serviceability
4. Conformance
7. Aesthetics
8. Perceived Quality
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-12
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions
(David Garvin) Slide 2 of 4
1. Performance
– Refers to the efficiency with which a product
achieves its intended purpose.
2. Features
– Attributes of a product that supplement a
product’s basic performance.
3. Reliability
– The propensity for a product to perform
consistently over its useful design life.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-13
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions
Slide 3 of 4
4. Conformance ( specifications and
tolerance)
– Numerical dimensions for a product’s
performance, such as capacity, speed, size,
durability, color, or the like.( easily quantified
and difficult for a service to conform)
5. Durability
– The degree to which a product tolerates stress
or trauma without failing.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-14
Garvin’s Product Quality
Dimensions
6. Serviceability
– Ease of repair easily and cheaply. If service is rapid,
courteous, easy to acquire, and competent, then the
product have good serviceability.
7. Aesthetics
– Subjective sensory characteristics such as taste, feel,
sound, look, and smell. We measure quality as the
degree to which product attributes are matched to
consumer preferences.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-15
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions
Slide 4 of 4
8. Perceived Quality
– Quality is as the customer perceives it.
Customers imbue products and services with
their understanding of their goodness. This is
perceived quality.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-16
Quality Dimensions
• The Garvin list of quality dimensions,
although it is the most widely cited and
used, is not exhaustive.
• Carol King identified dimensions of
service quality such as responsiveness,
competence, access, courtesy,
communication, credibility, security, and
understanding.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-17
Service Quality
• Service quality is even more difficult to
define than product quality.
• This often results from wide variation
created by high customer involvement.
• The example is fountain pen and food
service.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-18
Service Quality Dimensions ( Table 1.2)
Slide 1 of 3 (
See Chapter 8 )
Parasuraman, Zeithamel, and Berry’s ( PZB)
Service Quality Dimensions
1. Tangibles
2. Service
Reliability
3. Responsiveness
4. Assurance
5. Empathy
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
6. Availability
7. Professionalism
8. Timeliness
9. Completeness
10. Pleasantness
Transparency 1-19
Service Quality Dimensions
Slide 2 of 3
1. Tangibles
– Include the physical appearance of the
service facility, the equipment, the
personnel, and the communication material.
2. Service Reliability
– Differs from product reliability in that it
relates to the ability of the service provider
to perform the promised service dependably
and accurately.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-20
Service Quality Dimensions
Slide 3 of 3
3. Responsiveness
– The willingness of the service provider to be
helpful and prompt in providing service.
4. Assurance
– The knowledge and courtesy of employees
and their ability to inspire trust and
confidence.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-21
Service Quality Dimensions
5. Empathy
– the customer desires caring, individual
attention paid to customers by the service
firm.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-22
Service Quality Dimensions
6. There are several other dimensions of
service quality ( please see above).
7. It should be noted that service design
strives to address these different service
dimensions simultaneously.
8. It is not sufficient for a service firm to
provide only empathy if responsiveness
and service reliability are inadequate.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-23
Why Does It Matter That Difference
Definitions of Quality Exist?
Understanding that definitions and
dimensions of quality exist allows
measures to be taken to provide a better
basis for communication and planning in
a firm.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-24
Why Does It Matter That Difference
Definitions of Quality Exist?
• By sharing a common definition of quality, each
department within a company can work toward a
common goal.
• Understanding the multiple dimensions of quality
desired by customers can lead to improved
product and service design.
• HP embarked on a “customer one-on-one”
program that emphasized customer interaction
with production workers.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-25
Differing Functional Perspectives on
Quality
• One of the important determinants of how we
perceive quality is the functional role we fulfill
organizationally.
• It is difficult to communicate with information
systems users and internal managers for several
reasons.
• User system requirements differ from analyst
system requirements.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-26
Differing Functional Perspectives on
Quality
• This difference in the nature of the work
performed by users and analyst causes
them to see quality issues differently.
• Differences between users and analysts are
only one instance of different perspectives
created by functional differences.
• Firm must constantly improve their
communication.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-27
Differing Functional Perspectives on
Quality
• Recognizing fundamental differences between
difference function view quality is an
important first step in understanding and
resolving problems associated with
mismatches of quality perceptions within
organization.
• Experience with cross-functional teams has
been difficult for many firms because of poor
communication skills among team members.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-28
Differing Functional Perspectives on
Quality
•
•
•
•
•
•
An Engineering Perspective
An Operations Perspective
A Strategic Management Perspective
A Marketing Perspective
A Financial Perspective
The Human Resources Perspective
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-29
Engineering Perspective on Quality
Slide 1 of 4
• Nature of Engineering Perspective
– Engineers are interested in applying mathematical
problem solving skills and models to the problems
of business and industry – Operational Research.
– R. A. Fisher expanded the field of mathematical
statistics to problems related to variation
experienced in the production area.
– Two of the major emphases in engineering are the
areas of product design and process design.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-30
Engineering Perspective on Quality
• Nature of Engineering Perspective
- More and more engineers are being
hired into services firms requiring a strong
technical component.
- Two of the major emphases in engineering
are the areas of product design and
process design.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-31
Engineering Perspective on Quality
Slide 2 of 4
• Product Design Engineering
– Involves all of those activities associated
with developing a product from concept
development to final design and
implementation.
– The next slide ( Figure 1.1) demonstrates the
six steps in the engineering life cycle for the
design of products.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-32
Engineering Perspective on Quality
Slide 3 of 4
Design Life Cycle ( Figure 1.1)
Idea
Generation
Prototype Iterations
Preliminary
Design
Prototype
Development
Final
Definition
Product
Design &
Evaluation
Implementation
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-33
Engineering Perspective on Quality
• Product Design Engineering
– Concurrent engineering refers to the
simultaneous performance of product and
process design activities.
– Engineers have also applied statistical thinking
to the problem of reliability.
– Reliability engineers use probability theory to
determine the rate of failure a product will
experience over its useful life.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-34
Engineering Perspective on Quality
Slide 4 of 4
• Related Concepts
– Life Testing
• It is a facet of reliability engineering that
concerns itself with determining whether a
product will fail under controlled conditions
during a specified life.
• If a component has a relatively high probability
for failure that will affect the overall function of
a product, then redundancy is applied so that
backup system can take over for the failed
primary system.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-35
Engineering Perspective on Quality
• Related Concepts
– Another engineering-related contribution to
quality management is the field of Statistical
Process Control (SPC).
– SPC is concerned with monitoring process
capability ( meet specification) and process stability
( only exhibit random or common variation).
– The control process as specified by Shewhart is
shown in Figure 1.2.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-36
Engineering Perspective on Quality
• Statistical Method from the Viewpoint of
Quality Control by Shewhart (Figure 1.2)
1. Specify Hypothesis
3. Inspect Data
for Consistency
with Hypothesis
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
2. Produce Data by
Performing an
Experiment
Transparency 1-37
Engineering Perspective on Quality
• In summary, the engineering view of quality
is technically oriented, focusing on statistics
and technical specification.
• Only recently have engineers begun to
interact with customers in meaningful ways.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-38
Operations Perspective on Quality
Slide 1 of 6
• Nature of Operations Perspective
– The operations management view of
quality is rooted in the engineering
approach.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-39
Operations Perspective on Quality
• Nature of Operations Perspective
– Like engineers, operations managers are
very concerned about product and process
design. However, rather than focusing on
only the technical aspects of these activities,
operations concentrates of the management
of these activities.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-40
Operations Perspective on Quality
• Nature of Operations Perspective
- Today, operations management has
developed into an integrative field,
combining concepts from engineering,
operations research, organizational theory,
organizational behavior, and strategic
management.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-41
Operations Perspective on Quality
Slide 2 of 6
• Systems View
– Operations management (OM) utilizes the
systems view that underlies modern quality
management thinking ( see Figure 1.3).
– The systems view involves the
understanding that product quality is the
result of the interactions of several
variables such as machines, labor,
procedures, planning, and management.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-42
Operations Perspective on Quality-- The
Systems View of Operation Management
Slide 3 of 6
The Conversion Systems Model of Operation Management ( Figure 1.3)
Planning
Inputs
Organizing
Conversion
Process
Outputs
Customer
Process
Control
Controlling
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Customer
Feedback
Transparency 1-43
Operations Perspective on Quality-- The
Systems View of Operation Management
• This systems view focuses on interactions
between the various components that
combine to produce a product or service.
• The systems view also focuses management
on the system as the cause of quality
problems.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-44
Operations Perspective on Quality
Slide 4 of 6
• Operations/Marketing Interface
– In recent years, a major advance in
operations management has been the
improved understanding of the
operations/marketing interface.
– The interface has resulted in an
increased focus on the customer.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-45
Operations Perspective on Quality
• Operations/Marketing Interface
- This has helped operations manager
externalize their views to the customer as well
by making the customers part of the design
process.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-46
Operations Perspective on Quality
Slide 5 of 6
• Strategic View of Operations Management
– Among the recent advances in operations
management has been a migration towards
a more strategic view.
– Ferdows and Demeyer linked this strategic
view of operations management to quality
management by proposing the model shown
in Figure 1.4.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-47
Operations Perspective on Quality--Strategic
View of Operations Management
An Operations Management Competence Model --The
Sand Cone Model ( Figure 1.4)
Cost
Efficiency
Speed
Dependability
Quality
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-48
Operations Perspective on Quality--Strategic
View of Operations Management
• This strategic view of OM to quality
management identified quality as base on
which lasting improvement in other
competitive dimensions established.
• This strategic view has also led to a better
understanding of the relationship between
quality and other competitive variables such
as profitability, cost leadership, and
operational success.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-49
Operations Perspective on Quality--Strategic
View of Operations Management
• One common complaint among critics of
operations management is that too much
credence is given to fads of the day rather
than honestly improving the fundamentals
of the business.
• OM has elevated quality management as a
key area of business study.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-50
Strategic Management Perspective on
Quality
Slide 1 of 3
• Nature of the Strategic Management Perspective
– When the concept of strategic planning first arose
practitioners treated quality-related strategic
planning as if it were a separate exercise from
firm-level strategic planning.
– However, we soon realized that quality
management, to become pervasive in a firm,
needed to be included in all of the firm’s business
practices, including strategic planning.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-51
Strategic Management Perspective on
Quality
• Company strategies are rooted in the
building blocks of mission and core values.
• An organization’s mission states why the
organization exists.
• The core values of an organization refers to
guiding operating principles that simplify
decision making in the organization.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-52
Strategic Management Perspective on
Quality
• Companies go to great effort to establish,
communicate, and reinforce a sense of mission and
values in an organization, because mission and
values strongly influence organizational culture.
• Organizational culture is often seen as a major
determinant to the successful implementation of
quality improvement.
• The quality movement has greatly influenced
strategy process in recent years.
• Figure 1.5 shows a generic strategic planning process
and its components.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-53
Strategic Management Perspective on
Quality Slide 2 of 3
A Generic Strategic Planning Process ( Figure 1.5)
Firm Mission
and Goals
External
Analysis
Strategic
Options
Internal
Analysis
Business Level
Strategy
Corporate Level
Strategy
Operational
Subplans
Organizational
Design
Conflict Politics
and Change
Org. Reward
Systems
Strategic Alignment
Between
Structure and Goals
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-54
Strategic Management Perspective on
Quality
Slide 3 of 3
• Goal of Strategic Quality Planning
– The ultimate goal of strategic quality
planning is to aid an organization to achieve
sustainable competitive advantage.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-55
Strategic Management Perspective on
Quality
• In many markets, like the auto industry, it is
becoming difficult to sustain a competitive
advantage based on quality alone.
• The quality/cost combination can be used as
an order winner.
• Madu and Kuei propose a strategy process
based on plan-do-check-act (see Figure 1.6).
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-56
Strategic Management Perspective on
Quality
• Page 15, Figure 1.6 A Plan-Do-CheckAct Approach to Strategic Quality
Planning
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-57
Strategic Management Perspective on
Quality
• As quality has become integral to
competitiveness, strategic planning for
quality has become more important.
• Research shows that quality is still the major
competitive concern of CEOs.
• Quality Highlight 1.1 (page 16) show how
General Electric has made quality a key
strategic imperative.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-58
Marketing Perspective on Quality
• In a trend known as relationship management ,
marketing has directed its attention toward
satisfying the customer and delivering value to
the customer.
• Studies show that the value of the loyal customer
is much greater than an individual transaction.
• If all customers are satisfied, sales increase
exponentially!
• This increases the importance of high levels of
customer service and after-sales support.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-59
Marketing Perspective on Quality
Slide 1 of 3
• Nature of Marketing Perspective
– Marketing efforts are often focused on
managing perceptions of quality.
– The primary tools for influencing
customer perceptions of quality are price
and advertising.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-60
Marketing Perspective on Quality
• The link between price and quality could be
significant if all products were priced based on
cost of materials and production only.
• The relationship between advertising and quality
is not as straightforward as one would hope.
• Marketing is also concerned about systems.
• The marketing system involves the interactions
between the producing organization, the
intermediary, and the final consumer ( see Figure
1.7).
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-61
Marketing Perspective on Quality
Slide 2 of 3
A Marketing System ( Figure 1.7)
Organization
Offering
Payment
Intermediary
Offering
Offering
Payment
Payment
Customer
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-62
Marketing Perspective on Quality
• Because of the relationship, it is often very
difficult for firms and organizations to agree
on who the customer is.
• Although it might always seem obvious who
the customer is to the casual observer, it is
not always clear to those who are involved
with the business.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-63
Marketing Perspective on Quality
Slide 3 of 3
• Focus on Service
– Another important contribution of the
marketing perspective has been the focus
on service.
– This focus is on service at the time of the
transaction and after-sales support.
– Customer service surveys are important
tools for assessing the multiple dimensions
of quality.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-64
Marketing Perspective on Quality
• The role of marketing in design has been to
bring the voice of the customer into the design
process.
• Customer service surveys are important tools
for assessing the multiple dimensions of
quality.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-65
Marketing Perspective on Quality
• The marketing perspective on quality is
unique because the customer is the focus of
marketing-related quality improvement.
• In trying to satisfy customer needs, marketing
often wants to develop specialized products for
different customers to perfectly satisfy
customer needs.
• This can make life more difficult for
producers.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-66
Financial Perspective on Quality
Slide 1 of 4
• Nature of the Financial Perspective
– One of the most commonly asked questions
about quality management is “will it pay us
financial benefits?”
– The Answer to this question is an
unqualified”maybe”.
– Management was pursuing quality
improvement as a means of reducing waste
and increasing profitability.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-67
Financial Perspective on Quality
• Nature of the Financial Perspective
- Implemented correctly, improved quality
reduce waster and can lead to reduce cost
and improved profitability.
- However, these returns tend to be long
term rather than short term.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-68
Financial Perspective on Quality
• Nature of the Financial Perspective
– W. Edwards Deming made the first
theoretical attempt to link quality
improvements to financial results through
the “Deming Value Chain.” ( see Figure 1.8)
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-69
Financial Perspective on Quality
Slide 2 of 4
The Deming Value Chain ( Figure 1.8)
Improve
Quality
Cost decrease
( see next slide)
Productivity
Improves
Capture
the
Market
Stay in
Business
Provide Jobs
and More Jobs
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-70
Financial Perspective on Quality--The
Deming Value Chain ( Figure 1.8)
- Deming linked quality improvement to
reduction of defects and improved
organizational performance.
- He also stressed quality as a way to increase
employment.
- Cost decrease because of less rework, fewer
mistakes, fewer delays, snags; better use of
machine-time and materials
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-71
Financial Perspective on Quality
• The goal of finance is to maximize return for a
given level of risk.
• Juran stated that “the language of
management is money.”
• One way to translate quality concerns is to
identify and measure the costs of quality.
• Trade-off and break-even analyses can be
performed using the various costs of quality.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-72
Financial Perspective on Quality
• The relationship between quality
improvement and financial success is
confounded by several intervening variables.
• Top management involvement that is limited
to lip service often results in great
expenditure, and great effort, but eventually
failure.
• The pursuit of quality does not safeguard a
company against bad management.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-73
Financial Perspective on Quality
• Another concept that affects financial
officers’ perceptions of quality
improvement is the law of diminishing
marginal returns.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-74
Financial Perspective on Quality
Slide 3 of 4
• Law of Diminishing Marginal Returns
– According to this law, there is a point at
which investments in quality improvement
will become uneconomical.
– The figure on the next slide ( Figure 1.9)
shows a quadratic economic quality level
model.
– We will resolution this issues for chapter 4.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-75
Financial Perspective on Quality
Slide 4 of 4
Basic Economic Quality Level Model ( Figure 1.9)
Cost
Minimum
Cost
Total Quality Costs = Sum of Losses and Costs
Losses due to
poor quality
Optimum Quality Level
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Costs of
Improving
Quality
Quality
Transparency 1-76
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-77
Financial Perspective on Quality
• According to this law, the pursuit of higher
levels of quality will result in higher
expenditures.
• To invest beyond the minimum cost level
will result in non-economic decisions.
• In summary, the financial perspective on
quality relies more on quantified,
measurable, result-oriented thinking.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-78
Human Resource Perspective on Quality
Slide 1 of 3
• Nature of Human Resource Perspective
– Understanding the human resource
perspective on quality is essential as it is
impossible to implement quality without
the commitment and action of employees.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-79
Human Resource Perspective on Quality
• Nature of Human Resource Perspective
- Although leadership is an important
antecedent to successful quality efforts, the
involvement and participation of employees
is just as key.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-80
Human Resource Perspective on Quality
Slide 2 of 3
• Related Concepts
– Employee Empowerment
• Empowering employees involves moving
decision making to the lowest level in the
organization.
• The topic of empowerment is closely related
to Organizational Design.
• Quality management flourishes where the
workers’ and the company’s needs are closely
aligned.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-81
Human Resource Perspective on Quality
• Related Concepts
– Job Analysis
• Involves collecting detailed information
about a particular job.
• The information is used to define a job
description that is used in setting pay levels.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-82
Human Resource Perspective on Quality
• Training allows firms to standardize the
approaches their employees use in solving
unstructured problems.
• Vertical deployment of quality management – top
manager and low-ranking employees within a
department will use similar processes for
solving problems.
• Horizontal deployment of quality management –
Different departments and units within a firm
will use similar approaches to solving problems,
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-83
Human Resource Perspective on Quality
Slide 3 of 3
• Related Concepts (continued)
– 360-Degree Evaluation
• Human resources departments typically
administer and oversee performance
appraisal and evaluation.
• Although some critics , such as Deming ,
have found this system ineffective ,many
companies believe performance evaluations
are a key method for motivating employees.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-84
Human Resource Perspective on Quality
• Related Concepts (continued)
– 360-Degree Evaluation
• A performance measurement system in
which an employee’s peers, supervisors, and
subordinates are involved in evaluating the
worker’s performance.
• This approach seems to be effective in
improving teaching performance.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-85
Human Resource Perspective on Quality
• Related Concepts (continued)
– Total Quality Human Resource Management
(TQHRM)
• Table 1.3 shows differences between
traditional HR and TQHRM.
• TQHRM involves many of the concepts of
quality management to provide a more
supportive and empowered environment.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-86
Human Resource Perspective on Quality
• Table 1.3 HRM versus TQHRM
Traditional HRM TQHRM
Process
Characteristics
Unilateral role
Centralization
Pull
Administrative
Consulting role
Decentralization
Release
Developmental
Content
Characteristics
Nomothetic
Compartmentalized
Worker-oriented
Performance measures
Job-based
Pluralistic
Holistic
System-oriented
Satisfaction measures
Person-based
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-87
Is quality management its own
functional discipline?
• Wall Street Journal reveal job openings for
quality managers and engineers.
• The role of these departments and specialists
are changing in the new century of quality.
• Historically, the quality management
department performed a policing function in
the firm.
• Quality managers will responsible for quality
conformance and spent their time ferreting out
causes of defects.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-88
Is quality management its own
functional discipline?
• In the late 1950s, Armand Feigenbaum and
others showed the limitations of this approach.
• The movement began toward the total
involvement of employees spawning total
quality management (TQM).
• With total involvement, the role of the quality
department moved from a technical,
inspection role to a supportive training and
coaching role.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-89
Is quality management its own
functional discipline?
• As a manager or a quality specialist, you will
be ask to either arrange or perform qualityrelated training.
• The ability to conduct effective training and to
facilitate teams are important tools for the
quality professional.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-90
Is quality management its own
functional discipline?
• Is quality management its own discipline? Yes
and no.
• Consultants, quality engineers, trainers,
coaches, and managers are still needed.
• A strong knowledge of quality is best coupled
with technical experts in other areas such as
materials management, finance, accounting,
operations management, human resources
management, strategy, industrial engineering,
or myriad other disciplines.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-91
The Three Spheres of Quality
• One way to conceptualize the field of quality
management is known as three spheres of
quality.
• These spheres are quality control, quality
assurance, and quality management, and their
functions overlap as seen in Figure 1.10.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-92
The Three Spheres of Quality
Slide 1 of 4 (
Figure 1.10)
Quality
Management
Quality
Assurance
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Quality
Control
Transparency 1-93
The Three Spheres of Quality
Slide 2 of 4
• Quality Control
– The control process is based on the scientific methods.
– Includes phases of analysis, relation, and
generalization.
– Activities relating to quality control include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Monitoring process capability and stability
Measuring process performance
Reducing process variability
Optimizing processes to nominal measures
Performing acceptance sampling
Developing and maintaining control charts
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-94
The Three Spheres of Quality
Slide 3 of 4
• Quality Assurance
– Refers to activities associated with
guaranteeing the quality of a product or
service.
– These activities are design-related.
– Quality control is reactive rather than
proactive by detecting quality problems after
they occur.
– The best way to assure quality is in the design
of product, service, and processes.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-95
The Three Spheres of Quality
• Quality Assurance
- Quality assurance activities include tasks
such as:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Failure mode and effects analysis
Concurrent engineering
Experimental Design
Process improvements
Design team formation and management
Off-line experimentation
Reliability/durability product testing
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-96
The Three Spheres of Quality
Slide 4 of 4
• Quality Management
– The management processes that overarch and
tie together the control and assurance activities
make up quality management.
– Quality Highlight 1.2 ( see page 24) is an
example of a company with effective quality
management.
– Quality is the responsibility of all management,
not just quality managers.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-97
The Three Spheres of Quality
• Quality Management
- For this reason, a variety of managers,
supervisors, and employees are involved
in quality management activities such as
next slide.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-98
The Three Spheres of Quality
• Activities of Quality Management
- Planning for quality improvement
- Creating a quality organizational culture
- Providing leadership and support
- Providing training and retraining
- Designing an organizational system that
reinforces quality ideals
- Providing employee recognition
- Facilitating organizational communication
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-99
Other Perspectives on Quality
Slide 1 of 2
• The Value-Added Perspective on Quality
– A customer-based perspective on quality
that is utilized by services, manufacturing,
and public sector organizations involves the
concept of value.
– Involves a subjective assessment of the
efficacy of every step of the process for the
customer.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-100
Other Perspectives on Quality
• The Value-Added Perspective on Quality
- A value-added activity can be pinpointed by
asking, “would this activity matter to the
customer?”
- A value-added activity will have economic
value to the customer.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-101
Other Perspectives on Quality
Slide 2 of 2
• Cultural Perspectives on Quality
– International marketers have long noted
that there are differences in tastes and
preferences between cultures and nations.
– As a result, approaches to quality
improvement may differ across culture.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-102
Other Perspectives on Quality
• Cultural Perspectives on Quality
– It is not so obvious that approaches to
quality improvement may differ according
to culture.
– Cultures that are more class-conscious or
command-and-control oriented might have
trouble delegating decision making to lower
levels of employees.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-103
Contingency Approach to Quality
• Arriving at a Common Understanding of
Quality Using a Contingency Approach
– Contingency theory presupposes that there
is no theory or method for operating a
business that can be applied in all
situations.
– As a result, a coherent quality strategy will
need to address key environmental
variables.
© 2001 Prentice-Hall
Transparency 1-104