Professional Documents
Culture Documents
FindBestStuff.com
Google Search
Web
FindBestStuff
com
Coffee
Cooking Tips
Recipes & Food and Drink
Wine & Spirits
Elder Care
Babies & Toddler
Pregnancy
Acne
Aerobics & Cardio
Alternative Medicine
Beauty Tips
Depression
Diabetes
Exercise & Fitness
Hair Loss
Medicine
Meditation
Muscle Building & Bodybuilding
Nutrition
Nutritional Supplements
Weight Loss
Yoga
Martial Arts
Finding Happiness
Inspirational
Breast Cancer
Mesothelioma & Cancer
Fitness Equipment
Nutritional Supplements
Weight Loss
Credit
Currency Trading
Debt Consolidation
Debt Relief
Loan
Insurance
Investing
Mortgage Refinance
Personal Finance
Real Estate
Taxes
Stocks & Mutual Fund
Structured Settlements
Leases & Leasing
Wealth Building
Home Security
Affiliate Revenue
Blogging, RSS & Feeds
Domain Name
E-Book
E-commerce
Email Marketing
Ezine Marketing
Ezine Publishing
Forums & Boards
Internet Marketing
Online Auction
Search Engine Optimization
Spam Blocking
Streaming Audio & Online
Music
Traffic Building
Video Streaming
Web Design
Web Development
Web Hosting
Web Site Promotion
Broadband Internet
VOIP
Computer Hardware
Data Recovery & Backup
Internet Security
Software
Copyright 2007
FindBestStuff
Advertising
Branding
Business Management
Business Ethics
Careers, Jobs & Employment
Customer Service
Marketing
Networking
Network Marketing
Pay-Per-Click Advertising
Presentation
Public Relations
Sales
Sales Management
Sales Telemarketing
Sales Training
Small Business
Strategic Planning
Entrepreneur
Negotiation Tips
Team Building
Top Quick Tips
Book Marketing
Leadership
Positive Attitude Tips
Goal Setting
Innovation
Success
Time Management
Public Speaking
Get Organized - Organization
Book Reviews
College & University
Psychology
Science Articles
Religion
Personal Technology
Humanities
Language
Philosophy
Poetry
Book Reviews
Medicine
Coaching
Creativity
Dealing with Grief & Loss
Motivation
Spirituality
Stress Management
Article Writing
Writing
Political
Copywriting
Parenting
Divorce
Shannon Macey
Submitted
in partial fulfhent of the requirements
for the degree of
DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY
August, 2001
National Library
Bibliothque nationale
du Canada
Acquisitions and
Bibfiographic Services
Acquisitions et
senrices bibliographiques
Table Of Contents
List of Abbreviations
1.0 Introduction
xi
~
..........................~.......o...~....~....ooo..~~~.e............................1...~e...o......
Performance Management
...................................................................................................... .......1
..
.
.
.
. ............................................. 5
.............................,
.
.
....................................... ..........7
Case Study Organisation (CSO)...............................,
.
................................................ . 9
Ornanisation o f the Thesis .............................................. ....................................
.. .. 1 0
Performance Management in R&D
2.1
............................*................~o.....sm..........*.~*...........*12........~...
Introduction .............................................................................................................. . . . 12
2.2
Performance Management
..............12
2.2.1
2.2.2
23
...........................................................................................-46
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.3.3
46
51
.......................
.
.
............................................................... 52
Objectives of Proposed Researcb ................................................................................................
53
Motivation for Proposed Research
.................................5
..............................
.................................................................................................54
Development of the OPIM ......................... ..... .............w........9.9........ ..........................54
Introduction
3.2.1
54
3.2.2
57
3.2.3
3.2.4
3.2.5
33
Cbapter Summary
.......................................................................................................................
76
..................................................................................................................................
77
Self-Assessment at the Case Study Organisation .......................................................................
77
Introduction
4.1
4.2
4.2.1
Planning ................................................................................................................................ 78
4.2.2
Assessrnent............................................................................................................................ 83
4.2.3
4.2.4
Outcomes .............................................................................................................................. 90
4.2.5
Introduction
..................................................................................................................................
96
......................
.
.
......................96
......................
.
.
...................................................-103
.............................117
5.5
Chapter Summary
........................................................................
119
.........................................120
........................................................................................ 121
Modifying the OPIM for Use in an R&D Environment ..........................
.
.
.........................122
6.2
63
6.3.1
Framework ..........................................................................................................................
123
6.3.2
Criteria ................................................................................................................................
125
6.3.3
6.3.4
...................................................................................................132
Scope for Further Research .................................................................. ...............................134
Contributions of the Research
.............................................................................................1 4 5
APPENDIX B .
Modified OPIM for R&D ..................-..... .................................................................160
APPENDIX C .
Triiiium Results .......................,.......
...............................................................169
APPENDIX D - Cornparison of Performance Management Mode1 Criteria ......................................170
APPENDIX E - Approach. Deployment and Results Adapted from the EQA ...................................175
APPENDlX A .
OPIM Questionnaire
List of Tables
Table 2-1:Channeristics of Performance Management Models.......................................-21
Table 2-2:Strengths and Weaknesses of Performuice Management Models ......................22
Table 2-3: A Cornparison of the S c o ~ Schernes
g
from the Quairy A w d .....................24
............................................................ -31
Table 2-5:Evaluation and Scoring Methods of the Performance Management Models .......33
Table 2-6: Description of Evaluation EIements Used in the EQA .....................................34
Table 2-7: Scoring Guidelines from the MBNQA ...........................................................-35
Table 2-8:Sample Score Calculation for MBNQA ..........................................................
36
Table 2-4:Selection of Self-AssessrnentMethod
. .
Table 5-7: Applying the BaLnced Scoreard to the Performance Measurtment Syscem of the
Cs0..................................................................................................................... 110
Table 5-8: Performance Mea~uresAccording to QuiLry, TirrP, Cos, and Flexibility ........111
Table 5-9: Performance Arev Addresseci by the OPIM.................................................113
Table 5-10: Suggested Performance Measures to Add Relating to Resources ...................115
Table 5-11: Suggested Pedomiance Meyures to Add Relating to Society........................ 116
Table 5- 12: Suggested Perfonnuice Mevures to Add Relathg to Employees .................. 116
Table 5- 13: Characteristics of Perfoxmance Measurement Methods................................. 117
Table 6-1: Chamteristics of QwLty Management Addressing Issues in R8rD ................. 123
Table 6-2: Strategy Criteria Gom the OPIM .................................................................127
Table 6-3:Moditied Strategy Criteria fiom the OPIM ...................................................128
Table 6-4: The Categories of the Modif1ed OPIM Addressing the R&D Issues ................ 129
Table 6-5: Scoring Sdieme for the Modifieci OPIM ................................................... 130
Table 6 4 Modifieci OPIM Addressing R&D Problems .................................................131
List of Figines
..................................................1
...
List of Abbreviations
CS0 - Case Study Organisation
VP - Vice President
QA Qdity Asnirance
PFM - Preference Function M o d e b g
Acknowledgements
Karapevovic, for invithg me to take part
in this research project and for all the guidance and support that he provideci throughout the
process. His knowledge of and experience in rhis field proved Livduable and was a great
1would like to thank m y supervisor, Dr. St&v
source of inspiration.
1wish to give thanks to the case study oqpkation for pamcipating in this project and for a i l
the CO-opemion1received whik performing my research there. Without its fwcial
support, this project would not have been possible. I would specifidy like to thank b o t -
Mark DeKoning and Max Jaffer for their involvement and advice. Their support was of
great benefit to the successful completion of this project.
1would Idce to thank Dr. John Blake for his valuable feedbadc and tirne spent reviewing rhis
work and Dr. Eldon Gunn for his encouragement and support. Thanlu to both for serving
as memben of m y guiding comminee. Thank
reviewuig some of the w o i in the thesis and for travelling to Halifax for my defence.
Thanks also to Dr. Car1Sandblom for seming as a member of my guidance cornmittee.
Thanks also to the Department of Industrial Engineering at Dalhousie University for
providing funding as well as the opportunity to serve as a teaching assistant. Thanks to ail of
the Industrial Engineering deparunent staff, especially to Cindi Slaunwhite and Linda
Seamone for their cheer and fnendship.
1would like to express my sincerest gratitude to Greg Delbndge for his inexhawible
The OPIM was developed specifically for the case study organisation (CSO) but can be
easdy adapted to be used by other organisations. A comparry c m employ this model to
evaluate its current quality management system against the minimum requirernents in the
model and rhen apply the opportunities for improvement as a guide for continuous
improvement. Self-assessrnent against this model wili be beneficial in enhancing the
organisation's quality auditing program as well as its redt-based perfoxmance measurement
system.
1.0 Introduction
1.1
Performance Management
manner possible. Effectiveness and effiaency constitute the two fundamend dimensions of
performance (Neely et al, 1995). Effectiveness refers to the exrent to wbich goais are met,
while efficiency is a m m of how economidly the h ' s resouras are udised to redise
these goals. Organtations musr continually improve their processes and the use of th&
resources to realise improved o v e d performance. Perfoxmance management is the overali
process of managing aa organisation's effiaencyuid effectiveness in the adiievernent of its
corporate and funaional strategies and objectives.
Performance management is a dosed loop process. Figure 1-1 illustrates this d e .
Set Goais and Objectives
............................
Audit .....................
Self-Assessrnent
Yes
undesirable situation (ISO 9000: 2000). Preventive actions are those taken to elMinate the
cause of a potential nonconformiry or other potentially undesirable situation (ISO9000:
2000).
Improved characteristics can be achieved through Kaizen or Quantum Leaps. Kaizen means
Quaiify = k d o m h m deficiencies
( 0 )
ELIMINATE
PROBLEMS
GET BETTER
F e ,once a goal or objective is reaiised, new goals should be set to continue the cycle.
Both performance measurement and improvernent are essenria if an organisation wishes to
sirndtaneous~achieve its objectives and maintain its cornpetitive edge.
MANAGEMENT
PLAN
ACT
+
v
DO
IMPROVEMENT
MEASUREMENT
L
The
There are xveral wys in which an organisation can mevure its performance and plan for
improvement. One such method is to compare its puformance t o a given reference model.
for sUai;ty management. Others such as National QuaLty A w d often referred to ar;
business excellence models (BEM) have a broader focus and uy to encompass all aspects of
an organisation. All of these models address the main aspects of performance management:
performance measurernent and performance improvement.
1.1.1.1
nanduds that provide the minimum requkements for an organisation's quality management
system. The core standard of the series, ISO 9001, addresses the creation and
implementation of a quaiity policy, the standardisation of procedures, the identification and
elimination of defects, cor-ve
quality management systea The standard is process onenteci, anu at customer satisfaction
asniance, and focuses an organisation's attention on the effectiveness of its quaiiy
management sysrem. It was conceived as a set of essential requirements for building a
qualiy management synem that fits the company's ne& in relation to its products, services
and customers.
1.1.1 -2 National Quaiity Awards
Q d y awards are models for business excellence. These models consist of viteria to which
organisations can compare their activities and results. They have been developed based on
the p ~ a p l e of
s Total QwLty Management FQM).TQM is a quality-oried approach
chat consisu of applymg quality management techniques t h r e o u t the organisation. The
e v h t i o n criteria provide puideluies to organisations to measure their progress in these
efforts.
1.1.1.3
Bo& the ISO 9000 series and the quality mat& have been adopted by orgaaisations to
measure and improve perfomiuice. Many oqpisations wonder whether one mode1 is
better than another, and whether the choice of model should depend on the type of
organisation. Many authors have mggesteci that both mo&
are important to an
organisation (van der W d e et ai, 2000; Dale, 1999; Karapetrovic and Wdborn, 2lB). The
ISO 9001 standard is seen as providing the minimum reS;rements for a &ty
management
syaem or the basics to stan the joumey towards orgauisationalexceilence. The quality
awardr, provide guidance for the n a sep on this joumq..
Combining these modeis would provide an integrared set of criteria that codd help an
organisation transition smooddy from its quaity management system t o w d the use of the
business exceilence modek for improvernent. There are however, many differences between
these models and as a resuh, they cannot simpiy be cur and pasteci together (Dale, 1999).
1.1.2
Performance Measwernent
process is used to interpret and descnbe quantitativelythe criteria used to mesure the
effectiveness of the organisation.
As noted previously, performance measurement can be defmed in terms of the rwo
fundamental dimensions of performance. Performance measurement is thus the process of
quanufyuig the efficiency and effectiveness of an action (Neely et al, 1995). ISO 9000
(2000) defmes effciency as the relationship bmeen results achieved and resources used and
effecriveness as the extent to which planned aaivities are realised and planned results
acheved
today: self-
Quaity au& are used to measure the effectveness of an organisation's quahqr system
against the selected ISO 9000 model. Audits do not however, meanire the efiaency of the
The audits used with ISO 9000 series registration look for noncornpliance and assess
whether the quJiry mern and its undeliying procedures are king followed. In other words,
+ty
audits ask 'if the organisation meeu the deria", wheeas self-assessrnena ask 'how,
and how well, does the organisation meet the criteria".
1.1.2.3 Result-based performance measurement
Result-based performance measurernent is another method organisations use ro meanire the
effuency and effectiveness of their processes. This involves the collection of information
and data to analyse process performance uid/or input and output characteristics (ISO 9000:
2000). To do this, companies design or adopt performance measures that ~ r o v i &valuable
information about the current performance lwels of organisational activities. Performance
measwes are meuics used to quanafv performance.
The set of performance measures used by an organisation fomis the performance
measurement system. Firms m m carefully select these m e m e s to provide a view of key
performance areas to control and improve performance lwels. It is the seleaion of this set
of meanires that has proved chailenging.
1.2
Research and development (R&D) is an area in which there is much variability and
uncenainty. The ability to innitute systematic decision-making continuous improvement,
experimentation with new ideas, and tearnwork are cntical elements of the TQM philosophy
that have been found to be important for a successful RBrD work environment (Gamin,
1993, Kiella and Golhar, 1997). This area of research however has been found to be weak
as, for the most part, the lirerature deals with the manufamiring and service sectors.
product
The emergence of new technology gready impacts the R8d) environment. R%D mus
view technology and scientific advances as tools to assin the organisation in meeting
company goals (McLaughhn, 1995).
Its responsiveness to and influence on changing customer needs musr drive the R8rD
organisation.
The company used as a case study (case mi+ organisation) for the research in this thesis is
very mu& f a e d on its research and development efforts to maintain its competirive
position in the marketplace. Many of the issues lined above apply to the R&D departments
in this organisation. The n a section provides an overview of the case study organisation.
1.3
The companyused for this work, which we wiU caiI the case study organisation (CSO)is a
Cinadian hrgh technology company which desigm, manufactures and markets eleamnic
components, p@
specialised applications.
The organisation has rwo faciliaes with total plant space of 70,000square feet, encompassing
all aspects of integrated circuit development, muiufacnviag and marketing. Revenue
exceeds f 107 million per year. The CS0 employs ahost 500 people.
The company bas recendy reorganised into rhree divisions. The divisions are based on
produa families and each indu&s marketin&sales, R&D, and manufacturing functions.
The CSO recognises that in today's fast-changing economy; initiative and ingenuity are
essenal elements of success. In 2000, it renewed its focus on RSrD, ramping up spending
to approximately 17 percent of d e s .
The organisation is dedicated to quality. To ennue hi& quality produas and services, the
organisation's Quality Program is registered to ISO-9001-94 and is constantiy evaluated
through interna and extemal audits. The quai~tysystem is currendy being updated to meet
the ISO 900 1: 2000 standard for quality management.
W
e the quality synem is being rnaitained in accordance with the ISO 9001-94 standard,
the CS0 is aware that these efforts are no longer adequate to maintain their cornpetitive
advantage. The company needs to continue its quality journey and expand its continuous
improvement efforts. Several National Quality A
1.4
It dso indudes an o v e ~ e w
of the motivation for and objectives of the research in this
thesis.
Chapter Three describes the development of an integrated model for performance
management based on the ISO 9001: 2000 Standard for QwLty Management and severai
business exceilence models.
Chapter Four subsequendy reports on a pilot self-assessrnent performed in a business
division at the case study organisation. This self-assessment was conducteci against the
proposed model for performance management.
Chapter Five compares diree me&& of perfomance measurement used by the CSO.
These include the self-assessment, the p h t y audithg prognm, and the result-based
R&D environment.
Chapter Seven condudes the thesis with a nimmary of r e d a and convibutions of the work.
The scope for htrther research is also discussed.
Introduction
A nwqr of existing literature has been conducted to review the foliowing aspects of
performance management:
the main elemenu of performance management iaduding mewrement and
improvemenr;
existing frarneworks and modeis for organisationai performance management;
the integdon of the minimum requirements for a quality management synem with die
cntexia frorn the more holinic national @ty
awards;
Performance Management
Success of an organisation's business depends on its ability to set svafegy and objectives and
then plan for the resources and activities necessary to achieve them To ensure that these
pluuied activities acnially occur and lead to the fulfhent of the set objectives, the
organisation needs to msnage and improve its performance. Perfomiance management is
"the process by which the Company manages its performance in line wirh irs corponte and
functional strategies and objectivesn (Bititci et al., 1997). Performance management is
essentiai to the successful operation of the enterprise. It has become a key business process.
The performance management process is a dosed loop deployment and feedback ryaem
that sans with the company's vision, broken down into business objectives and strategic
goals. Action plans are created based on the achievement of these goals and objectives. To
monitor the progress towuds the accompiishment of these goals and objectives,
performance measurement is used to collect information, indicating where the nirrent
performance gaps exist. This information is then fed into the performance improvement
process, which narrows the perfomunce gaps and then feeds information back into the
process. In SV,
This section outlines the frameworks and models used by organisations today to design,
implement, maintain, and improve their performance management systems. These range
from models of the basic requirements for a quaRy management system such as the ISO
9000 standard for q d t y management to more holistic models for business excellence. The
latter includes the Malcolm Baldnge National Q d t y Awad, the European Q d r y Award,
and the Deming Prize.
2.2.1.1
Customen in today's marketplace require assurance of the quaiity of the products or services
that they are buying. To provide this assurance, organisations look to the ISO 9000 series of
standards for q d c y management to provide guiciance in the planning, implementation and
maintenance of an appropriate quality system.
A @ty
various resources, to achieve the objectives relateci to quality (Karapeuovic and Wiibom,
1998A). The quai~tyqmem is a sub-system of the business system of an organisation.
The ISO 9000 senes of standards was developed in 1987 as a set of models that stipdated
the requirements upon which an e x t e d pany could assess an organisation's quality system.
The senes consisted of guidance nandvds and conformance standards.
The guidance
standards ISO 8402, ISO 9000, and ISO 9004, provideci interpretations for using the
conforniance standards. The conformance standards ISO 9001, ISO 9002, and ISO 9003
represented three distinct f o m of funaional capability suitable for extemai qyality
assurance purposes. Companies applied the applicable standard to their organisation to
assure their customers of the @ty
the model consisted of 20 elements that addressed all aspects of a q d t y srjem. This
sysem induded the organisation, allocation of responsibilities, procedures, processes, and
resources that joindy led to the provision of goods and seMces in accordance with the firrn's
quality policy and objectives (PG,1995).
The standards emphasised the asniance of quaiity of products and services through:
clarification of management poiicies and cornmiunent
identifilcation of roles, responsibility and authority (Elmuti, 1996)
establishment of clear instructions to ali personnel affecting qualiry
development of precise procedures and instructions in al1 areas of operationai activity to
e n w e consistenq and uniformity (kadi et ai., 1996)
This model has been used extensively by organisations 1over the world since its incepuon.
Today,over 400,000 companies world-wide are registered. There have been however,
severai criticisms made of the model:
In December 20d0, the ISO 9000 senes was updated for the second time. The 1994
version, which emphasised +ty
assurance, has now been replaced by ISO 9001:2000 that
was developed to assis organisations implement and operate effective quality management
systems. The sUa;ty asnuance standard provided confidence that the requirements for
quaiity will be met (Karapetrovic and Wilibom, 1998A) through quality planning and
conuol. The new series adds the process of qwLty impmvement into a broader model
emphasising quality management. Q d t y management is the combination of quality
planning, q d t y conuol, and quaiity impmvement.
and
improvemenr processes.
The changes manifest themselves in the underiymg p ~ c i p l e of
s the model. Ir is based on
eight q d t y management principles.
1. Customer focused organisation
2. Leadership
3. Involvement of people
4. Process approach
The ISO 9000 senes now consists of a pair of quality management system standards: ISO
9001 and ISO 9004.
ISOSM)I
ISO 9001 s p d e s requiremerits for a qu?lity managrment system that c m be used for infernal application by
oqpnktions, or for c d c a t i o n , or for contracnui purposes. It focuses on the effectiveness of the qu;Jity
management system in meeting customer qukments. (ISO9004:2000)
ISO 9004 gives guidance on a wider range of objectives of a qu;ility management system than does ISO 9001,
particulariy for the continuai impmvement of an organisation's o v d performance and efficiency,as wd as its
effectiveness. ISO 9004 is recommended as a guide for o ~ a t i o n whose
s
top management wishes to move
beyond the requirements of ISO 9001 in punuit of continual impmvement of performance. However, it is not
intendecl for certification or for c o n d purposes. (ISO 9004:2000)
These IWO standards can be used alone or a complementaxy models for an organisation's
quality management system ISO 9001 sets the essenrial requirernents and ISO 9004 shows
the way for future developments. To maintain registration status, an organisation m u s
perform intemal and extemal audits against the ISO 9001 model to show that it has met
these requirements. It can however, enhance the audit process by performing selfassessments againn the ISO 9004 model. This process can help identify strengths and areas
for irnprovement in the quaiity management system in texms of its efficiency as well as its
effectiveness. If the issues identified in the self-assessrnent are addresseci, the results of the
next quality audit should show irnprovement.
While the ISO 9004 standard is a model for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the
quality management system, other models have been k e l o p e d that address an even broader
set of organisationai activities. These are the National QuaLty Awarb or Business
Excellence Models (BEM) as they are often referred to.
2.2.1.2
activiries (Dale and Bunney, 1999). hstead of cornpliance with the criteria of a business
excellence model (BEM), these assessments idenrify an organisation's suengrhs, weaknesses,
the European Qua;ty Award and the Deming Prize. Each of these a w d has its own
focus, famework, mteria and scoring method
This award is named for Malcolm Baldrige, who served as Secretary of Commerce from
198 1 und 1987. His managerial excellence conuibuted to long-term irnprovement in
(Pannirselvam and Ferguson, 2001). These form the basis of the MBNQAaiteria. The
model embodies these essential values in a framework of seven main categones.
1. Leadership
2. Strategic P l k g
7. Business Results
There are two key assumptions thax devinthe modeL The fim is that the leadership
provided by top management is the primvy driver of the business. Top management m e s
organisational values and goals and direcrs orp.aiutional improvement. The second is that
the basic goal of the slUi;ty process is the delivery of mer-impruvingq d t y and d u e to
customers (Malcolm Baldnge National Quatty Awad, 2000). Figure 2-1 provides the
framework comecting and integrating the categories.
Organisations are evduated against a given set of criteria and a maximum total of 1000
points are allocated among seven award criteria Each critenon curies a different number of
points in accordance with its relative value within the a w d
The European Quality Award (EQM)was introduced in 1991 by the European Foundation
for Quality Management (EFQM).
The EFQM Excellence moQl is based on a set of fundamental concepts that formulare the
definition of excellence (European Quality Award, 1999). These are:
results orientation
amorner focus
leadership and consistency of purpose
public responsibility
The mode1 incorporates these Fundamend Concepts in a set of nine criteria; five of which
are 'enablers', four of which are 'redts'. The 'enablers' criteria address what an organisation
does while the 'renilrs' cover what an organiution achieves.
Enablers
Results
People
Leadership
Processes
u
=
L
J
Key
Performance
Redts
& Resources
organisations are evaluated agaian a given set of criteria and a maximum total of 1000
points are allocated among nine awd criteria. Each mterion carries ii different number of
The Deming Prize was established, in honour of Dr.W. Edwards Deming, by the Board of
Directon of the Japanese Union of Saentists and Engineers W E ) in 1951. Dr. Deming,
one of the fathen of quaiity, is best known for his work in Japan, d e r e from 1950 onwad,
he taught top management and engineen' methob for the management of qualiry. The
impact of Dr.Deming's teachings on American manufacturing and semice organisations has
been profound
The orignal objective of this prize was to assess a company's use and application of
statisticd method (Dale and Bunney, 1999).
The prize consins of a cheddisr with ten major categories. These are:
1. Policies
5. Human resources
6. Quaiiry asnirance
7. Mallitenance
8. Improvement
9. Effects
Y inherendy presuiptive.
2.2.1.3
Each of these rnodels har its own focus, scope, approach to evaluarion, and improvement
strateW. Table 2-1 illusvates these major differences.
ISO 9000
Conformanu (CO
p r o c h and CO
speafi&ons)
F
Responsibilityfor
Qu&y assurance
MBNQA
Iniprovan~~t
(of
rmthods and of
o v e d business
du)
ExeCUfive
management
Idmufication of
conformance and non- nruigths and
conformances, resulting oppominiria for
in a pasdfd verdia
improvemcnt, and
scom i n d i h g the
m;inuity of the
managunmt v a n
nie entire
management synem,
includlig ludcrstiip,
pluuung and the use
of infornucion and
meuurunuits, the
dorelopmenr and
management of
people, the mcrhods
used for
understanding
clrstomcr and market
rtquirrmenrs,and the
management of kcy
inuiness proceSKs.
EQA
lmprovanenc (of
mcthods a d of
o v d business
Deming Rizc
Statisud Mcrhods
(prevaition of
@ty
~mblm)
rdts)
ExCCutive
Executive
svcngths uid
oppomuiitics for
improvanent, and
scores indiaring the
cnanuity of the
managemcnt syscem
The entire
managanent system,
induding leadership,
people, policy and
nntegv, puuiuships,
mourccs, proceses,
and the management
of key business
processes
existence of
Identification of the
-ch
dement through an
auditing process
Process orientcd
nrong emphasis on
proces
management
Giteria confmed to
the application of
p r o ~ &,
e~
statisticd methoch
and q d t y c i d a
Fnmcwodc
ISO 9000
MBNQA
B a 4 on an
undcrjuig fnmework
linlunp conceps,
mkkks, processes
DrmingPrizt
EQA
Based on an
Does not u n i m e
mdatying
fnmervorklinlung
concepts, &es,
proceses and re&
togtthff
anun-
udty,umpIy
provides a list of
&sirable or good
quality-oricnted
management
pncrices
( G h o b a b and
Woo, 1996)
nonconformanccsand
to pxwent m>ccurrrnce
of pmblans
CoaunlKnlS
ilxpvmmfuung
Quality
lmpmvemcnt
CHECK-ACI' cyde.
conml
PIAN-DO-
thrwghdd
Appendix D provides a detailed cornpuison of the elemems covered by the ISO 9001
standard,the MBNQA, the EQA and the Deming Prize, in each of their cntena Table 2-2
presents an overview of the svengths and weaknesses of each model.
Model
1-
9001
MBNQA
we;ikncsscs
Stmlgths
M i n focus is on the processes wnhia the quality
management system
Quaiity system model is prescriptive and therefore
the way forward is clear and unambiguous
End point (achieving registration) is weii defineci
and externay valiated (Najmi and Kehoe, 2000)
Constinites an integrai pan of an organisation's
o v e d management systern (Pun et ai, 1999)
Addresses the identification and provision of
resources with a focus on idkanmm, the work
environment and the conml of documents
Forces an organisation to describe its key
processes and make thern more transparent (van
der Wde et al., 2 0 )
Broad model addressing an organisation's o v e d
activities, not oniy those relateci to the quality
management system
Asks how the organisation meeu the criteria
Focused on cunomer management
stmlgths
Weaknesscs
dephrbrnthefs09001
stvldvd
Focused on q d t y control
Focuseci on compuiy wide qu?lay efforts,
conMwus improvement
Provides a List of desirable or good qu;ilisronented management pnctices
T h e EQA is also a broad model for business excelience. Ir does not address customer
management in the same detail as the MBNQA.
The Deming PNe is a model focused on quality conaol. The criteria is not as broad as
those in the MBNQA or the EQA but provides some important pieces conceming the
use of quaiity control in a company's continuous impmvement efforts.
Table 2-3 provides a cornparison of the major categories addressed by Bdi of the qudity
award models as weli as th& respective point values.
MBNQA
Ladership
12.5
Deming R u e
(%)
Leadership
10
'
1
Orpiution and iu
Strategic
8.5
People
Partnenhips and
Planning
Customer and
Market Focus
Information and
Human
8.5
Resource Focus
Assembling and
Resources
Process
Manaeement
j
f
8.5
7
Business Results
Processes
14
information
Qu;ility-=
Miatenuice
Standardisation
10
10
Custorner
Resuits
society
People resuits
Resulu
Key Perfomiance
Results
Irnprovement
Future Plans
Ir is evident that each of the awards places emphasis on different areas of their criteria. Both
the EQA and the MBNQA however, assign the most points to the Results sections of their
model. The Deming Prize does not single this category out as being the most important in
rems of its scoring xheme (each is valwd at 10%). The MBNQA assigns 12.5% of its
points to Leadership and distributes the ren of its points among Strategic Planning,
Cusromer and Market Focus, Infornuon and Analysis, and Human Resource Focus
e givhg
Processes 14%. The People category is worth 9%, o d y slghrh/ higher thao in the MBNQA.
This cornparison process has rwealed that each of the performance management madels
have muiy nrengths. Each one could compensate for aaother's weaknesses. The next
section examines, in further detail, the research that has been done conceming their
2.2.1.4
The ISO 9001 standard for quality management is seen by many as a requed foundation for
a company's @ry and performance improvement efforts (van der Weile et al., 1997, Dde,
1999, Karapmvic and Willborn, 20O1B, Russell, 2000, Meegan and Taylor, 1997). For
exampie, van der Weile et al (1997) make the following comment:
Continuous improvment ody m;ikes sense if an organisation h m what is going on in reiation to
the processes, which are undedying the things that need to be improved. The ISO 9000 series forces
an organisation to desaibe the key processes and make them more transparent.
Once the requirements for rhis standard have been met however, companies need to b d d
on these foundations to extend the principles learned to ail organisational activities and not
The transition from quaiity management to business excellence need not involve leaving ISO
9000 behind to move on to somRhing supenor (Meegan, 1997). To facilitate the movement
from ISO 9001 quaiity management to the o v e d business excelience embodied in the
quality awards, researdien niggest that these models be integrated (Mann and Voss, 2000,
Tonk, 2000, Dale, 1999, van der Wkle et al., 2000, Pun et al., 1999).
Pun et al. (1999), describe a self-assessed qual~tymanagement sysrem using the framework of
the Baldnge M
d forthe integrarion of ISO 9000: 1994, ISO 14000, and the Baldrige
criteria. In a case stuciy, the assessrnent against rhis f r a m e d d l consisted of the regukr
auditkg and performance assessments performed by the organisation.
When there is a co11ection of afksystems or stanfiam different ueu, efficiency is difficult
and misconcepuoas and coafurion often occur. It is &us ben to elimbae possible confusion and
sub-optimisation from the outset by establishing and maintaininga t o d systems approach.
(Puri et 4 1999)
Finai conclusions from Sun (2000), suggea that TQM and ISO 9000 srandards musr be
completely and systematicallyimplemented and i n t e g r a d Researchers must detemine a
method of c o m b i i g ISO 9000 and TQM, and bridging the gap bnween the two.
Mann and Voss (2000) present an innovative approach used by one company IO integrare its
ISO 9000-certified management system with the Baldrige model. The company concemed
developed its ISO 9000 qmem to address all elements of the Baldnge criteria. Of parti&
note is its process improvement approach that prioritises improvemenr projects based on
The challenges involved in integrating ISO 9000 and TQM are well reviewed in the
literantre. We have seen that ISO 9000 has been advocated as the fxst step towards total
quality management. The ISO 9000 series and the excellence models clearly have different
goals and perspectives and define total quai~tymanagement at different levels of maturity
(van der Wiele er ai., 2000). It is obvious then that the uiteria from the ISO 9000 series
cannot simply be incorporateci into a model for business excelience. The criteria represented
in the reference models are different, ISO 9000 representing the minimum requirements and
the quaiity award models k i n g more holisric paie, 1999). If rhis were to o c w , it would
lose much of its potency in the building of the foundaton of an organisation's TQM
activities (Dale, 1999).
The quaiity a
and quality
auditing respectively for evaluation of rhe otganisauon against them. To integrate the
models would require the integration of these measurement methods. Karapetrovic and
'scoring" schernes used by eadi. For example, when Tonk () describes the integration
of the MBNQA and the ISO 9000 system, he suggesu:
The Bddrige scoring system uses percenrages, w h m s the ISO 9000 systern uses, in effect, a pus/fd
(conform;ince/nonconformuice)system Decisions need to be made as to whether to retain the
MBNQA percenage scoring sysrem and if so what scoring levels will be reqwred in each of the
uiterion in the new model.
2.2.2
Performance Measurement
Performance rneaswement is the process of coileccing data pertaining to al1 aspects of the
company's activiues. This data can then be used to help control and correct waning
performance areas and to set new targets for improved performance.
According to Sinclair and Zain (1999, rhis meanvernent is exuemely important to
organisations for several reasons:
Meanires can be analysed to enable appropriate decision making.
highlighrs quality problems and deremines which areas require priority attention
gives an indication of the costs of poor q d t y
justifies the use of resources
provides feedback for driving the improvement effort
Each of the National QluLty Awub provides guidelines for perfonning organisational selfassessments agalin the given set of criteria for business excellence. MBNQA provides a
Guide to Self-assessrnent and Action. The EQA provides detailed guidance to organisations
and suggests a self-assessrnent approach depending on the quaiity rnaturity of the
organisation.
These organisations usually perform self-assessrnent in one of rhree ways (van der Weile et
a., 1999):
taking the a
d guideha and foiiowing these for intemal use in the sarne way as
prescribed in the respective guidance booklets for those organisations who are putting
forward a formal application for the chosen award
adjusting the cnteria and/or the scoring to fit the specifc situation and goals of the
organisation
speQfying the parh and seps to be t&n h m the present situation ro the end goal.
Conti (1993) suggescs that organisations should use already existing data in the assessment
process and as additional information for the goal setting process. Some examples of this
data are:
employee wqs, work safety statistics, illaess rates, absenteeism and fluctuation,
Self-AssessrnentProcess
The assessment method suggested in the ISO 9004 standard involves the evaluation of the
mamrity of the @ty
ranghg from 1 (no formal system) to 5 (best-inclas performance). The standard provides
exvoples of t y p i d questions that cm be asked duriag the self-assessment. It is suggested
that self-assessment can be used in a flexible way according to the needs of the organisation.
Two recommended m d o d s are to:
perfoxm the self-assessrnent on an individual basis for all or part of the quality
management system and then to pursue improvement.
have a cross-function group of people perfonn self-assessment on ail or part of the
then consensus
MBNQA
The Baldrige National Qwltty Progra.provides a Gui& to Self-Assesunent and Action.
This document ourlines ten seps ro conducting a self-assessment.
1. Idenufy the boundaries of the organisation to be assessed.
-7
2. Decide on a format for the assessment and action plan.
4. Select seven champions and teams, one for each criteria categoty
-1
JLl
.~m
EQA
According to the EFQM,selecton among assesmient methods should be dependent on the
quality ma-
correspondmg to the maturity of the oqpnkation and the desired effort level.
Award simulation
Pilot a w d simulation
Facihateci workshop
Pro-formaand wofkshop
This approach involves the creation of a questionnaire used to gather infomtion about the
perceptions of people within the organisation. Some questionnaires can consisr of simple
y e h o questions. Othen provide a set of possible a m e r s nich as A-Fullyachiwed, BConsiderable progress, C-Some progress, or D-Not started. These questionnaires are
dinnbuted and used alone, or as nippon for more elaborate self-assessment approaches.
In this approach, an achievement ma& is developed For each category of the award,
statements perraliing to possible achievernents by the organisation are set on a scaie from 1
(minimum achievement) to 10 (greatest achievement).
Pro-forma
Here pro-formas are created for each sub-category. The description of the critexia in the
sub-category is printed at the top of the page with areas to address beneath it. The
assessrnent entails f&g
pro-forma itself.
Woikshor>
The management team is responsible for gathering dam from their unit and presenting the
results to their p e r s in a workshop environment.
Thic appmach is effectivelya simulation of entering for the award. The unit undenaking the
self-assessrnentwntes a full submission document. A team of trained assessors then
evduates this report.
The EFQM dso indudes in the EQA document, a figure that i i l m t e d the relationship
between the rigour of the different approaches and the quaiity of data captured. (See Figure
Qrnhuti
c3
Pro-f o n
Process
Rigour
<workrhop>
4
Low
Based on Opinion
Table 2-5 presents the evduation and scoring methods used by ach modeL
Mode1
ISO 9004
Details
1
No systematic approach
cvident, no results, poor
d t s or unpredimbIe
d t s
Problem or systemaric
appfo;idr; minimum data
on improvement resuits
~ a&le
S y s t d c pmess-bued
appmpC4 Fufy =%e of
system~tlcrmprovement ,
&ta avaiiable on
c o n f o m c e to
objectives and existence
of improvement vends
hpmvement process in
use; good resuits and
susuineci improvement
I
I trends
5
Strongiy integrated
impmvement process;
best-in&s results
dernonstrateci
Evaiuates each element in the a d criteria bved on
the appmach, the deplayment of appmch, and resuits See Table 2-6for details
re?lised These are evaiuated on a d e from 0% to
100%.
Evaluates each elexnent in the award criteria based on
the approach, the depIoyment of approach, the resuits
r e d i d , and the assessrnent and review (RADAR) of
See Table 2-7 for details.
these elemenu. These are evaiuated on a s d e fkm
OYo to 100%.
Cfiecklist is evaiuatd Each category is worth the same.
I
Dcsaiptim
Mallod(s) d to
;iddress item
requvcmcnu
4the
in
each item
r-Results
OutcomesinachieVing
the purposes of the
item
r
Assessrnent & Review
units
CuITentperformance
Performance relative to appropriate
compvisons or bencbmarh
breacith, and importance of ~ o u r
performance impmvements
Remilu me;uurement of the effectiveness of
t h b r o a c h and deplayment is carrieci out
Levniag acvities are used to idenufy and
share best practice and improvement
opportuniues
Gtpn from measurement and leamhg is
a
n
w and useci KIidentify, prioritise, plan
and impIernent improvementr
m a c h and Dcployment
no systematic approach aident; a n d o t a l
Rcds
no resuits or poor results in areas reponed
l
I(
1
igood
improvement trends d
performance levels reporteci for m;ury to
moa ueu of importince to the company's
kqr business fequirements
no p a m of adverse trends d m poor
performance lweis in areas of importance
to the appliant's key business requinmenu
some trends and/or current perfommce
lwels-evaiuated against relevant
cornparisons d m bencbmuks-show
areas of svengrh and/or good to very good
relative performance levels
In self-assessment, once the evduation of each element is complete, the cmmhtive scores
are used to calculate a fnalscore. In both the EQA and the MBNQk this is a score out of
l. These IWO points have k e n distributed among the caregories of the award by the
developers of these modeis based on the perceived imponan of each.
Table 2.8 uses the MBNQA categones to illusvate how a final score is calculated. First, each
category is evaluated out of 100% according to the process described previously. Nem, each
score is calculated based on the total poim value of the categoty and the evaluation v h .
For the Leadership category, the evaluation wu 60%, the total point value for the category is
C;rtegory
Leadership
Srrategic Phnning
Custorner and Market Focus
Information and A d y m
Human Resource Focus
Process Management
Business Resulfs
Totai
Evduation
Aau;il Score
60%
45%
55%
60%
52%
40%
35%
75
38.25
46.75
51
43.35
34
157.5
370.85
Point Vaiues
M h u m Score
125
85
85
85
85
85
450
IO00
In an initial assessment such as this, mon organisations do not score more than 250 out of
1000 points.
World class perfoxmance would achieve a score of around 700 points, while a
d score
A quality audit is
A systematic, independent, and documenteci proces for ob-
Severai elernents are essential to the performa~lceof an effective audit Fint, there is the
audit standard. Standards provide guidance on the prinaples of auditing, the management
of audit programs, the conduct of a&
A new
Audit criteria are the set of policies, procedures or requirements used as a reference (ISO
19011,2002). Audit evidence are the records, statements of fact or other information, which
Audits should not be stand-done processes, but part of an overali auditing system (Goetsch
and Davis, 1998; Karapetrovic and Wdbom, 2lA). Wdibom and Cheng (1994) suggew
thar a badine audit (a more cornprehensive and inteasive audit) establishes the starting
effectiveness of the sysrem and t h du+ the eariy p e n d of implementation, regulu audits
should be scheduled at reg& intervals to mainuia the inaeases in effectiveness of the
system. As the system matures and the effectiveness stabilises, audits should be scheduied
less frequendy.
The execution of any audit indudes sweral steps. ISO 19011 prodes a dugram to illustrate
the activities involved in the auditing process (See Figure 2-5)
T
I n i t i b g the audit
Appointhg the audit team leader
Defining objectives, scope and criteria
Determinhg the feasibility of the audit
Estabidmg the audit team
Establishing i n i d contan with the auditee
1
/
i the audit
I
...-...---...-...- ---....
The objectives of a quality audit, as outlined by the ISO IO0 11standard, are to:
determine the conformity or nonconformity of the quality system elernents with
specified requirements
determine the effeaiveness of the implemented quality v e m in meeting specified
quality objectives
provide the auditee with an opportunityto improve the @ty
systern
quality audits are used in a dynamic and proactive rnanner (w;ubom, 1990; Banhelezlly and
Zairi, 1994; and Peters, 1998). If organisation use a u d i a only as a tool to verify
cornpliance widi agreed standYb wthout dieduog the aptness of the standards thernselves
or seeking information about the effectiveness of the q d t y system in meeting objectives
(Beeler, 1999), auditiug will not lead to impmvement.
of making decisions and taking action throughout the organisation (Schallcwyk, 1998)
Organisations, and researchers in the performance management field, have developed many
performance mevurement models. These models range from a balanced set of indicators
that periodicdy show an organisation how it is performing in various areas of the business,
to integrated models that provide real t h e information with respect ro how thqr are
performing cmently and forecasts how thq. mry do in the future. As competitiveness
increases, organisations require measurement synems that provide not onty up to date
performance idonnation but also examine how these meanires interrelate so they can make
more informed decisions. Performance measurement systems should be aligned with
organisationai goals and objectives. This helps to ensure that the organisation is measuring
the efficiency and the effectiveness of the activities that have the greaten effect on the
achievement of these goals.
The set of measures selected by a parcicular organisation should provide m e n t information
penaining to the health of the organisation and also link direcrty to suategic objectives.
Traditional perfomiance meaSuTemenrs systems are based m a d y on f i n a n d performance
measures 6.e. retum on invesunent, renun on sdes, productivity and profit per unit
how thqr CUI improve this perfomiance. Neely (1999) suggests that the mevures in today's
Company need to be:
focused on organisational strategy
provide data on @y,
corresponding meanires to coiiea the important data This data is then used to control and
improve performance in these key areas.
It is becoming increasinglyimportant for companies to understand how all areas of their
organisation are perforrning. If properly consvucted, performvv~meanires provide
information to management to enable fact-based decision making. They are also important
for effective communication. Their use increases constructive problern solving, increases
influence, monitors progress, and gives feedback and reinforces behaviour (Sinclairand
ensure manageable data collection but yet provide a good indication of the naus of the
organisation's health.
M q authon have trieci to develop guidelines or approaches that will help in this selection
process (Keegan et al., 1989, Fitzgerald et ai., 1991, Kaplan and Norton, 1996, Dixon et al.,
1990, Neeiy et al., 1995, Globenon, 1985). To d
stimulate action
are being m
developed by Kaplan and Norton (1996) and the model from Neeiy et al. (1995), which
consists of four elemenrs of perfoimance.
The Balanced Scorecard anernpts to capture an organisation's performance from four
different perspectives. The first is a f i n a n d perspective, Le. how the organisation looks to
th& shareholden. The second is an intemal business perspective, which asks at what the
organisation should excel. The third looks at how the organisation appean to the cwomers
and the founh perspective is one of innovazion and leaming which asks how the Company
perspectives.
2.2.2.4
Three methods of performance meanirement have been presented in this lirerature review.
This section wdl review the work done to compare these methods in terms of their
applicability and usefulness to organisations.
2.2.2.4.1
for non-compliance and wess whether the system and the undedying procedures are being
followed. O n the other hanci, self-asessrnent against the a w d modek is focused on
to drive the organisation d o m
fmding improvement opportunities and new wys in WU
these approaches satisfying a given set of BEM cnteria. The uialysis should indicate
whether the current approaches are sound and integrated and whether there is systematic
and implemented deployment of these approaches. The remit is the ability to predict
whether these are sufficient to lead to improvement of the system. Thus, the objective of an
audit is to venfy compliance with a set of cnteria and self-assessment is used to examine the
driven for improvement (Karapetrovic, and Wdborn, 2001A).
The r e d t of a quality audit is either compliance or non-cornpliance with the criteria. Either
the organisation meets the criteria or it does not In a self-assessrnent process, the objective
is not to cornply with the cntena but to use it as a frarnework for idendjing svengths and
oppominities for improvement in each area of the BEM cxkeria.
When it cornes to perfonning the audit or assessment, the procedure is sirnilar. Both
processes are designeci around DemLig's Plan-Do-Che&-Actd e .
I1
T1
DO
~dentifyo ~ o x d s u u c n i r and
e mq&d
cornpetence for audit program management
Define audit..pr-..
and respoasibdiaes
Identifywdit teams
Ennve cornpetence and suitab* of auditors
Cummuniute audit pian
Manage the planning and suitability of auitors
Gxnmuniute audit pian
Manage the piamhg and arecution of
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
Identify r e q d actions
Incorponte actions into p h
Implement pians
perfofxxLlnce
A m
Karapevovic and Wdbm (2001A)compare the principles and practices of qualicy audits
and self-assessments for the purpose of examinlig th& compatibihty and providing the
basis for integration.
The authors suggest severai suategies for increasing the capability and potential aiigriment of
audits and self-assessrnenu. These include:
'hard controls", while self-usessments would be used for 'softer" issues and idenufying
improvemenu. In pnctice, this strategy is already applied.
Goss-use. Quaiity audits can be applied to enhance self-assessments, and vice-versa.
Perfo~nafliceManagement in RkD
2.3
A large portion of the quliry problems rhat vise on the manufactuxing floor could have
been avoided completely with proper attention to the design process. Quaiity cannot be
tested into a manufactureci p d u a , but musc be designecl imo the produa. Most of the
focus of quality management research however, &als Mththe manufacniring and s e ~ c e
secton and lacksRSrD focus. The quality management pracrices that are successfd in
rnanufacniring environments are wd known and widely publishd The application of these
manufacnuing-based d t y pnctices in an R8rD environment is not as successful due to
the lads of replication and high level of variability in RBd) projeas (Kumar and Boyle,
2001). There are also high levels of uncextainry in terms of the impact of the produa on the
market and the revenue it wiU generare over the followhg years. It is more difficult to apply
practices in such an environment however, the undedying concepts of quality
@ty
management are essenria to decreasing this variab'ilityin the R&D processes. Research is
needed to examine an R&D operation and idennfy pertinent quality management aspects
that are applicable in nich an environment. To adequately address this problem, there needs
to be an understanding of issues that are specific to an R&D organisation.
2.3.1
R&D roles have been recognised and awarded has fostered a very individualistic work ethic.
Researchers often prosper by phcipating in a system that rewards individual achievement
and discourages alliance building and CO-operation(McLaughlui, 1995). This individual
recognition crares an amiosphere plagued with individds working toward goals that will
move hem ahead without due consideration for the overall goals of the RgrD funaion itself.
As individuah are rewarded for their personal contributions to R&D activities, the
It is exuemely important that r e s e d organisations ensure they are focused on projects that
address the saaregic needs of the organisation and that rhese needs are being met effuendy.
Kleinschmidt, 1994). The r e d t is a need for efficient and effective new produa
development (NPD)processes that will ailow the Company to mainuin its competitiveness
within its indunry. What R&D facilities are facing now ody increases the pressure while
acting as a barxier sometimes to the achievement of good processes and competitive outputs.
There is a need for a systematic approach to irnproving design and development processes,
and the management systems surrounding hem, to provide the bea environment for
&taking
cornpeutive advanrage.
Many of the factors that influence NPD cyde Ume are outside the R&D department's
control, making the process that much more difficult. C o p r a t e decision making, customer
needs, and orpan;Sational goals are all factors that impact the t h e to market of many new
products (McLaughLR 1995).
Fewer resources
As companies downsize as a meam of c o s CU&&
target.
Poor or uncertain economic conditions cui cause havoc with R& funcihg and personnel. These
uncertain conditions have a dmmxic and powerful psychologid effect on projects, innovation, and
creativity.
@kLaughttr,1995)
Executives expect that the R&D function will perform successfullywith reduced resources
and unrealisric objectives (Kumar and Bayle72001). This reduction in resources affects the
spirit of the R8rD teams d o meanwhile must nniggle to keep improving cyde times to
W& moa research organisations there is a constant pressure to produce more results with
less budget in less rime. It is imperative therefore t h research organisations ensure their
cnticd resources, the research naff, are focused on proieas that address the strategic needs
of the organisation and that these needs are being met efficiendy (Endres, 1992).
Increased competition
(McLaughlin, 1995).
Capturing the customa's changing needs
The R&D organisation m u s be driven by its responsiveness to changing cunomer needs.
This is one of the greatest challenges forRBrD hinctions. At the initial stages of a new
product development project, researchers and scientists musr accurat* and precisely
ascertain customer requirements. These are then translateci into a set of specificationschat
defme the prouct to be designed. A new challenge arises when customers request changes
ro rheir on& requirements in the rnidst of the design stage. This may only necessitate
s m d changes to the design, but could result in the design team starcing again from scratch.
These changes increase cyde rime, costs, penon houn and affect the RSrD schedule, rying
up employees that are require on other projects.
As a r e d t of these factors, the need for teamwork, efficient and effecrive management
One of the main benefits of irnplementing quality management in an R&D environment that
authors have reponed is the darification of the defdtion of 'quality in RBrD' (Pa&o, 1997,
Kumar and Boyle, 2001, Pearson, et ai., 1998). Several &finitions have been suggeste. A
review of litaamre by K
'quaiity in R&D':
an understanding of who the R8rD client is and his or her values and expectations
what the key technologies are and how they can be used to meet R&D clients'
expectations and the needs of the entire organisation
who the R&D cornpetitors are and how t h q will respond to emerging R&D clients
needs
Qing diuigs nght once you know you are working on the nght things?c o n c e n t h g on
continually improving the system.
enabling people by removing barrien, and encoUrap;ig people to make their maximum
connibution
Many authors have written about the need to have systemauc processes for managing quality
to gain and remain in a cornpetitive position (Cooper et d,1990, Colurao, 1998, Auer et al.,
1996). The result of irnplementing such a q d t y approach is a hm that continuody
serves the needs of its customers (both internai and extemai) in an efficient and effective
manner (McLaughhn, 1995).
idenufylng gaps for improvement, as well as providuig a comrnon focus o r direction for
the whole Company. (Pearson,et al., 1998)
and teamwork are important for a successful research and developnieit environment
( G d ,1993).
Several reasons have been provided in the literature for the limited use of quality
management practices in R8rD. These are:
concem that
d e creative
such as
(Francis, 1992)
PaGo, (1997) suggesfs that some of these barriers can be overcome if there is sufficent
dialogue and darity as to whar ' M t y in RBrD' means.
Several authon have discussed the implications of implementing ISO 9000 in RgrD
environmenu (Cooper et ai, 1990, Davidson and Pniden, 1996, DeWeed-Nederbf et al.,
1995, McLaughlin, 1995).
Process driven quality synem mch as ISO 9001 are potenwy of great vdue to control
W1thin the RBrD context, ISO 9001 is becomuig more popular as a way of making
people think and plan ahead and as providing a disciplineci way of capniring the R8rD
r e d t s (Cooperet ai., 1990).
The revised version of ISO 9001 look into the dyaamic chamter of organisations m
receive speciai attention. The need for more dynaxmc approach ro RBrD management
has been emphasised for yeus (De Weed-Nederfiof et al., 1995).
ISO 9001 addresses both the issues of better convol and continuousty raising the R&D
standards (Iayawama and Pearson,l).
ISO 9001 is a good means of providmg a framework for developing a quality syscern in
R&D. It outlines the organisational nnicnup, management responsibilities, procedures
and processes r e q d to set the base for a "hoiistic @ty
management system"
(Davidson and Pruden, 1996).
The Companycan adapt (select) from the specifications in the new standard,enabhg
In light of the topics reviewed in this litenture search, the following points outline the
motivation for the proposed research.
7he ISO 9001 standard for q d t y management systerns is a stepping aone on the path
to business excellence. Extending these minimum requirements for a quality
developed for quality management systerns (quality auditing) and for overd business
performance (self-assessment). Both of these mdodologies have been proven to be
essentiai to an organisation's compet;tiveness. There is a need to analyse the
commonalties and differences between these method01ogies in order to provide a
~ b o m2001A).
,
Result-based performance masurement k a method01ogy for measuring an
organisation's performance. Organrwtions are Ehallenged ro select a rneaningful set of
performance measures thar wili provide a broad view of organisational performance.
Whde the abject of q d t y management in a manufacturing environment has been wd
This section describes the objectives of the proposed research. These are to:
develop an integrated model for performance management based on the ISO 9001
model for organisations wishing to move from the minimum requirements for their
quaiity management system to overall business excellence
condua a self-assessment against diis new reference model in a case study organisation
compare the self-assessrnent renilrs to the outcornes of a quality audit to furcher
investigate the opportuniries for integration of these masurement methods
review the redt-based performance measurernent system within the case mdy
organisation and compare rhe outputs to the self-assessrnent and the quality audit
moddy the reference model for more appropriate evaluation in an R&D environment
Introduction
Organisations roday must reach bqrond the minimum requkmenrs for their qualiry systws
using a more holisric approach to improve aii elements of their business. The minimum
Framework Development
The framewok for both the ISO 9001: 2000 standard and the &ty
a w d are based on
severai undertying principles (see section 2.2.1). The fm stage in the Qvelopmem of the
the system's performance results. Applying this definition to any set of processes results Li a
"system's view" (Kuapetrovic and Willbom, 1998A).
The OPIM is a model that describes the C S 0 7 s quality system. Ir focuses on the continuous
meanwmenq monitoring and control of the sysrem's performance and its impmvement
(Kanpetrovic and Macey, 2001). Figure 3-1 represenrs the systems concept for applicability
to the OHM. This concept is based on previous research by Kvapetrovic and Wdborn
(1998A). The dotted lines nirrouning the objectives and resources are meant to emphasise
rhe active role of the processes in the system and to indicate that these elemenrs are used as
inputs to the F e m not to de-emphasise their importance.
RESOURCES
PROCESSES
OBJEC77vES
i MANAGEMENT
.........................
PROCESSES
MANAGEMENT
II
1:
..........................................
RESULTS
Each element of the synem portrayeci in Figure 3-1 is a main category of the OPIM
framework These are:
1. Objectives
2. Resources
3. Processes
4. Results
5. Performance
The fm s e p in the integrauon of other models to fonn the OPIM was to use these
categones and to devise sevenl sub-categones that were thought to encompass the purpose
of each main category. The subsategories were created from a review of the content and
3 3 Product =&or ~ t r v i c e
3.2.1 1drnrif;caxion of producc mUor service processes
32.2 Idmrifiminn and c r a c d i
32.3 Produa d / o r m i c e ourput
32.4 Graamapropeny
32.5 V d i d a h of pnxases
3.2.6 Gntrol o f me;;llairing a d monitoring devices
3.3 RvEfuung
3.3.1 Idemifiution of nced
3.32 kifofmaricm
3.3.3 V d a r i o n o f purchascd product and/or services
3.4 Support Proccsscs
3.S. 1 Idear.i6&0n
3.5 Pluinulp
1.0 o b j j v e s
1.1 Intacncd parlia
1.1.1 Cunoma
1.1.2 Ownas/ i n v a t o n
1.1.3 People
1.1.4 Supplias d parTnen
1.1.5 Society
1.2 Mui;ig~ll~llt
syacm
1.2.1 Muugtmmt rtsponsibhy
12.2 Mur;igcment mnew
1.3 Legd
2.0 Rrsouras
2.1 People
2.1.1 Acquisnion
2.1.2 Deploymait
2.1.3 Worksynmis
2.1.4 Wdl-king and saisfaaion
2.1 .S TrJning
p i d d 2a 2? L
2.2.1 lLsponsibilicics
2.22 Policy and nrrtegv
2.3 Infomution
2.4 infnnnicnuc
2.5 TechnoIogy
2.6 Supplim/purnaships
2.7 I 4 k c d s
2.8 N d resourccs
2.9 F i c e s
3.0 P r o c e ~ ~ s
3.1 Design and/or dcvelopmuir
3.1.1 PlaMlIlg
3.1.2 Lnprtts
3.1 -3 Aaiviues
3.1.4 Chpus
3.1.5 Revicw
3.1.6 Verification
3.1.7 Validation
3.1.8 Convol o f changes
3.1.9 Design and developmcnt o f p r ~ ~ e ~ ~ s
3.2.2
4.0
Renrhs
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
Cunoma
d and uurket
People
Supplia and m e r
Soery
4.6 G p n k i o d effectivena
5.0 lmprovanent
5.1
monitoring and control
5.1.1 S y n m i performance
5.1.2 Cuscomasatisfaction
5.1.3 i n t d audit
5.1.4 Processes
5.1.5 Prodm a d o r service
5.1.6 GICIM~
of nonconformhy
5.2 An;ityPs o f clam
5.3 6 d v e anion
5.4 Prrvcntive acon
Criteria Development
mode1 are split into two parts. The fmt presents the minimum requkments for the quality
management system. The second provides opportunities for improvement over and above
these minimum requirements, descnbing the continuous improvement of the category. This
an i n i d fit of rheir categories and sub-categoriesinto the OPIM framework Table 3-2
OPIM
ISO9i: (
IS09004-.
1 MBNQA I
EQA
DP
ISO 9001:
OPIM
rOOO
32 Rohua d o r service
32.1 Idadkaionof ~roduct
75.1
73.9
, 75
1
d o r u n i i c c ~
3 1 2 khtificPioa
d traceabd'y
propaty
VIliduion of prousses
7-53
7.3.8
MBNQA
ISO 9001:
2060
7.53
5d
6.2
DP
EQA
6.7
75.3
7.55
7.6
7.6
6.7
conml
5.1.1 S ~ c m p a f o ~ c e
5.1.2 G ~ ~ a m
satisfaction
n
5.1.3 h a m i audi
5.1.4 Proces~s
5.1.5 l'mduci urd/or savicc
5.1.6 GmmI of noaconfonnity
5.2 AiillyPs of d m
5.3 Cormxivc action
5.4 Prcvmuvc action
4.1
1 82
82.4
8.2.13
6.6
6.5. 6.4
6.7
822
82.3
83
8.4
83
8.4
8.52
8.53
4.2
6.1.6263
6.1.6.2, 6 3
3.3.8.3
Sb,%
Sb, Se
6.5.62
IO
After ensuring that moa of the categories from the models were mapped to the OPIM, the
contents of the awards and ISO 9001 were reviewed to ensure that the categorymatches
were appropriate. This process resulted in the rearrangement and renarning of some of the
caregones in the OPIM to provide a more streamllied set of cnteria.
Category 5.0, labelied Irnprovement, is provided as an example. Irnprovement cannot corne
from corrective (5.3) and preventive (5.4) actions done because they just remove the causes
(existing or otherwise potential) of problems. They do not lead to Breakthroughs, which
break new ground in improvement. Breakchroughs cm be graduai (Kaizen) or innovation /
Anorher review of the category 5.0 rwealed that it &O indudeci analyus of data, intemal
auditing, and measurement and monitoring These elements are all a pan of an
organisation's performance management system. The category was renamed Perfozmance
under which three sub-categories were creatd Management, Monitoring and Conmiling,
and Improvement. Matching elexnenu from the other models were reshuffled to fit into the
new structure of the OPIM.
Table 3-3 illustrates the process as describeci above. The first parc of the table shows the
initial sub-categones in category 5.0 and correspondmg criteria The second pan shows the
modXed mb-categoies and their comespondlig criteria.
MBNQA
5.0 hprovemcnt
I n t e r d audit
Pmrs~s
Product and/or semice
Conml of nonconformiry
5.1 An3ysir of du
5.3 Conmive: action
5.4 Prcvmtive action
5.0 Perfonnancc
5.1 Management
5.1.1 S p e m
5.1.2 Key Pcrformuicc Outcomcs
5.1.3 K y Perfonnancc Indiuton
5.2 Monitoring and Controlluig
5.2.1 Audits
5.2.2 Self-Assasrnaits
5.2.3 Puformancc M a s u m e n t
5.3 Improvanent
5.3.1 C o k v e and Prnteative Actions
5.3.2 Kaizcn d Quuinun L a p s
8.2.1.3
82.1.5
8.1,8.2.1. 8.4
8.5.1
8.52,8.5.3
8.5.4, Anna
EQA
5.0 Performance
F i OPIM
5.1 Mui;igcxnent
5.11
Systan
5.1.2
Rczpciramnr
4.6.3 of OPM
5. t .3
Describe how the meuwpient spem for key performance indiators is contllidy
impmved
5.2 Monitoring and Conmlling
5.2.1
Audits
5.2.2
Describe the system applied to perform rcguiar self-assessrnenuagainst the The CS0
Performance improvcment M d
qyJmmm3
Describe h m the effmiveness, efficiuicy and consisturcy of the self-wcssmcnt synern are
concinuaiiy improveci
3-4- I
5.2.3
Performylce~wumncnt~SOI,8.1,821,8.4)
(MBNQA, 4.1al and 42)
Describe the performance mevurrmait systan d to collea, moaitor, adysc, synthcsise and
act upon puvpios (cnan;J)and performanceindiators (iuitamal) &ring to:
C U S t O ~
shareholdus
people
suppkandputnas
-ccy
(MBNQA, 4.1d)
Descrik h m the effecUvcness, efficimcy aud connsVncy of the performuice masurement
systcm arc contindy impmved
is i
To better integrate the requirements of the ISO 9001 standard and the non-prexiipnve
criteria in the qualiry a w d , each category of the OPIM was split into rwo aspects, the
Table 3-5 outlines the fuial OPIM and the comesponding cnteria of the MBNQA,EQA,
Deming Pnze, and ISO 9001, ISO 9004.
Please note that there is no entry in element 5.2.2 from the MBNQA or EQA. The reason
for this is that these a w d do not specifically address self-assessrnentin their uiteria but
provide further guidance in sepante documents on this process. Please refer to the
Once the framework and ait& for the OPIM were cornplme, a document cded 'OPIM
Fundamentas" was created to describe the undertying frarnewods of the OPIM, its content,
terminoiogy and application (Karapev~Mcand Macey, 2001).
This document is meant to accompany the OHM Criteria and contains general information
about the OPIM induding its relationship with the CSO's performance management system,
the framework of the OPIM,the content of its criteria, a description of terminology used,
3.2.3
Once the model w u complete, it was ready to be wd as a reference for conducting selfassessments. To couen appropriate information for a self-assessment, the criteria were
translated into a set of questions to be used in assessment interviews. The questions were
based on the cnteria of the OPIM and were specific enougb to capture suffiuent
information with which to evaluate each element in the OPIM.
The questions were designeci to be open ended to obtain as much information as possible.
Appendk A contains the set of questions for the assessment. Please note that category four
is the r e d t s section that is used to evaiuate the results obtained in all other sections of the
model. For this reason, there are no questions for this category in the questionnaire but
evidence of the results in each pertinent category are collecteci from interviewees when
questions pertaining to these categories are asked. These questions ask the inte~eweeto
provide perception measures or performance indicaton that indicate performance relative to
the respective category critena.
3.2.4
This model was developed as a set of criteria against &ch a self-assessrnent could be
conducted in a praaicai sertlig. Although, not the main puipose of self-assessment, it is
ofren beneficial to calculate a score from the assessment that can be compared from one
models for the scoring xheme for the OPIM were the MBNQA and the EQA. These have
the most complete and comprehensive methods of evaluation. The evduation scales are
Mdti-cnteria decision making involves the selection of one alternative from a given set of
altemarives based on a set of criteria. Preference Function Modelling
is a decision
the decision would the selection of one car out of the set of cars.
This methodology is used to select one out of a set of alternatives. However, in this
application, the software was used for a slighdy different purpose. The hope was to develop
a function of values to be applied to the OPIM categories. The software was used to rank
the caregones of the mode1 based on their relative contributions to business performance.
These ranks would then be trandated into a set of vaiues for each of the categories. Thur
instead of selecting one car, we are creating a set of weights that would dow us to evaluate
any given car on a single, uni-dimensional scde that weights the car's characteristics
The foilowing describes the development of this function of values for the OPIM.
TOdetennine the dimibution of scores among the categones of the OPIM,the Trillium
software was iwd In this o v e d function, the htghest ranked element f~anslatesinto the
category that is worch the mon points.
The relative contribution of each category to business performance w u captured using the
opinions of top management and those who had experience with BEM and self-assessrnent
process. A review of literature rwealed several instances where authors that have vied to
determine the relationship betweai quality management practices and business performance.
To dwelop the peference function for OPIM,the foUowiq process was followed. The
alternatives are the categones in the OPIM and the criteria are the six components of
business
of alternatives in sets of five on each decision cnteria Figure 3-2 shows the scale used in the
Trillium software with severai elements from the OPIM positioned on it. After these
rankings were complete it was necessary to determine the uade-offs between the cntena to
indicare to the software which cnteria was the moa important to the organisation at the
present Ume. The Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operathg Officer, Vice President of
Finance, and the Vice President and General Manager of Division A were asked to indicate
the importance of each of these to the CSO in the Trillium software.
Appendix C contains the raw data taken from the Trilliurn software.
from 50 to 150.
It was decided that 1000 points would also be the t o d point value to facilitate cornparison
with the other award assessments.
The following process was used to change the ranks of the alternatives on the preference
function into scores out of 1000 for the OPIM.
1. The preferences on the scale were summed.
scores. The sum of al1 the resulting values wu 1000.Table 3-6 shows the results of this
process.
4. The resulting scores were rouded to give the result in Table 3-7.
I
People
Pmfamcw
48.49
1%
* m t
customcr Rdalionships
148.77
48.09
144.44
46.69
Performance Managamt
132.05
42.69
Performmce h p m e m c ~ l t
131.94
42.65
Strvegy ikvelopment
131.75
42.59
131.12
42.3 8
Peopk Resulu
129.62
41.90
De*
128.73
41.61
lnfonnuion Resources
12526
40.49
h
*
122.54
39.61
120
38.79
and Deploymtnt
Proccsxs
Resourccs
F~cialResources
St;ikehol&r Objectives
118.99
38.46
Raiisation Ptoccrxs
118.98
38.46
Cwomer Wts
110.3
35.65
103.n
33.54
Shareholdcr Results
99.48
32.16
System R
94.95
30.69
Supplier and P m a M
dts
89.38
28.89
Support Processes
86.8
28.06
l'urchasing Processes
82.8
26.77
50
16.16
Society Rmilts
l
Total
3093.56
Faaor
3.09356
ZOO0
4.4 SU&&~S
4.5 S O U m
4.6 Svstem
and Pumas
cz
33.50
16.00
30.50 1
42.00
43.00
I
r-
nnn
in the software to capture these uade-offs. Once this was clarified, thqr were more
comfortab1e wRh entering their preferences into the mode1 for an+.
element to comprehend wu the idea of uade-offs.
the MBNQA criteria in the OPIM Processes utegory are p e r than the poinrs in the
EQA The uiteria from each of these a
d that fdinto the Results catego'y of the OPIM
make up between 43 and 45% of the respective award points. The aiteria from each of these
awads that f u l inro the Performance category of the OPIM make up between 7.5 and 8.5%
Objecllves
Tod
Resources
8.5%
4%
4%
4%
OrganhonalTp
Public Responsibilityand Citizenship
Development
Sv?te&~
Smtegy Deployment
Custorner and Market Knowledge
12.9%
Work Systerns
Employee Education, Tninllig and
Development
Employee Well Being and
32.8%
Rwults
Tod
19Yo
Measurement of Organisationai
Performance
Analysis of Organisationl
Performance
Perfol.;mance
Tod
Processes
Total
12.8%
Customer Satisfaction and
Relationships
Cusromer md Market Knowledge
P d u a and Service Processes
Supplier and Pamer Processes
Suppon Processes
22.5%
Leadership
10%
8%
7.8%
4%
24.5%
3.5%
People
9%
2.5%
P m e r s h i p s and
Resources (9%)s - I / S
7.2%)
20.8%
2.5%
8.5%
11.5%
1 1.5%
Satisfaction
Tod
8%
2.5%
11.5%
45%
Customer Results
People Results
SocietyResula
Kcy Pcrfommcc
Results ( l job) x L 12
18%
20%
9%
6%
1 7.541, 1
1
42.5%
Kcy pcrtormancc
4%
4.5%
8.5%
4.5%
4%
5.5%
1.5%
1.5%
17%
Resulrs ( 15%)
>)s
1/ 2
7.5%
7.5%
Pracesses ( 1 -4%) s 4 / . V 1 3 ,
Pannerships and
1.8%,
Rttsuurces (9%) s 1/ 5
13%
i O OPIM
1 HMBNQA
1 O EQA
Objectives
Resource
Processes
Results
Performance
OPIM Categories
There are siight differences between the models in ternis of the preference given to each
category. The EQA and the MBNQA are both very focuzed on the results categones. A
large percentage of the total points have been assigne to this category in these cwo models.
The s c o ~ scheme
g
developed for the OPIM has points that are more evenly disvibuted
among the categories. n i e point value of the resources categoiy in the OPIM is aiso verdifferent from those of the other models.
The Resources category was deemed to be of greatest importance to the organisation's
perfoxmance. This is very 1ogica.I. It is often forgotten that no systern exists widiour
resources. A V e m is not jus a set of processes thar interact to produce an output.
Resources are ememely important as input into these processes. The q d t y of these
resources needs to be high to obtain quality outputs. One cannot cast inarmpetent
employees, unreliable equipment, or poor materials into a sysrern and expea satisfacto'y
results. It is interesting to note that resources are worth the lean in the scoring scherne of
the MBNQA.
41
1
This redt is a h v e y important to companies moving beyond ISO 9000 towub business
excellence. The main focus of IsO 9001 is on pmesses. TOmove beyond this standard,
companies musr begin to concentrate on &ek resources as a next sep.
The distribution of these points in the OPIM is based on the opinions of people in the CSO.
This distribution of points my have a great effect on the final score in a seif-assessment.
Chapter 4 describes the performance of a self-assessrnent against the OPIM. A sensitiviry
analysis is done to answer this question.
3.3
Chapter S u m n w y
Introduction
The CSO's quality system has been registered to the ISO 9001 standard since 1995. Since
thar tirne, quality audits have been conducted to ensure the continwus cornpliance of this
system. The organisation had not however, conducted a self-assessment against a mode1 for
quality management or business excellence. Sweral seps were involved in conductiag the
fwst self-assessment a g h the OPIM (See Figure 4- 1). This induded planning, garhering
idonnation, evduating the r e d s and the assessment process, and incorporating the r d t s
into the business planning process. This secrion describes the seps involved in the pilot
assessment of one of the (30's business divisions.
Planning
4.2.1
The planning phase of the self-assessrnent induded definmg the scope, self-messment
method, resources, and tim$ines. The scope refen to the areas within the organisation rhat
This can ange from one depanment to the whole organisation. The selfassessrnent method concerns how the infonnation will be gathered to complete the
assessment. (Chapten 2 and 3 ourline several nich methods). It is important to defme the
wili be assessed
Scope
assessment. Fin*,
this particular division was selected because it was the fastes growing
Self-assessrnent Method
It was necessary to select a self-assessrnent method that would be appropriate for the
organisation as wd as meet the requirements and expectations of the CSO.
There are sevenl choices for appropriate self-assessment method, as seen in Chapter Two.
The seleaion of a self-assessrnent mode1 involves wsessing the maturity level of the
Company.
The CS0 had progressed well in the implementation ofits quaiity system. This suggests that
it has srarted its joumey towars excellence, and w u 'on its wy". As a r e d t , a more
rigorous assessment approach was deerned to be appmpxiate.
assessment exerQse was to collect information from the organisation to identify the
suengrhs and areas for improvement in each area. The initiators of this process were also
interesteci in gaining as much information as possible from the assessment. Because of the
amount of infoxmation required and the quality manuin/ level of the organisation, a variation
on the pro-forma approach (see section 2-22) was selected.
The pro-forma approach involves the creation of a set of pages where each page
corresponds to one sub-critenon. The description of the sub-critaion is printed at the top
of the page with areas ro address beneath it. The information requested on the page
indudes suengths, areas for improvement and evidence. I n t e ~ e w are
s conducceci to collect
evidence for rhis process. Once these are finisbed, the assesson then complete the proformas.
Ln this self-assessment, a set of questions relating to the sub-criterion was asked of the
inte~eweesro uy to capture its essence. The assessor then identifieci the strengths and
areas for improvement based on the responses of the interviewees. Thus, the pro-forma
was completed by the assessor through the collection of information and evidence from the
interviewee.
Marketing
* Research and Dwelopment
Test Operations & Strategic SourSng
- Materials Planning
The following organisational charcs indicate which representatives fiom eadi are? were
intervieweci.
A mauix contaning the question set and the names of the inten?ewees w u created. This
was used to ensure that dl questions in the set were asked at least three times to three
particular question had been asked of an inrehewee to ensure at least rhree. The lasr
column indicates if ail the intewiewees asked the question were able to provide a usable
answer to the question.
Question
How do leaders communiate the importance
of meeting cunomer as weii as reguiatory and
legal requirements?
Whar is the process for iden*
and
targeting cusromers, customer groups and
market segments?
How does the CSO address and improve
workplace heaith, safety and ergonornic
factors?
How is design validation incorporated into the
design and deveiopment processes?
How do you detennine key suppon process
requirements? What is the systern applied to
measure your key performance indicators
relating to organisationai effectiveness
(meeting key objectives)?
How do you && what key compaxtive data
and information to use?
How do you continuaiiy improve the
effectiveners, effiency rad consistency of the
performance mevurement systern?
Number of questions for each interviewee
Ys
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes Yes
Yes
Yes
Ys
3
Yes
3
Yes
3
Asked Aaswer
3
Yes Yes
Yes
3
3
4.2.1.3
Timelines
A Mieliae was developed to indude al stages of the assessment process. These were
developed based on previous experience in other organisations. Table 4-2 ilhinrates the
suggested and a
St;ise
p*
1 ~ e v e l o ~ m mofr
manix
M d up session with (QA manager and
the &miew
u
Idenyfy OFh and r a s(3 OFI'r and 3 +'s
Der careeonr)
12.00
l&
1M
ldy
20.00
6.00
2d;iys
8.00
25
75.00
80.W
100.00
15
30.00
Wrrkr
1 Week
1 I weekl
week
wIFk
1 da^
we$rr
1h
4.2.2
Hours
10
2-3W&
ld?y
2-3 W&
Presentation to Management
IdV
Report
1%
ldy
000)
Time
Persons
Involved
Person
Tii
Esum;ited
377.25
--
Assessrnent
After the ~luiningwas complete, the next phase of the assessment involveci conducring
interviews, reviewing and e v a l b g responses, reviewing resuits, and crearion of the final
report.
InteMews were scheduled through intemal e - m S Each interviewe was sent a List of
questions to feview before his or her scheduled interview M i e . The interviews were
conducteci by the aurhor and were recorded dire+
meeting, the notes taken were rwiewed and if any dacificarion was necessary, a phone c d or
e-mail was made to the interviewee.
Objective evidence wu also coiiected from the interviewees. This evidence included the
following:
customer satisfaction nwqr re&
employee satisfaction nwqr results
monthly performance data from the result-based performance memement system
This evidence was used to evaluate the Redts section of the OPM The data was reviewed
ro see if trends from the pas few yean have shown continuous impmvement.
4.2.2.2
Review of Responses
At the end of the interview process, the ansvers from each interview were reviewed. It was
here that the i n i d analysis of the responses took place. The three answers to each question
were midied to determine if thqr described the same approach. If al1 three answers were
sirnilar, this would indicate that there was good deployment of the approach across and
down through the division. If an inte~ieweein a management position described a strong
approach but other respondents did not concur, diis indicated that the deployment of the
approach was weak. If, after getting these dvee answers, they wue ail different, the question
was posed to yet another h t e ~ e w e e .If
niggested that there was no consistent approach to the element in question throughout the
division.
After ensuring that each question had been arked a SuffiCient number of thes, the author
and a member of the quaity assurance team ma to discuss and evaluate the amvers. The
three or four responses to each question were Nmmanred before the evduation Each
s u m m a h d question was evaluated first accordllig to the approach describeci. Appendix E,
adapted from the EQA, darifies the scores given for approach, deployment and results.
Each evaluator scored each question independen* as per these definitions If the scores feu
within 20% of each other then the average score was taken for that question. This range was
felt to be acceptabie to the assessrnent team since, as we can see in Appendix E, the range
foreach score level is 20%. If however there w u a gap greater than 20%, then discussion
ensued This was a vduable part of the evaluarion process. A large gap occurred onlytwice.
The discussion that followed led to a re-scoring and a s d e r gap.
The following is provided as an examp1e of the evaluation process. It describes the
evduation of element 5.1, Performance Management.
These questions were asked in order to mess this aspect of the organisation's business.
What are the systems used to mevure organisationai performance?
H o w are these synems interrelated?
The responses to these questions provided enough information to evaluate the approach and
deployment cf the methods to satisfy the given element.
Approach:
There wu some evidence of a sound approach to internai auditing and remit-based
performance meanirement.
There was no self-assessrnent process in place at that t h e .
and strategy and that the interna1 auditing process w u well defined
Each department tracked its own perfonavrce measures but had its own merhod of
daetmiaing which performance areas needed monitoring and how this information w u
colected.
Ther- was no evidence that the relationship berween the intemal auditing systern and the
performance measurement system is managed or improved at d
The average score given was 20%. Refeming to Appeadk E, we can see that the CSO had
oniy some evidence of systemauc approaches to satisijmg the criteria in the given category.
Deplqment:
performance meanirement.
The average score given was 13%
Results
M e r the xoring w u complete for each sub-category, a lia of svengths and areas for
hprovement w u compiied. These were based on a bendimuking ana+
to derennine the
within
A final presentation of the results of the assessrnent was made to the managers and directors
of the division The results were also communicated in a Gnal reporr that w u left wirh the
CSO. Each page of the body of the report conrained the sub-category title, the fmal score
for that section, the criteria in that category, the list of strengths and areas for irnprovement,
and some examples of what excellent companies do. Figure 4-5 is an excerpt from this
repon.
5.1 PRfo1111;~1ce
Management
5-13 Key Performanceindiaton
tomtvunthc~
perf0~OutCOmcs
&nt&d in section 4.63 of
syffem
irnproved
Fimd Score
4.2.3
Once earh categoxywas evduated, the scores were uuisfured h o the final scoring template
to caiculate a f;nal score for the self-assessment.
4-3:
-
F
I
1
OPIM Citcpory
Objdva
2000 Score
50
1
1
Pemat Score
39%
Maximum Score
Raccsses
60
27%
Proces Managanent
10
49
220
Ginorna rationships
12
23%
25%
Design ~
13
30%
13
3096
23
Shucholder Rcsulrs
309b
30
People Rcnilts
10%
44
5%
33
Society RcsulKs
5%
10
~gProccsscs
12
27%
Perforxuncc knprovanmt
12
28%
43
28%
IO00
Ova;ill OPIM S c a c
281
43
A score of 284 on the first assessrnent indicates that the CSO and the division that
undenvent the d-assessmuir have embarked on the joumey towarb excellence. This
score is not to be taken as an absolute accurate 'proportionw of business excellence (Le. the
Company being about 28% excdlenr), but as an indicator of which areas within the
organisation are further dong than others (Le. some categories received a score of 50h
whereas others scored 30%, meaning the fint category is not as developed as the second
one). It is not the absolute score in each category that is the most important eitha but the
translation of scores into priorities for impmvement that is the most value a d d d
4.2.4
Outcornes
Once the fmai scores of these categones were caldateci, it was important to prioritise the
results. This would assist the in the process of selecting the area on which to focus
improvement efforts.
This prioritisation was based on the score achiwed in a speciiic catego'y and the value of the
category. Table 4-4 illustrates the prioritisation process. The categones are ordered by score
achieved resulting in a score index. The categones are then ordered by total point value
giving a value index. These index values are then multiplied resulting in the total index.
for
IGtcgory
Score
Achiwed
1 Score Index (
4
10
23
15
17
13
11
People Results
Process Management
Information Resources
1Techno10gy Resources
&orner relationships
11
12
Perfomiuice Management
Supplier and P m e r Rcsults
Resoufce Management
Perfommce Monitoring and Conuolimg
R;ilis?tion Prucesses
Desien Processes
11
2
14
12
10
13
Vaiue of
Gtegory
44
44
1 Vaiue Index 1 T o d I
19
20
13
41
45
49
24
44
33
47
43
37
43
18
8
23
16
10
17
456
300
289
286
264
22
I
12
25
7
10
14
8
2 16
200
161
160
140
136
n d
Performance Impmvement
Infr;isuucnueResources
Work Environment
NaturalResources
Shareholder Renilrs
System R e d t s
Strategy Development & Deployment
Support Processes
People fiesources
&orner Results
Pudashg Processes
Financiai Resources
SocietyResults
Management
Score
Achieved
12
8
14
4
9
4
17
8
25
16
7
18
1
27
Scorekidcx
9
19
6
24
16
22
4
18
2
5
20
3
26
1
30
28
42
24
53
35
23
40
10
51
135
133
126
120
15
7
21
5
6
96
88
56
54
14
3
26
9
2
12
1
25
1
1
52
45
40
36
26
25
The self-assessrnentprocess providecl the CSO with severai important outcornes. Firn, the
self-assessrnentprocess itself was i m p o m t . The pilot assessrnent will provide valuable
information to the organisation regardmg how best to conduct their self-assessrnent process
in the future. A h , a review of the strengths and areas for improvement found in the
assessrnent will be beneficial as an input to the m u a i business planning process. The final
score on the assessrnent wili be a usefd benchmarkuip tool as weli as a good quantitative
indicator of the statu of the quaiity management system and its level of business excellence.
The observations and recommendations resulting from this wessment were the following
Objectives
Suppliers and partners are not involved in the strategic planning pmcess.
There is no syscematic process to follow-up on action items to determine if they have
been completed and to evaluate the gaps.
Processes
Lack of syste~llitticincorporation of leamhg and customer feedback into design
processes.
No systernatic process for incorporation of current and projected infernal Nsromer
requirements and priorities into the design of support processes.
No review of customer related processes to ensure they are dmeeting custorner's
requkemenu.
Collecf and use data from day to day contact with customers to enhance customer
satisfaction levels.
Resources
Provide managers with a report of only those budget items that thqr have control over.
0
Develop a formal process for providing timely feedback to suppliers and parmers on
their performance.
Develop a synem for waiuariag the uade-off berween maintaining 'old" techdogy
and investing in new technology.
Results
Review the reporting of perfomance measures ro ensure that vends for the pan three
years are evident and that rargets are explicitly xared.
Performance
Irnplement a review of performance measures used to track rhe performance in each
deparunent to enwe thqr are reflecting the key drives of your business.
Focus on closing the loop. Irnplement processes to e n m that outputs from co~~ective
and preventive actions become inputs to design and process control activities.
4.2.5
As this self-assessrnent was the k t for the CSO, the organisation and assessors reviewed
the process to evaiuate its effectiveness and to suggest impmvements. This should become
a reg&
pan of the assessment proceu. Severai questions should be asked within this
process.
wouid suggest that more information and support coming from management to encourage active
participation in the process by employees should orin before the n m self-assessrnent is
conduaed.
Was the tirneframe appropriate for pmper feedback into the business planning
process and 0 t h processes that would require input fiom this process?
This self-assessrnent did not oc= at the proper t h e for the results to be fed into the business
p l h g process. These self-assessments should be perfomied doser to the beginning of the
This proces nee& to be reviewed and imPmved in the next assessment. The inte~eweeswere
selected by department managers and directom. A better cross-section of employecs including,
for instance, more people involved in the re;ijisatiion processes, could be selected.
rhis should be thought out before it is conmicred and reviewed again once it is complete.
assessment?
It is benefiaal ro have a number of assessors from al1 areas of the business. This would result in
a more efficient and effective coiiection of information, since thete would be a better
understanding of the s p d c proceses Mthinthe Qputmenfs. This would eluninate Ume spent
on understanding the organisational processes.
This self-assessmentprocess involved many people wirhli the CSO. The tirne involved was
lengthy. As this was the first assessment of ths kind performed within this organisation,it is
useful to evduate its value to the Company. One wayto do rhis is to compare the process
and r e d t s to those of a q d t y audit performed in the same rime LamP. This anparison
indudes:
the resources required to perforrn the self-assessrnent and the quality audir
The ne= chapter deais Mth such a comprison proces. It also lodrs at remit-based
perfommnce measufement in &on
Introduction
The CSO uses several methods for measuring organisational perfonnance. The selfassessrnent desuibed in the previous chapter is now compareci to wo other types of
perfonnance measurement used by the organisation: a quality audit conducted in the same
time frame, and the red-based performance mevureman used to continuously monitor
the processes 4 t h the organisation.
5.2
October 23d and December 15* (8 weeks) and the q d t y audit occurred during the week of
October ZPto November 2" (1week). The internal audit team within the Quality
Assurance deparunent perfonned this audit with the assistance of an extemai consultant
acting as lead auditor.
Both the audit and self-assessrnent resulted in a set of recornmendauons for improvement.
The audit's recommendations resulted from the non-confonnities and opportunities for
improvement identified by the lead auditor. The recommendations from the self-assessrnent
arose from the areas for improvement found throughout the process. Table 5-1 shows the
main areas requiring attention that were identified in each of these processes as a remit of
within Customer Relationships and those found within element 4.4 Design Conml.
Table 5-2 shows the main recormnendations, and non-cornplance issues and ares for
improvement idendied in the self-assessrnent and audit respecciveiy. The table lins the
main caregories in the OPIM with corresponding recommendations.
T h e non-compliuice
issues and opportunities for improvement redting from the audit have been listed
accorciingly. The issues underlined within the table have been identified as si&
issues
arising from the audit and self-assessment. As was illustrated in Table 5-1, many of the
recommendations from the self-assessrnent do not correspond to any in the audit as the
audit covers onty those items in the ISO 9001: 1994 standard. Those that were identified as
major issues in the audit may not have been major issues in the self-assessment. This is
because other issues arising in the self-assessrnent were ranked at a higher impomnce level.
Qriltrysysta
Use ISO 90012m direction for dcploying stratcgic
ptnn;np prinC;Plcs t o &me bmuiinkage berweai
svPegic objectives & the systcm dtslgned to achieve
tbmi
N o compiiancc issuCs
No compiiancc issucs
N o compluace issues
No c o m p ~ c isnics
e
N o compLUnce issues
Design Control
Processes
s-
..
on k
IKtfofminrC
Move t
d tnic supplier qu;ilif~cationin pkcc of
product quaMcations
Consider a formal sys~cmfor achicving the above
t cause ui;3yUs is i n a d a p t e
Corrrcllvc actions not responded to in a timeiy
muuicr, and somc n a rcspondcd to at d
l
Mcthod for esublishing effecrivcnessof solution is
Intenul Audits
Prioritise audit ;ictivillcs b w d on due-added and
effective w of reu,urces
Numaous comcWe isnies ourstuiding. Consider
an &on
Clause
No objective evidence that mut?gcmuit personnel
rwiewcd audit fndings
Indepuidence of auditors not evident in di cases
Statistid Techniques
Several issues can be ewacred from this comparison. A mjor problem identifid in the
q d t y audit (element 4.17) was that there was no objective evidence that management
personnel reviewed the audit fmdings. This was also emphasised by the fact that there were
numerous corrective issues found to be outstanding. This is one of the main differences
berween the self-assessrnent and auditing processes. It is evident that the outcornes or
recommendatons from the quality audits are not reviewed and acted upon to an acceptable
level. The results are not fed back into the business planning process. The self-assessrnent
fmdings on the other hand were presented to senior management and were considered
usefil to the planning process.
As discussed previously, the renilrs of an audit are simple pass or f
d judgements. The
assessrnent performed against the OPIM was given a score based on the approach and
deployment of the approaches that the organisation has in place to mea the given criteria of
the model. It is difficult, therefore, to compare the f i score or outcome of these two
processes. If there were a methoci for cornpuison, the findings would show that the score
on an assessment againa rhis model Qcreases with fhe number of non-conformances and
elements requiring major attention in a qualicy audit performed in the same rime frune.
The OPIM has attempted to incorporate the basic reqykments for the organisation's q d r y
system. If there were any non-conformances arising from the audit, it should follow that the
corresponding element in the OPIM would be judged as inadequate. If the minimum
reguirements have been met, the score for the eiemem in the self-assessment should be
hrgher. It does not indicate however, that ail the critexia in the corresponding element of the
seIf-assessrnent have been met. Figure 5-1 iliumtes this concept.
Self-Assessrnent
Low
I
Wouid h?\e nonconformanceswhilc
0bt;ilring a hi& score
on the self-asxssment.
Audit
QualityAudit
SeIf-assessrnent Score
Low
Conforrmnce
Nontonformance
This corresponds well with the hypothesis presented in Figure 5-1. The highest percentage
of elemenrs is in the quarter for low scores and non-conformances. The lowest percentage
of elements is in the quarter for high scores and non-conforniances. The other rwo quarters
are almost equal.
Figure 5-2 compares the scores on the OPIM to the elemenu of the quality audit that weie
found to have non-conformities. On average, the self-assessrnent xores were lower when
corresponding ISO 9001 elements were found to have non-conforniinces. The results do
Vary. Keep in rnind that the elements of the OPIM in moa cases cover more than
corresponding elements of ISO 9001. It is possible to have a low score on the OPIM men
if there were no non-conformances found in the audit. There should not be however, mun,
elements in the OPIM that achieve a high score if rhere are non-conforniances found in the
corresponding element from the ISO 9001 standard
5.2.1
The self-assessmentperfoxmed againa the OPIM provided much information regarding the
effectiveness and the efficiency of al of the organisation's processes. In particular, suengths
and areas for improvement were identifieci in processes related to quality management. A
comparison of the resuits of the self-assessrnent and the quality audit rwealed that similar
issues were idenufied in each process. The implications of this are far reaching.
It is evident from this exercise that performing self-assessrnent on the elements related
to q d t y management c m provide valuable information regardhg rhe effciency of
these processes. This c m cl+
of such processes.
The men& and weaknesses identified in the self-assessrnent process are incorporated
into the business pknning pmcess. This ensures that the areas for improvement, related
to the quality management system, are iopns h o rhis planning process as w d . This
compensates for the fact that the results of quality audits are not incaporated into the
business planning process.
management, especdy if perforrned
a opposing times of the year from the interna1 quality audits, would lead to further
improvements to the efficiency and effectiveness of these processes.
5.3
Self-assessmenr against the MBNQA and the EQA involves the evduation of organkationd
results. These reniks are assessed based on the history and trends of m m e s that have
EQA and the Business R e d t s categoxy of the MBNQA (See Table 5-4).
EQA (Result4
Customer
People
SRY
Performance
It is the a
~0~
people
supplias and partnen
Society
qptm-
WNQA4, . 1 4
OPIM
5.3.2
The CSO has IWO main divisions. Each of these has its R&D, marketing, and manufacninng
components but are assisted by the same support departments. These are cornputer
services, quality conuol, quality asniance, hurnan resources, and finance. Division A
focuses mady on new produa development. This means the design of new integrated
circuits @Cs) to meet the needs of its customen. Most of the new products developed are
manufactureci out of house. Division B has both new product development and on-site
manufacturing. The divisions are quite different h m one another but both must conuibute
to the ovedl adiwement of profitable gr&
Most departments have dwdoped their perfoxmance measures from the objectives of the
depanment, which in tum are developed h m the CSO's overall objectives. To improve
the C D ' s performance measurement system, it is important to identify gaps where aspects
Explmation
The pcrcmtage incmasc in d e s over the pmiious ycu (5 veu compound)
(Prr-tuincomc-invesmicntinromc-tucs)/~oril~-cuh+ ST-
Ilbiliries)
Qualicy
Assurance
-pli%
umc
NP1 New
Roduct
Introductions
Sales
revenue
invcuaiin'~~~
Pmrntage
effort for top ten
. .
This is the pcruntagr of anplqrcc t h e spenr on the cumnt top tai priority
-&on
'
Cyde
1
1
1
1
1
Asscmbly Opcrations/Test/Extemal
Asscmbly
(w*)
Testing
(Extemal
and Intemal)
The actual mix of produar testcd cornpucd to the scheduicd mir of turing in
~produaionschcdulc
.
AIQ (ppm)
Prototype cyde timc inhowc/offshorc (w-bys)
Several interviews were conmicted to gain information about the current measures being
used. These measures were reviewed with the manager of QA, the VP of Research and
Developmen~the VP of Manufaauring, and the VP of Finance. Each one was asked a
number of questions pe~ainingto these measures.
Quesuons
Which
performance
indicarors are most
important to you in
determinhg the
performance of
your department?
VP Finance
meaSures are
imponant with the
possible exception
of the Quai~ty
Assurance
Inspection Cyde
Time, which is
done for customer
satisfaction
reasons. These
meilSufes are a
good indication of
the performance of
the QA
deriment.
measures thu you
feel are not quite as
useful as they
could be?
measures are
manufacnuing
COR
on-rime
delivery
qdty(%
defects)
production of
appropriate
volumes
Other
healthand
safety
although these
need to be
explained
thoroughiy to the
attendees at the
montMy
performance
meetings so that di
measures used are
undersrd
Quesuons
Yes
How ue these
tracked and
reported on?
How is the
information from
these measured
used?
depaKmenf
determines the
outgoing qu;ikty of
Measures are
reporteci on
monthiy
Measures are used
to fmd areas w here
d t y
performance is not
up to targets
How are targeu for The targets for aU
these measures set? these measures are
1s bencharking
25% improvement
done? If so how is over previous year.
t h done?
Target was 50h
but after improving
the 'low huiging
fruitn,it was more
difficult to achiwe
this 50%
improvement.
Yes
There is a database
for tmcking these
measures (on-line
NP1 &tabue)
Mon of these
n w s w e s are
tracked in the QIS.
Finaud mesures
are uacked in
aflother
inforniwon
sysrem.
The performance
of the
~llil~lufacfuring
dep;i~mentaffects
cusfomer
satisfaction and
~lll~lufacniiing
The performance
of the R&D
department
determines how
fast the Company
grows
It is the primvy
cost driver of the
business and
deterrnines the
quality of produm.
The performance
of the QA
organisation's
Yes
Yes
M m e s are
CalcUlated by
accounting d e r k
from information
in another
information
syst=.
The finuicial
measures are the
m?in indiaors of
The orgmktion's
performance
COSU
Measures are
coiiected and
reponed on
mon*
This information is
used to focus
improvement
efforts
Me;isures are
collected weekly
and reporteci on
mon*
Measures are used
CO frnd problems in
the production
pmcess
Measures indicate
how the
organisation is
performing o v e d
Set realisticaiiy
based on historiai
baseci o n
forecasteci dernad,
some
based on an
increase of 20 in
saies and revenues
each year
benchmarking such
as on-time delivery.
Benchmuking is
done m d y from
a process
perspective not just
to determine
tuners.
coiiected monthly
Based on this set of interviews, the foflowinglin of strengrhs and areas for improvement
was created.
Strengths
The measures used in the Quaiity Assurance, R8rD and Manufactwing are felt to be
adequate to capture perfoxmance in each depanment.
The meanires are felt to be in-line with the organisation's strategy.
The CS0uses its performance measurement infommion in monddy meetings.
A r e a s for impravemcnt
Most measures are monitored monrhly. Some may need to be mcked more o h .
There is no systematic review of these measures to ennue that they are d l meeting the
compare the set of measures used by the CSO to these models to idendy a .areas whem
the organisation does not meanire performance.
Table 5-10 places the CSO's perfoxmance measures wirhin the four penpecrives of the
Balanced Scorecard (BSC).
Fimacial Perspective
Sales growth
I n d Business Perspective
Design cycle time
De*
4 w
Devclopmait effort
Milestones on time
Manufaawingcyde Urnes
Design-ins
Yield
Supplier on-time delivery
Qu?lity of supplier products
Billingacmmq
Customa Perspective
Customer Satisfaction Survey
Fdure Assessrnent (FA) success nte
Customer renvnstechnid
CAOQ (CunomerAverage Outgohg Qdq)
Prdua reliabhy Ievels
On-Ume shipments
Backorden
Cil response
Ability to accept orders
Ir is evident that the C D ' s measures fit well inro the BSC famework The weakest category
seems to be Innovation and Learning. The CSO should find several more measures
penaining to its performance in this area Sorne suggestions follow in the next section.
Mmuf?aiPing
AIQ ( P P ~ )
AOQ ( P P ~
CAOQ (customer average outgohg quality)
Product reliabiikty levels
Customer rcnunstechnical
Production m e vs. MPS (%)
P
&
Yield
Prohuct mix vs. MPS
Sdety
FA
m e
R&D
Mask d o
% First tirne right
Humui Rcsourccs
ProductiY;ty/E mployee
TrainingH o m per employee
Hit me (%)
Qulityof hire
Rtention rate
Testing and Stntcgic Sourcing
Quality of WO accepted
Muiufacturlllg
Qu;ility Assurance Inspection
Muiufacnuing Lead
Tie
Rare of production
ind&on
Deliver lead time
Due-Date performance
Frequenq of delivery
O n T e Dehiy
R&D
'
Manufaauring cost
Vdue added
S e h g pice
Running con
Service con
Cost of Qu;iLty
Design con
Distribution con
Cost dative to
cornpetitors
Materiah
Inventory
Flembiliry MPaGlquliry
Manufrcturing
B;ickordas
Rtw
Ncw p&
;n;t;lt;ons
(MG)
New prohua imroducaom (MR)
Humm Resourccs
0urPutQu;itty
N-vproduct
Modify~h
D&mbility
Volume
Mix
Resourcemix
Ov&
Other
R O M
ROE
EPS growth
% Revenue h m NPI projects iaunchcd within last 3 years
Investment in NPI
NP1 investment as % of forcas menue
Percentage effort for top ten priority projects
Design-ins
Sales
This set is comprehensive. The con category however, is quice weak. This uea should be
reviewed to ensure that the organisation uuly understands its costs. O n e important aspect is
the identification of the c o s of quaiity. This is not addressed at all by the CSO's
performance measurement system. This indudes looking at preventative, appraisal and
fadure costs to show management the costs of poor quaity, to idenufy opporninities for
A third set of measurement categories is found in the Resuhs sections of the OPIM. The
OPIM incorpontes the meanires suggested by the MBNQA and the EQA. Table 5-9
compares these measures to those that are mcked bythe CSO.
i OPlM
Reput;ition
Ourpum
CAOQ
On-the shipments
Interfaces
Backordcrs
GIl Response Rare (Applications)
Financial
Sdes Growth
ROANA
ROE
value Added
EPS Growth
Non-Finuiciai
Design-hs
Interfaces
Motivation
Satisfaction
Hours of Tnining
Employee Alignment Survey
RRenaon
Absen&
Achiwemeats
Supplien and
Parmen
Society
Services
Lnputs
Interfaces
CRizenship
Cornmunity
Environment
Hdth and S a f q
-of
Hire
Enuy level/expenence %
Empluyee Productivity
Accession (% hedcount)
AiQ for Offshore paru
Offshore cyde tirnes
On-tirne deliveries
Quai~tyof WO accepted
Responsiveness
Interfaces
IC cyde Ume
Development
W
t
y
T o d Development
Effort
AIQ for Offshore
P-
Offshore cyde h e s
On-Ume deliveries
Qu;ility of WO
accepted
Responsiveness
Production rate vs.
MPS
Produa mix vs.
MPS
Production cycle
times
Yield
AIQ
Quality-ce
Ins~ectionT i e
Management
Finances
RONA
ROE
[nformauon
[nfnsuucturr
People
Produ&+ per
employee
Design Effon
-
Nature
Work EnWonment
EPS
Net Profit
On-tirne shipments
Schedule Accuracy
FA Success Rate
Mes
Design-ins
Accordhg to the utegories of perfonnuice in the OPM, the CS0 is missing perfomiance
measures that reflect the effiaent and effective use of the organisation's r e m c e s . Table 510 provides suggesred meanires that shodd be incorporateci into the CSO's m
t set of
masures to monitor the use of resomes. The suggested meanires have been taken from
several sources induding the E Q A
Pcrformancc Ar#
Source
Sct
Exterd Resources
C
Supplier psice
Numkr and vaiue added of p d p s
Inventor-leveh and timing of deliveries
Number and vliut added of innovative product solutions
Financial Resources
EQA
t ratings
Technology Resources
I
Information Resources
inventory tumover
Utility consumption
Lhihation
~ & i i iof~toolr
Value of i n t d d property
Patents
Royalties
Accessibility
kitegrity
Relwance
Timeliness
Sharine and u s m knolk'ledee
Vdue of intellecd capitd
Y
Shaw, 1999
Csb flowitems
Balance sheet items
Depreciation
Maintenuice corn
M
EQA
EQA
EOA
EQA
EQA
EQA
EQA
EQA
EOA
EQA
EQA
-.
EOA
- -
Ba*,
1994
EQA
EOA
-
- -
EQA
EQA
EQA
EQA
EQA
EOA
EQA
In addition to the resource indicators, the CSO does not have indicators that show what the
organisation is adUeving in relation to s o c i q . Some of the measures that are s-ested
in
literanue are k e d in Table 5-1 1. The CSO should inco'pome seved of these mevures
into its m e n t set of performance measures.
Pcrform;uice Arca
Performance as a responsible a&
toExistingSet
Disdosures of information relevant to the
cornmunRy
E q d oppominities practices
Impact on I
d and nationai economies
Involvement in education and &&g
' Volumvy work a d phiianthropy
Support for sport and leisure
Choice of avupon
Ecologid impm
Reduction and eiimktion of waste and
EOA
-x--
EQA
EQA
EQA
EQA
EQA
EQA
EQA
The CSO d s o does not report on services for employees. Table 5-12 indudes a lia of
suggested performance measurrs covering rhis perfomiance area.
Benefit lwels
Provision of facilities and services
EQA
EOA
In general these tables address the three areas where the CSO's perfomiance meanirement
system is weak Thus, performance measures should be designed or adopted to reflect
use oI resources
The 0should a h rmiew the suengdis and areas for improvement related to its remitbased performance measurement system identifid in this chapter.
5.4
It is evident that self-assessment, audiring and result-based performance meanirement are ali
benefiaal to an organisation's performance improvemem efforts. Each one requires a
different cype of input and each r e d t s in outpins that become inputs into the performance
management system of the organisation. Table 5-13 recaps the characteristics of these
Self-assessrnent
Inputs
' Effort
Outcornes
Measure
Opinions
Obiective evi&nce
Possible hi& effon l
wei
Qulttative
Subjeaive (Based on
Result-baseci pe dormance
measunment
Numeric &ta
Audrnng
Objective evi&nce
1
opinion)
Pfocess-based
Dependent on system
Quantitative
Ma+ Objective
Specific
Holistic
Effiaency anci Effecveness
Effectiveness
Qualitative
Objective
These methods each have its specific role to play but are obviousiy quite interdependent.
This next section describes the relationship arnong these meanirement methods and how
they can be used together to improve organisational perfoxmance.
5.4.1
The OPIM, like the EQA and the MBNQA, contains cntena that address the Enablers and
Results of the performance management system. In self-assessment, the efficiency of the
Enablers is judged. Their effectiveness is mevurd by the Redts. Figure 5-4 illusmates this
relationship.
SELF-ASSESSMENT
Efficiency of
Effectiveness of
meanires in this system provide quantitative and qualitative information concerning the
efficiency and effectiveness of activities. For instance the CSO uses Quahy Asnirance
Inspection Cyde Ume as a measure of the how efficiendy the QA department performs its
inspections. It also racks customer satisfaction, which is an indiwor of how effectively it is
meeting cunomer requirements.
O n e wodd ask then, why wouid an organisation need self-assessment. The anmer lies in
the limited abiiity of these meanires to evaiuate the approaches and deployment of
important. This process imrolves a more in-depth a d p of~why the activity is at the
current performance lweL Self-wessment, for instance, can provide information about
how the QA department performs its inspection processes thus shedding light on why it's
effiaency is where it is.
Resuit-based performance measurement provides a snapshot of performance levels. Selfassessrnent evaiuates the causes of these performance levels. It is &dent that these nvo
performance meanurnent methods are complementary. Used together they can provide
valuable information for improvernent.
5.4.2
This chapter has illustrated the importance of each type of performance measurement to an
organisation. Figure 5-5 illusvates how these fit into an organisation perfonnance
measurement system. The result-based perfonnance measurement system consins of
perforrmnce meanues. The OPIM exisrs as a reference mode1 for self-assessrnent and
encompasses the elemenu that are audited against ISO 9001. The results of self-assessments
against OPIM will provide an indication of the CSO's overall performance, and therefore
PERFORMANCE
MEASUREMENT
w
Audit
Assessrnent
i
5.5
Chapter Suimnary
audit*
reveded the several implications for the simuitaneous use of audits and self-assessments
within an organisation. The chapter dso described the review of the CSO's perfonnance
meanvernent system and rhen compared the use of redt-based perfonnance meanirement
to the use of audiring and self-assessment.
Introduction
This diaprer outlines the modification of the proposed model, the OPIM, for use in an
R&D environment. These modifications were based on issues raised in the literature review
and practical experience gained t h u g h the self-assessrnent conducteci at the CSO.
6.2
The CSO, as an organisation, is very much focwd on its R&D efforts to compete in the
fast paced marketplace. There are several R&D reams woiking in each of irs three business
areas. After interviewhg several of the managers in each of these areas, it was dixoverd
that mon of the issues mentioned impact the efficiency and effectiveness of the R&D
function.
The R&D management is very much focused on reducing q d e Urnes and ensuring that
products reach the marketplace as dose to fun as possible. It is currently woriung on
increasing the awareness of the vaiue of time amongst R&D ream members. Through
several benchmarkhg mdies reporteci on in the CSO's strategic pianning meeting, it was
discovered that Ume delays con much more in the long r e m than does exceeding the project
budget to get the work done on cime.
One author found, mggesteci that in a market with 20% annual growth and 12O/0 pnce drop
per year chat a delay of six months while on budget wdl earn 33% less profit over life but
introducing the same produa on rime with a 50% budget overrun cuts profits by only 4%.
(From the 0 ' s strategic planning meeting)
The CSO is very aware of the need to malitain its RgrD efforts. About 20% of net revenue
is invested back into R&D. The CS0 is constantly exploring other markets and expanding
its opporruniaes.
Division A is involved in the design of integrated Circuits for th& application to a particular
segment of indu-.
The OMM is based on standards and models that have not s p e a f i d y been taiiored for use
in an R&D environment. To be effective as a mode1 for R%D, several modifications needed
to be made.
R&D goals and objectives shodd be defined in a waythat shows de+ how each
researcher's activities contribute to the company's goals. These should be aligned from the
a m with the goals of the organisation. If organisational objectives are undear, then the
nom is generally for individwls to outperfom othen through a system that r e w d vaiues
conduave to organisational goals (McLaughLn, 1995).
diat are not
Overaii Organisational Goais
R&D Goals
Organisationai goals should be translated into goais for the R&D effort and subsequently
system for the R&D environment. Table 6-1 iflusvateshow the characteristics of a wddesigneci quality management system could vldress each of the issues.
ChPrctaStics
Emphask on developmcnt of team baseci
recognition
R e w -d s based
- on- the dievernent of
o ~ o n agoals
l
Fast pace
I
I
Fewcr rcsourccs
Inaeased cornpetition
GQfLving the customa's changing nccds
6.3.1
I d e rimes
I
A system that leas to improvernent in the
effectiveness and efficiency of the R&D proceses
which enables improved performance with fewer
1 resources
'
A syaan that piaces the o r p k i o n in a position
to unckmnd ascorner's current and future needs
to continuously iinprove its ab*
to fuifil these
nees and remin competive
Framework
The R&D hinction can be viewed as a mbsystem of the organisational management sysrem.
In this way, R&D should develop its own quaiity management system chat is aiigned and
easdy integrated with the o v e d organisational management system. This will ensure that
the R&D mbsystem is operating to achieve goals that are w d aligneci with the organisation's
overall goais. The system is comected to the overall system thmugh balances and checks to
ensure continuous alignrnent of goals and objectives. Figure 6-2 illustrates the framework
OPIM to which an RBrD subsystem has been ad& The mows in the
figure depict the interrelationships between this subsystem and the o v e d OPIM to ensure
for the modified
continuhg aignment. For example, compare Figures 3-1 and 6-2. h e OPIM can be
applied to the qmem as a whole but the items can atm be tailoreci to be used for the R&D
system.
PROCESSES
RESOURCES
PROCESSES
i MANAGEMENT i
MANAGEMENT
R&D
PROCESSES
The research and development funaion can be viewed as a system of processes whose most
important resources are technology, people and understanding of the customers'
requirements and expectations.
Once the f~ameworkfor the modified OPIM was created, the next s e p was to modify the
cnteria to reflect the specific requirement of a quaiity management system in R&D.
Obieaives
The Objectives section of the modifieci OPIM should focus on management, R&D nategy
fomulation and alignment with organisational suategy, and the main nakeholders of the
R&D function. These stakeholders include interna and external astomers, senior
management, people, suppiiers and Pamiers, and society.
Resources
This section should cover all resources indudeci in the origiuai OPIM but should focus on
how the RSrD function plans for, acquires, deplay$ and controls these resources Li order to
Processes
The Processes section should adress process management and the planning and conuol of
customer related processes, design and development processes, purchashg processes, and
support processes. Realisation processes originally addressed in the OPIM are not required
in this version.
This section should determine how customer requirements are completely defmed. These
requirements 'drive" the design convoi process so customers are aswed that the
organisation will design the appropriate processes to ensure cornpliance. The R8rD
professes should be planned and designed frorn the customer's point of view. This indudes
everyrhuig normally associateci with design, development, test, prototyping, and
evaluation/assessment.
The R&D organisation cian re~uestrhu supplien demonstrate evidence that pudaseci
product will m a all quality reS;rements. This permits the R&D organisation to ensure
that purchased items and seMces meet the needs of the depanment.
The key support pnxesses r e q d for effective and efficient R&D should be planned and
conuolled.
Results
In the R8rD environment, the rime lag becween action and outcome is prolonged This
makes difficult the development of a comprehdve set of masures that accurateiy reflect
the outcornes of the R&D activities.
Sevenl authon have addrrssed this problem and have corne up with suggestions for
meanires that can be used in R&D organisations.
The funaion of the R&D organisation is not only to develop but &O to transfer technology to o p t i o n s
and the marketplace, to enable the compuiy to meet its business goais and therefore maximise stieholder
value. R&D's conuibution, therefore, is n a to be m
d simpiy by i n t d success mevurements but
by its performance against interoll ;and e x t d customer satisfaction short and long-term pals. (Patiiio,
1995)
In general though, these meanires should reflect the achievement of set objectives relating to
customers, people, suppliers and pannes, society, and the synem itself. The meanires
performance, trends over the past three to five years, uid performance relative to
cornpetiton.
This section should address the systems for perfomiance management, performance
monitoring and conmlling,and performance improvernent related spediuUy to the R&D
should be si&
The following is provideci as an sumpte of the modification made to the criteria of the
OPIM.
Section 1.2 of the onguial OPIM perrains to the establishment of quaLty policies and
objectives and the o v e d suategic ph.ningprocess of the organisation. Table 6-2 illusuates
the critexia from this category of the OPIM.
1.2 Strategy
1.2.1
Development
i?q&mm&(ISOI,5.3 and 5.4.1)
1.2.2
Deployment
Describe the processes of management planning and review, as weii as the wociated
respoasibilities and authorities.
qnpimomies @Sa, 5.4-5.6; MBNQA, 1. Ib and 2.2;EQA, 2d and t e ; CP,1:4 and 15)
Descnbe h m suacgic pians are deployed, reviewed and improved upon.
business planning process. This requires uuisktion of the organisatiod goals and svategic
objectives into R8rD department goals and objectives. This transformation enables the
R%D funaion to better understand the corporate stratefies and to ensure the aignment of
its suategic goals and purpose.
Table 6 3 illusvates the modifications that have been made to this categoiy of the OPM.
OPM
Describe the stmtegic pluroig process applied to improve R&D performance and set
appropriate strategies and policies.
1.2.2
Deplayment
(IS04,5.4-5.6;MBNQA, l.lb and 2.2; EQA, Zd and 2e; DP,1:4 and 1:s)
Describe how strategic plans are deplayed to the R&D function. Describe how the
strategic plans, translated to the R&D function, are reviewed and irnproved upon to
ennire continuing alignment wirh organisationai p h
The scoring scheme for the OPIM wu developed from the opinions of people w i t h the
organisation. These people undemuid the importance of each part of the criteria to the
performance of the business. This sarne process could be foilowed to modify the scoring
scheme for R&D application. Expen opinion from those within the R8rD depments
could be c a p d using the PFM software and a new distribution of points could be done.
This wu not possible in this case because of tirne collsvaints, so a change in the disuibution
of points was made to address the issues identifieci in the litennue nwqr.
Table 6-4 shows the categoxies of the modified OPIM that mon &cdy
1.1 MaMganait
1.3 Stakeholders
2.5.1 Hunan Resource Sysvm
2.5.3 Satisfaction, Involvernent and Empowerment
4.3 Peonle Rcsults
1.1 Managrnient
1.2 S m q y
4.6 System Results
2.5.1 Human Resoutre System
3.3 Design and devdopment processes
4.6 System Results
2.5.1 Human Rcsource Systern
3.3 Design
- and devdopment processes
4.6 System Rcs&
Fewer resources
Increased cornpetition
Capturing the customer's changing neeb
Emergence of n m technology
These categories should be vaiued the highea within the modified OPM model. Table 6-5
presents the s c o ~ scheme
g
for the modified OPIM.The items in boldface rype are those
caregories that have become the moa important in the rarised s c o ~ scheme.
g
Criteria
Ctcgoy
Po*
1.0 Objectives
1.1 Management
1.2 Stntcgy
OPIM
Item Points
129.00
48.00
43.00
38.00
129
13 Stakeholdm
Modif~cdOPIM
Item Points
Points
m~g0ry
146.00
50.00
48.00
48-00
146
2.3 Information
2.4 Lnfnrrnicnire
2.5 People
40.50
2.6 Tcchnoloev
2.7 Nature
2.8 Work Environment
48.50
44.00
29.00
43.00
--
- -
---
3.4 Purchasing
3.5 Relis;ition
3.6 Support
4.0 Resulu
4.1 Customa
4.2 Shareholders
42.00
26.00
38.00
28.00
190.00
36.00
32.00
42.00
33.50
16.00
4.6 System
303
190
4.3 People
-
5.0Performance
128
128.00
220
- - - -
110
47.00
26.00
0.00
28-00
220.00
50.00
30.00
48.00
3 1.00
16.00
45.00
110.00
-
6.3.4
39.00
39.00
50.00
46.00
28.00
40.00
40.00
42.00
43.00
Io00
- - -
40.00
41.00
Io00
The moci&ed mode1 for perfomiance management addresses many of the issues we have
seen that RgrD funcrions face today. Table 6-6 outhes how the modifications respond ro
these problems.
Mocfied Elcmcnts
Design of work and job functions
Addfcssing R&D h b l e m s
Improvement of this design udi support co~
opecation, collaboration and innovation
The system used to reward and recognise R&D
Irnprovement of this system to encourage
- teampem&el
b d r e w d and recignition
The development and deploymor of RdrD
Improvement to ensure the alignxnent of R&D
stmegic objectives
objectives with organisational goals
The use of technology
to
achieve
R&D
Improvement
to ensure efficient and effective
objectives
&of technology in R&D projms to meet
organisationai goais
The identification of nistomer reqllemenfs and Impmvement to the pnxesses of idendj&g
the Licorporuion of these recpkments into the customer qukements to ensure thar changing
& s i p process
customer needs are being met
n i e management and improvement of design
Impmvement to increase the efficiency and
and development processes
effectiveness of RBrD processes
to shortai cycle
I tmes and maintain comOefiuVeness
The rneasuremenr of results reiated to people,
Improvernent of the mednument
to
customers and the system as a whole
ensure the effectiveness of the R&D
I
1 performance management system
-
6.4
Chapts Summary
This chapter illusuateci the modification of the OPM for use in an R8rD environment. The
modifications were made to address the issues outlined in the literature review. The next
section closes this thesis with a summiuy of the conclusions arising from the studyas well as
some oppomuiities for future research.
7.0 Conclusions
This chapter discusses the main conuibutions of the worir presentd in the thesis, followed
by recommendations for future research.
7.1
In Chapter Three, a proposed m d for performance management that inteptes the new
identifid strengths of each model for business excellence. The redting set of aiteria
represents a path towvds business exceiience. The organisation can evduate its c u r w t
&y management system against the minimum requirements in the model and then use
the opportunities for improvement as a guide for conMuws improvement.
A scoring scheme was developed for the model using a decision an+
the opinions of senior management regarding the relative importance of each element in the
model for business performance. The resource element was considered to be the mon
important, representing the transition from the process-based ISO 9000 to a more system-
information through interviews with a cross-section of employees from the CSO. The self-
of
the IWO measurement methods. The chapter ais0 compareci the use of result-based
performance measurement to the ourcomes of the self-assessment and audit.
This process
a u d i ~ is
g used to detemiine
valuable infomiation regarding the efficiency of these processes. 'Iliis enhanas the
@ty
The svengths and weaknesses identified in the self-assessrnent can be incorporated into
the business planning process. This ensures that the veas for improvement, rekted to
the quality management system, are considered, compensahg for the absence of quality
audits results, in the business planning process.
Self-assessrnent of the processes relating to quality management, especiaily if p e r f o d
at opposing times of the year from the internai quality audits, would lead to f d e r
Mprovements in the efficiency and effectiveness of these processes.
Chapter Six ouined how modifications were made to the OPIM to create a more
appropriate model for use in an R%D environment. The modiGed model addresses many of
the issues facing the CSO's R&D departments in today's marketpIace. This is a renilr of the
new focus on the most important aspects of the OPIM to W. These areas are:
Suategy dwelopment
Stakeholders' objectives
Human resounces
Techn01ogy resources
Oisromer related processes
Design and development processes
People renilu
Syaemresults
The scoling scheme was +Lo changed ro reflect the new focus of the OPM for R8rD. The
vaiue of the above listeci catepies wu increased Using rhis proposed model, the
organisation can assess its R8LD activities in more detaiL
In summaxy, the main contributions of the wotk in this thesis are the:
development of an imegrated mode1to move beyond the minimum requirernents of ISO
9001 to create the proper conditions for business excellence
funher investigation into the compatibiityof self-assessment and audithg for future
alignment or integration of these performance measunment methods
examination of the roles of self-assessment, audiMg, and redt-based performance
measurement in the o v e d performance mevurement system
a modifieci version of the OPIM which provides a good framework for future
development and application of this model in an R&D environment
7.2
audithg process
smdies on the integration of self-assessment and audit te. using an integareci evaluation
funher use of the OPIM for organisationid self-assessrnent and investigation into the
effectiveness of the m d for improvernent
8.0 References
B d e l e m y , J. L., Zairi, M., (1994), 'Makmg ISO 9W Work: The Role of Auditingw,TQM
Mag&
VOL6, No. 3, pp. 44-47.
B a d & J., 'Preference Function Modeliagn,~://~~~.Scien~c&asiom.com/,
(6
Augus, 2001).
Bandai, J., (1997), "ANew Methodology for Deaiing with Contradicting Engineering
Design Criteria," l + t x d ptfi4.e 18thA d Mehg fPbe Ammkan h e t y f i EnM'pp. 73-79.
Beeler, D. L., (1999),"Intemal auditiag the big liesw,QuakyAug>ea, Vol. 32, No. 5,pp- 7378.
Biutu, US., Cimie, A.S., McDevtt, L., (1997), 'Intepteci performance meanirement
systems: a development guide ",-1
J d t f O p e r i & ISulrrIio2 Manugemt, Vol.
17, NO. 5, pp.522-534.
Bodinson, G. W., (1991), 'Waming: ignoring ISO standards may be h
company's fumen,.i&
Manrqgeney Vol 33, Pt. 2, pp. 11-12.
d co your
Burr, J. T., (1990), 'The future necessisr, Quriby h p s , June, pp. 19-23.
Chin, K. S., Yam,C. M., and Rui, K. F., (1995), 'Continuou Qwi;ty Improvement
beyond ISO 9O0on, Total Qaky RaiRu,VOL5, No. 1, pp. 53-59.
Glurcio, M., (1998), 'ISO 9000 quaiity v e m and product innovation: new evidence from
shoe manufaauring factories", PnmzhfirmPSP 4 E U S M InaornatidlPlMConti, T., (1999), "Vision 2000: positionhg the new ISO 9000 standards with respect to total
Vol. 10, Nos. 4/5, pp. 454-464.
management modek", T d Q d t y
+ty
Taal @&y: A
A&M d a q p m ~Ch;anui
,
& Hall, London
Dale, B. G., Bunney, H., (1994), T d @&y UmqgRlait, Blackwel Publishers Ltd,Mass.
Dale, B. G., (19991, M e - ,
Dixon, J. R,Nanni, A. J., Vollrnann, T. E., (IWO), The Neru I+gbmmC h h g - Mes*
qmmim~&Wd-GlrrsCcnpmk, DOWJones-Irwin, Hommvood, Il.
9000" I
Endres, A. C., (1992), 'Resdts and Conclusions from Applyiig TQM to R e s e h " , 464
A d @&y Ca?g>ar, May, pp. 426-430.
Eutopean @
t
y
Management
~~d
a h s , 1996,
European Foundaaon for Q d t y Management, (1995), S e ~ A s s e s s n r G
Bnissels.
Fktgedd, Le,
Johmon, R,Bngnail, S., Silvestre, R,Voss, C., (1991),
in Sm& bu si ne^^, CM& London.
Meaamrrnt
July-
NY.
Ghalayini k M., Noble, J.S., (1996), " n i e changiog basis of performauce measurementn,
r
w
j
d4 - h
6 hxhufim IlroLgenar, Vd. 16, No. 8, pp.63-80.
Ghobadian, A, Woo, H. S., (1994), "Ch~aceristics,benefits and shortcomings of four
major q d t y awarbn,hnemiiairdJ i x m d ~ Q u h t y a d R e M z & t yVol.
~ ,13, No. 2,
pp. 10-44.
Globenon, S., (1985), 'Issues in developing a performance crite& system for an
organisation", I - I d o f
B u h m &sud, Vd. 23, No., 4, pp. 639-646.
Goetsch, D L , Davis, S.B.,(1998), U-md
Prentice-Hd, Inc., New Jersey, 1998.
Ho, S. K. M., (1999), "Change for the better via ISO 9000 and TQM", Manu--,
Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 381-385.
Hutdiins, D., (1990), In P
Izadi, M., Kashef, A. E., dr Stadt, R W. (1996). 'Quaiity in higher educauon: Lessons
Deming prize, and ISO 9000 regktration"./ou+
leamed from the Baidnge
I m k d&
T
VOL 33,No. 2, pp. 60-76.
~~
Jayawama, D., Peuson, A. W., (2001), 'TheRole of ISO 900 1in Muiaging the Quality of
VOL 13, No. 2, pp. 120-128.
R&D Activities", k 7QM
Kaplan, R S., Norton, D. P., (1999, T
*
S t r -~ Z Z Action:
O
ihe Balmnd S 4 ,
Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Mass.
Karapetrovic, S., (1999), 'ISO 9000: the system emerging h m the viaous cirde of
compLanceW,?he 7QM M
m VOL 11, No. 2,1999, pp. 111-120.
Karapetrovic, S., Wdbom, W. (200lA), "Audit system: Concepts and Pmctices", TotalQclLry
M-,
Vol. 12, No. 61, pp. 13-28.
Karapetrovic, S., Wdborn, W. (200l), "Audit and Self-Assessment in Qualiry Management:
Cornparison and Compatibility",Managend AudithgJournal,Vol. 16,No. 6, pp. 366-377
Karapeuovic, S., Macey, S., (2001). ' A Model for Perfoxmance Management and
Assessment", Working paper, Department of Mechanid Engineering, University of Alberta.
Karapetrovic, S., Wdbom, W. (2000), "Genenc Audit of Management Systems:
W A&mg/<lmill, Vol. 15, No. 6, pp. 279-294
Fundamentals",M
Karapeuovic, S., Wdbom, W., (1998A), "The Systems View for the Clarification of Quality
J d q f Q d z t y & R$tabiltry-,
Vol. 15,No. 1, pp. 99Vocabulary",
120.
Karapetrovic, S., Wdbom, W., (1998B), "Integated audit of management synemsn,
r i j d d w v 1 o d R $ i a b i l i q~m<qpmm,v d 15 NO.7,pp. 694-711.
IntematCQnalJd c f O p e r h
Keegan, D. P., Eler, R G., Jones, C. R, (1989), 'Are your performance mevures
obsoke?", Mamapmz AcJune. pp. 45-50.
Kumar, V, Boyle, T., (2001), 'A Qualiry Management Implementation Framework for
Manufacnving-basedRBrD EnWonments" ,I n d J a r m r J o/Q&y dnd R*e
M
m Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 336-359.
L a w , C.W., Noble, J.S., (1998), "A Framewotk for Business System and QuaLty
Management Integrationw
,I u J a m i r d dQdzty& R$latrlny Mbqpm, Vol. 15, No.
6, pp.566-581.
Laszlo, G. P., (1997), 'U.S.and Canadian national quality awards: increased emphasis on
business resulu", 7Z.w 7QM Ahqpzzw?VOL9, NO.5, pp. 381-383.
Vol. 8,
Mann, R, Voss, M., (2000), 'An innovarive process irnprovement approach rhat integrates
ISO 9000 with the Baldnge frameworkW
,Berhdmg An Irrtematio?al Jd,
Vol. 7, No. 2,
pp. 128-145.
McLaughlui, G. C., (1995), T d @&y
Q d t y Senes, Florida.
bz Reemrhrmd-,
McWaid, T., and Gale, R, (1995) ''Summyr of the quality self-assessrnent of the precision
enginee~gdivision", Planning Workshop of the NIST Pr~isionE n g i n e e ~ gDivision,
Defence Systems Management CoIIege, Fort Belvoir, VA
Meegan, S. T., (1997), 'A model for muiaging the transition from ISO 9000 to TQM",
T r i rQi*rlP/, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 35-39.
Meegan, S. T.,and Taylor, W. A., (1997), 'Factors iduencing a successfd transition h m
ISO 9000 to TQM the influence of understanding and motivation", Intencmd J&qf
@&y & RdddqiMnqpm~,
Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 100-117.
Neely, A., (1999), "The Perfomiance Measurement Revolutiorx Why and What Next?"
-1
Jd
of OpPr&
ard&u.htim ,
V d 19, No. 2, pp. 205-228.
Neely, A., Gregory, M., Plans, K., (1995), "Performance Measurement Synan Design; A
Literature Review and Research Agendan,-nI
Jd
o*f&
rOd h z h m
,
M
Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 80-116.
b i n e s Exo$letrp, Bunewod-Heinemmq
m,
h
i
,
S.C.,(1995),ISO 9000 e>tgEumc.rd T d @&y
Standards-Qualiy
Management Group, Ottawa-Nepean, Ontario, Canada, pp. 181 183.
Russell, S., (2),'ISO 9000: 2000 and the EFQM Excellence Model: cornpetition or cooperation?", T d @&y
VOL l l,Nos. 4/5 & 6,pp. 657-665.
Schalkwyl5J. S., (1998),'Td Quahty Management and the Perfomiance Barrierw, The
I p M Magazk, Vol. 10,No. 2, pp. 124-131.
Shaw,A, (1999),A Gude toR+mam? Meaammeitad N m - F i d lidEurans, Mariison
Public Relations, The Foundation for Performance Measurement, S u q
Sinclair, D.,Zaki, M.,(1995), " Effective pprocess management through performance
meastuernent - Part 1 ",BusmeJs Anses Rem& M m q p m m ] d , Vol 1, No. 1,
pp.75-88.
Sinclair, D.,Zai~$M., (1995). " Effective process management through performance
measurement - Part II", Burinss RUBs R e - e n m & M m q p m t J d , VOL 1, No. 2,
pp.58-72.
Tonk, H S.,(2000),'Integrating ISO 9001:2WO and the Bairige Criteria:A pmpod for a
2 in centuy @ty
paradgmw, QrdIy Aqpa,August, pp. 5 1-55.
Tummala, V. M.R Tang, C L,(1996). 'Stmegic qwlity management, Malcolm Bddnge
and European quaiity awards and ISO 9000certification: Core concepts and c o m p d v e
a.nalyssn, Intanmuxlal J d o f Q d k y a d R $ t a b r l r t v ~Vol
, 13,No. 4, pp. 8-38.
van der Wiele, T., Bmmm, A, MiIlen, R,Wh& D., (ZOOO), 'hprwement in
Orgamsational Performance and Self-Asse-nt
Practices by Selected Amencan Firmsw,
AbuJ
t VOL 7, NO.4, pp. 146- 157
van der Wiele, T., Brown, A, (1999), 'Seif-assessrnent practices in Europe and da",
1
,Jdqf@&yrIdR$iabilityV d 16, No. 3, pp. 238-251.
van der W~ele,T., Dale, B. G.,and W k , A. R T., (1997), "ISO 9000 series registration
to t o d quaiity management the transformation journey", I n t d Jd
dQ&y ScEslao,
Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 235-252.
van der Wiele, A., Williams, A. R T., Dde, B. G., Gner,Ga,Kolb, F., Luzon,D. M., A.
Schmidt, A., Wallace, M., (1996), 'Self-assessment: A midy of progress in Ewope's leading
organisations in @ty
management practices", I n W Jd
of Qdty dR$iabilrty
Mlm<qge>le~,
Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 84-104.
van der Wiele, A., Williams, A. R T., Dale, B. G.,Grtu,G., Kolb, F., Luzon,D. M., A.
Schmidt, A., Wallace, M., (1995), 'State-of-the-an snidy on self-assessment", 7he TQM
M a g k , VoL7, No. 4, pp. 13-17.
J d o f Q d t y m r d R $ t a b r l s ~M~ i q p r m ~VOL
, 7, No. 3, pp. 35-4 1.
9.0 Appendices
1.2 Management
1.2.1
system
1.
2.
3.
management
1.2.2 Leadership
4.
5.
6.
7.
society?
How are these processes continually improved?
8.
1.2 Suategy
1.2.1
Development
9.
10.
meaninble goals?
H m are!these communicated and deployed to each management level to
assure individual contribution to achievement?
How are responsibilties for these items eaablished and communicated
to the people in the organisation?
H m is progress a g a k t these plans rneasured?
How are the p r o c e s for deplayment of strategy conUnwiiy impmved?
1.2 Stakeholders
Customers
1.2.1
16.
17.
18.
19.
1.2.2
Shareholders
How does the organisation idenufy and review shareholders' needs and
expeaations?
1.2.3
People
How does the organisation identify and review people's needs for
performance indicaton
How does the organisation dwelop partnerships that iink to its arategic
objectives? (CABE 6.1)
How does the organisation idenufy the needs of these pamerships?
How are these pannerships reviewed to ensure rhey are still meeting
objectives of the relauonships?
1.2.5 Society
How do you i d e n e and manage the impacts of your products, seMces
and operations on society?
2.
2.1
Finances
4 1.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
Pl-
Infrastructure
5 1.
52.
53.
54.
2.4
People
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.5
Technology
75.
76.
77.
74.
resources. State their current levels and trends. List the targeted levels of
these performance indicators. (OPIM 4.6.2)
Nature
83.
What is the process for idenufyuig naturai resources that can influence
the organisation's performance? (IS04,6.7) What are your plans for rheir
continued availability or contingency plans to prevent or minimise
negative effects on the organisation's performance? (IS04,6.7)
84.
85.
Processes
3.
3.1
Management
87.
How do you p h and develop the key pmcesses within your depamnent
and how they intedate? (IS04,7.1)
How do you manage these pmcesses and their iaterrelationships?
88.
89.
86.
within your d e p m e n t . State their current lwels and trends. List the
targeted levels of these performance indicators. (OHM 4.6.1)
inomer relationships
90.
9 1.
92.
93.
Knowledge
3.2.1
94.
95.
96.
3.2.2
Satisfaction
97.
98.
99.
3-3
101. How do you plan design and development processes to ensure that they
respond to the neeb and expectations of the organisation's cusromers
Inputs
104. H m do you ensure that inputs to design and development are accurate
Activities
Outputs
108. How do you validate output againn input requirements and acceptance
criteria to achieve interested p a q satisfaction? (iS04,7.3.2)
processes?
Vedication
112. H m is design verification incorponteci into the desigri and development
processes?
3.3.7
Validation
3.3.8
Changes
116.
Purchasing
3.4.1
Planning
118. How do you i&nufy the resources needed, which cannot be obtained
for purchased
121. How do you define processes to ensure that ~~ecification~
product meet the requirements of the orpi&on and interested parties?
(IS04,7.4.1)
3.5
Realisation
Pianshg
3.5.1
124.
How do you plan and design realisation processes to ensure that they
respond to the neeb and expeaations of the organisation's customers
and other interened parties? (IS04,7.3.1)
125.
Convol
126. How do you implement and maintain realisation processes?
3.5.2
127.
processes?
3.6
Support
3.6.1
Planning
128.
129. How do you plan and design suppon pnxesses to meet ail key
requirements?
Conuol
131. How do you impiement and maintain key support processes ensure
meeting key perfomiance mquirements?
132. How do you improve the effiuency and effectiveness of these processes?
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
Customer
4.1.1 Reputation (OPM 32.2)
4.1.2 L~~&~(OPhil3.2.2)
4.1.3 Outputs(OPIM1.3.1)(OPhil3.2.2)
4.1.4 Interfaces (OPIM 3.2)
Shareholders
4.2.1
Financial(OPM1.3.2)
4.2.2
4.2.3
Interfaces (OPIM1.3.2)
People
4.3.1
4.3.2
4.3.3
4.3.4
Inputs ( o p h l 3.4.2)
4.4.2
Society
4.5.1
Citizenship(OPIM1.3.5)
4.5.2
Gmmunity(0PIM 1.3.5)
4.5.3
4.5.4
4.5.5
System
4.6.1 Processes (OPIM 3.1)
4.6.2
Remurces (OPIM2)
4.6.3
Objectives (OPIM1.1.1)
Performance
5.
5.1
Management
5.1.1
System
133. What are the systems used to measure organisauond perfoxmance?
134.
5.1.2
136. What is the system applied to mevure your key perfoxmance indicators
reiating to organisational effectiveness (meeting key objectives)?
137.
5.1.3
138. What is the syscem you use to measure your key resource performance
indicators?
139. How do you continuah/ improve rhis measurernent system?
140.
What is the system you use ro meanire your key process performance
indicators?
Monito~g
and Controllhg
5.2.1
Audits
142. What is the process for the performance of interna1 audits againn the
144. What is the process for the perfo~nanceof exremal audits against the
reS;rements of the selected management standarb induding ISO
9001:Z O S 0 900 1:19%) uid/or I S O 14001:l996?
145. How do you c o n t i n d y @mve
consistency of this process?
5-2-2 Self-Assessments
146.
147.
How do you decide what key comparative data and information ro use?
How do you support the organisational performance review and planning
with analysis of data and information?
5.3
Improvement
5.3.1
154.
&,
155. How do you indude plans for and renilu of corrective and preventative
action in the business plan?
156.
5.3.2
APPENDIX B Mded
1.21
System
Describe haw the R&D funaion establishes, "plements, and maintains its quality
procedures and plans to meet the qwiity policies and objectives set by the
organisation.
OS@,
and 5.4.1)
Describe the syscern for translating organisational quahty policies and objectives into
plans and objectives for the R&D funaion.
qDportrmrtJs (IS04,5.4-5.6; MBNQA, 1.1b and 2.2; EQA,2d and 2e; DP, 1:4 and 15)
Describe how m e g k p h uc deplaycd to the R&D function. Describe how the
nntegic pians, m d a e d to the R&D function, ue revicwed and improved upon to
ensure continuing ;ilignment wi3i organisational pians.
Describe how st;ikeholders are iden~ed,and how th& needs and requiremeau
[iudiUiinp legal, regultory, MWP-tal,
producr and protes standuds, as well as
openriod) are identied, deploye, communicated and evaiuated.
@xmmtm ( i S 0 4 , 5 2 ; MBNQ& 1 2 uid 3.1; EQA,21 and 2b; DP, 2:6 and 4:l- 4:s)
Customers
1.2.2
People
1.2.3
O r p w a t i o d Leaders
1.2.4
2.1 Management
h p t w m (IS01,6.1)
~ ~
D e s d e how the resources listed below in d o n s 2.2 to 2.8 and 3.4 of OPIM are
managd Describe the intdtionships among these resources and how they are
used to support processes listed in section 3 of OPIM.
(IS04,6.1)
Describe how the acquisition and deployment of resources is optimiseci to ensure
effectiveness, efficienv and consistency of system operation and achievement of set
objectives. JJiustrate how the use of the resources is continuously improved Describe
how the commitment of long-tenn resources to R&D effom is ensureci. ('da
&
G o h , 1997)
2.2 Finances OS04,6.8; EQA, 4b)
Desuibe how finulciai resources are planned, acquired, deployed and convolled to
achieve R&D objecrives.
QF==
Describe how the efficiency and effectiveness of the use of fmancial resources is
impmved.
2.3 Information
Describe how idonnation resources are pianneci, acquired, deployd and conmiled
to adiiwe RStD objectives.
;mprovCd
2.4 Infrvvucturc
OS01,6.3)
Dexribe h m
to d e v e R&D objectives.
(IS04,6.3; EQA, 4 4
Describe how the efficiency and effecciveness of the use of
'
'
buuctureresources
is
2.5 People
2.5.1
Describe how characteristics and skiils needed by potend employees are identifieci
to ensure h t the current and future ne&
of the R&D function will be met.
Describe h m work and job functions designcd to suppon CO-opedon,
collabontion, i.adividu?lhithive and innovation.
Q p f w z t k (MBNQA,5.1; EQA 3%3 4 3e)
Desuilx how the human resourre system is conUnuoUS, improved.
2.5.2
2.5.3
Describe how technology is used to achieve R&D objectives. Describe how business
and technology strategies are integrated, communiated, and understood by aU
depuunents (Kumar and Bayle, 2001)
9eipomotaier
Describe how the efficiency and effectivcnss of the use of technology is improved
3.
Processes
Rqamm#
3.2.1
3.2.2
Describe how prucesses for idendymg internai and extemai customers and their
requirements are designed, implemented, maintained, and improved.
Satisfaction (MBNQA,3.2b)
Describe how processes for determining internai and externai customer satisfaction
are designcd, implemented, maintained, and irnpmved
Describe how processes ro ensure that specifications for purchad producc meet the
requirements of the organisation and infefened pmies are defined, implemented,
maintaineci and improved
3.5 Support
3.5.2
Describe how requirements for key support processes are determined. Desuibe how
these support processes are pknned, &signe4 and hproved
Conml @Sol,
7.5.3-7.6; IS04,7.5.2-7.6; MBNQA,6.214-5)
Describe how key support processes are implemented, maintained and impfoved to
ensure meeting kqr performance reguirrments.
4.
Results
QP-4.1.1
4.1.2
4.1.3
Outpufs (ISO 1, 8.2.4 and 8.3; IS04,8.2.3 and 8.3; EQA, 612 and 6b2; MBNQA,7.1a3)
4.1.4
List the perception mevures and performance indiators &ring to the following
four componenu of people results. State their current levels and m d s .
List the targeted leveis of perception measures and perfonnuice indiaton.
4.2.l
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.2.4
Services (EQA,7b4)
9.lpnaprras
4.3.1
4.3.2
4.4.1
4.4.2
Community(EQA.812)
4.4.3
4.4.4
4.4.5
htcrfaces(EQ&8b)
4.5 System
4.5.1
Qv-leJ
-9biantrorias
4.5.3
5.
5.4
Obj&es(EQA,
91)
List the key performance indiutors reiating to R&D effectiveness. State their current
lwels and trends.
List the targeted lwels of key R&D performance indicators.
Performance
Management
Describe how the measmmmt synmi for key performance outcornes is conUnually
impmved.
Describe the system applied to masure the key perfonnuice outcornes identifid in
sections 4.6.1 and 4.62 of OPIU
5.5
5.5.1
Audits
Describe the V e m applied to perforrn internai and extemai auclits against the
requirements of the selected management stui-,
including ISO 9001: 2000
and/or ISO 14001:1996.
Qpzwntm (IS04,8.2.1.3)
Describe how the effectiveness, effiaency and consistency of the audit system are
c o n t i n d y improved.
5.5.2
Self-Assessments( I D , 8.2.1.5)
Describe the systern applied to perfonn regular self-assessments against the
Oqpmauonal Performance Impmvement Model.
5.5.3
soaety
hpmvcmait(ISO1,8.5.1;IS04,8.5.1;DP,9)
5.6.1
Corrective and Prevcntive Actions
5.6
Describe the systmi applied to monitor, i d e n e , analyse, and remove the exisung and
potend causes of nonconformiries in inputs, pfocesses, outputs, objectives, resources
and d
f s .
Desuibe how the c o d e and preventive actions are used in the business pian and how
5.6.2
REFERENCE ClUTERK
Demig Application Prize (1996), Dsnirg F%E G d
DP
Orsnoiv C k p z i s , Japanese
Union of Saentists and Engineers
European Qu;ility A d (1999), EFQM ExadlmP M d , European Foundation for
EQA
ISO1
1s04
MBNQA
Quatty Myiagement
R&D envkonrnents", I
359.
Trilliwn Resdts
Scoring for OPIM
98.77
Management
81.75
Su;itegy Development
75.46
61.72
87.58
100
100
81.47
90.55
72.92
68.74
67.77
100
38.39
56.41
76.17
97.87
86.09
50.5
90.02
71.84
86.72
68.86
58.26
10.55
71.03
97.7
87.43
31-01
89.75
83.8
85.75
81.41
59.37
53.86
87.37
91.46
74.14
19.13
94.47
77.82
89.93
91.7
66.39
80.06
92.97
71.42
55.63
48.32
60.13
48.72
77.21
72.19
49.43
79.06
79.56
79.33
99.5
89.2
88.49
87.1
72.36
37.98
30.47
100
50.06
89.84
61.66
51.83
30.76
68.29
58.45
69.6 1
71.4
37.9
51.85
50.51
62.94
49.16
48.41
51.41
95-36
59.66
75.78
55.09
62.8
28.53
72.49
72.98
O
67.21
72.86
59.52
and Deplaymcllt
68.99
87.49
l
85.19
39.38
84.38
84.83
94.44
78.73
32.8
68.98
36.8
60.3
49.48
79.62
53.77
O
44.95
82.05
81.12
StakeholderObjectives
Management of
Rwources
Rsources
People
Technology
Nature
WorkEnWonment
Management of
Processes
customeir
Relationships
Design Processes
Purchashg Processes
&uon
Processes
Suppon Processes
Customer R e d u
'Sheholder R e s u l c
People Results
Supplier and Panner
Renilts
SociqResults
System Results
Performance
Management
Perforrmnce
Monitoring and
-
Conuoltng
48.67
78.02
63.42
100
---
52.52
46.26
48.21
51.11
54.63
61.79
28.82
100
80.56
89.39
12.47
70.03
74.99
93.49
69.65
42.06
88.67
37.65
63.03
68.46
35.34
88.91
37.17
43.72
53.31
47.53
46.5 1
92.56
69.44
89.37
91.1
54.56
89.05
ISO9001:2OOO
h k i n g for
evidence of
management
coIIMifment to the
gwlity
management
system and that
top managanent
MBNQA
senior leaders
gui& the
or&;inis;ition and
revicw
or&;inistional
perfolmance
eaSureS
EQA
Examines how
leaders develop
and facihate the
achievement of
mission and vision,
develop values,
and ensure t
h the
o
~
o
d
management
systern is
developed and
maintained
Dcming Prize
Addresses
undersraading,
knowledge and
enthuskm of
leaders, hmeffectively leaders
impiement TQM,
and senior
management's role
in the management
v-
dehd
objectives and
the qiulity
management
system (qms)
is pianned
Responsibility
and authority
is defmed
The review of
the qms
Generai
Looking for
evidence of a
p o h and
the planning of
Generai
qdty
objectives
the quaiity
management
mem
company addresses
its responsibilities
to the public and
how it practices
g d cihnship
Suaregy and policy
Examines the
company's strategy
deveiopment and
deplayment
processes
compaxxy's leaders
are involved with
representatives of
society
Examines how the
compvry
unplements its
mission and vision
concerned with
quaiity assurance
miVities and
q u ; i l i ~ ~ ~
Exunuies h m the
company pians and
manages its
intan?l resources
in order to suppon
its policy and
strategy and the
effective operation
of its processes
qu;ility
II1;Ul?gement
system and to
enhance customer
satisfaction
Not speaficaliy
induded
finuicial
performance to
and security
support decision
Lx>okmg for
evidence t h t the
compuiy
&termines,
provides and
maintains the
Examines how
exted
information is
collecteci and
=bed to
support decision
making
-
.
-
manages its
buildings,
equipment and
Not induded
illhsmcture
needed to achieve
Examines how
effectively the
Company manages
its miued
Not specifically
induded
Not included
Not specificaiiy
included
Na specificaiiy
included
Not included
resources and
supplies so that
material
inventories are
m e is mkiimised
Examines how the
Eompany evduates
and exploits
techno1og)r
Examines how the
~ompany
's
manages its
Il~lilllcialrrSOurceS
Not induded
Not induded
Catcgory
ISO9601:ZOOO
MBNQA
uaLlreSOurtem;inge
EQA
Examines how the
compaq-es,
develops and
reieves the full
potend of its
Looking for
evidence that the
company ensures
the necessary
cornpetence for
Eduution and
Training
paformuice
Examines how the
Company secks
input h m
ernployecs and
their supervisors
on.educaon
and
.
trvnrngnceds
Examines h m the
Company support
business objectives
people
Exvnincs how
people's
kncswiedge and
cornpetencies are
idenaed,
deveioped and
personnel
performing woiir
Dcming f i e
ent
susuineci
;iffectingproduct
qu;iliv
Company appiies
Qu;ilityconcepts
into its human
resource docation
and management
Not induded
Examines h m the
companyf
eduatiod
poliaes and plans
consider QC
management and
how it reviews the
effectiveness of the
educationai
Prognms, and
whu eciucatiod
compuiies
Examines how the
Not induded
organisation
maintains a work
enWoument that
contributes to
employee wdking and
satisfaction
Examines how
people are
m;uded,
recognised and
cared for and how
the company
promotes the
dialogue between
i d and the
wo~le
Not induded
Cjtegory
ISO900t:2OOO
MBNQA
Processclualiw
Examines how the
ComPvIy m=%=
its key product and
-l
service design,
delivery, and
suPpo*
EQA
DcmingPrizc
Great emphasis on
the quaiity
assurance of
products and
services
Prim+
concerned with
quality assurance
activities and
Resuits
Examines the
compq's
performance and
Unprovernent in
the folluwing key
ue?s
Gmomers
Finuiduid
Not inciuded
market
cwomer
requirements are
deterrnined and
fulfied with the
aim of enhancing
customer
satisfaction
homer
management
Humui
resoufces
organisational
effecriveness
r management and s;i
Examines how the
compvry
determines
requiremenw
expectation, and
preferences of
cunomers and
Customer
satisfaction
perception of
fuifiient of
Not included
Not inciuded
Not inducfed
markets
b
evidenc h t the
company monitors
inforniluon
WtyfeSults
Examines the
compuiy's
perfonnuice and
improvement in
customcr
sarisfaction
Cpcgory
Genenl
ISO9001:2OOO 1
MBNQA
1
EQA
SuppIiers/pumtn mamgamc a d performvlce
Lcdnng for
Ervnincr how the Examines how the
&ce
rhr the
manages
cornp h and
corncompany cv;ilu?us its supplia and
manages its
and selecu
me ring
extad
nippliers based on processes
pvtnerships to
th& ab&y to
support.itspolicy
and stnregy and
W P P&P~
in
accorcfance with
the effective
the company's
operation of its
requiremcnfs
proccsses
DcmingPrizc
Focused on
excension of
qu?lity
management CO
suppliers of the
fum
Approach is implemented
0%
75%
No evidence or
anecdotal
Some evidence
No evience or
anecdotai
Some evidencc
No evidence or
anecdod
Somc evidencc
No evidence or
anecdotal
Some cvidence
No redts or
information
Positive trenb
and/or satisfactory
pcrfomiiuicc on
somc muhs
Positive trends
and/or sustainc
food pcrformzncc
onmanyds
over at leas ihrcc
Y='
Strongly positive
trends md/or
sustaincd excellent
pcrfomunce on
mon rcsutts over at
lm 3 y m
Strongiy positive
vmds and/or
sustaincd excellent
performance in a
vcls over at leas
5 Y-
No r e d s or
anecdotai
information
Favourable and
appropriate in some
FavowbIe and
appropriate in
Favounble and
appropriate in mon
Excellent and
appmpriate in
mon
Gnnprehcnsive
cvidencc
dcar evidence
Syncrnatic:
Approach is deplyed in a nniauredway
T d
Trends:
T m & are positive and/or there is
sunained g d p c r f o m c e
Tugcts:
Targcts arc achievcd
Targets ue appropriate
a
mecdow]
areas
mvry-
arcas