Application of SPC tool in accessing quality issues in Qasr Al Muwaijii

Application of SPC tool in accessing quality issues in Qasr Al Muwaijii

Student Name: Mohammed Rashed Al Yahyaee

ID: 4978250

Institution: BostjanGomiscek

TBS 951
Table of contents

Introduction......................................................................................................................................3

Literature Review............................................................................................................................4

Philosophy of Quality in Tourism................................................................................................4

Theory of Quality in Tourism......................................................................................................5

Uses of SPC in Quality Improvement in Tourism (Lenehan & Harrington 1998)......................6

Methodology....................................................................................................................................7

Results and Analysis........................................................................................................................8

Discussion......................................................................................................................................11

Recommendations& conclusion....................................................................................................13

A Plan for improving performance............................................................................................14

References......................................................................................................................................15

Appendices....................................................................................................................................16

2
Introduction
Quality is a key determinant of an organizations success (Alfar, 2011). The level of

quality influences how customers are attracted to a companys product, and ultimately,

determine how competitive an organization becomes in the long term. It is beyond doubt

that business organizations that emphasize on quality achieve greater success than those

that focus less on quality. There are different factors that may push a company to focus on

quality. One is the need to provide customers with better products and which meet their

intended needs. Consumers are more attracted to products and services that serve their

needs (Mukherjee, 2006). In addition, quality may be used to determine price and more

specifically differentiate certain products from others. Most consumers tend to associate

quality with price. For instance, a product or service that is priced high may be perceived

to have better quality than that price at a relatively lower price (Bagad, 2008). Competition

against organizations producing similar goods and services is also a function of quality. If an

organization has the best quality then they are likely to out-do their competitors. Low quality not

only affects the producers but also the consumers in terms of time wastage, effects on the body

and losing their money (Fleisher & Babette, 2007).

It is Imperative that the issue of quality is very important for any organization.

Traditionally quality was measured in terms of the products. With digitalization and time this

has evolved and the tool that is used for quality program is SPC- Statistical Process Control. SPC

is more process oriented as compared to the traditional quality control (Jones 2005). Under the

SPC emphasis is placed on monitoring and controlling variations with an aim of preventing

defects. Secondly SPC holds that effective quality enhancement comes from reducing variations

3
and improving the system. This paper aims to apply the SPC requirements in discussing Qasr Al

Muwaiji- a tourism and culture center located in United Arab Emirates.

Literature Review

Philosophy of Quality in Tourism

The concept of quality is wide and depends with the issues being discussed. In service

industries such as tourism quality has both a dynamic and a static dimension. The static

dimension is concerned with the customers expectations which are bound to change with time.

Dynamic dimension on the other hand happens at the time of service delivery and provides

opportunities for the customers to be impressed by the extra efforts provided by the staffs. In

order to ensure that the tourist center such as the Qasr Al Muwaiji remains active and relevant

across decades both the Dynamic and the static quality should be ensured.
In the tourism sector the best marketers for the tourism site are the people who have

already toured the place. When there are more repeated visits the tourism sector will receive

more revenue and be able to improve their services more (Jones 2005). For instance they could

decide to be giving all their customers the maps of the site without incurring more charges on

them. The staffs have to be well paid to ensure that they are also performing well. Without any

performance appraisal most staffs always become sluggish in work and the customers notice the

negative attitude. Creating the best impression at first site concerning the services and the

tourism sector should be the key for a successful tourism industry.

Globalization, digitalization and deregulation have led to increased competition in the

tourism sector leading to fewer charges from customers and better services. This implies that .

What attracts customers-tourist in Qasr Al Muwaiji for instance is their focus on quality provided

by their employees. This has enabled them to have a lifetime value which they can use in

4
forecasting. Culture is a vital aspect in tourism quality management (Murphy 1997). People visit

tourist sites with a major aim of getting to understand the culture of the people in the surrounding

area or the traditions that have been preserved over time. It is critical that the people are able to

strike a balance between modernization and preservation of culture. The employees should be

allowed to participate in the decision making. They can come up with effective process that can

be adopted in the sustenance of the tourism industry.

Currently competition in the tourism sector is the major determinant of the market share

and the returns on resources and time investments. The three main determinants of quality in the

organizations include the method of providing the gods and services, technological developments

in the sector and increased competition in the international market. SERVQUAL , SERVPERF,

TQS and ISQM are some of the models that have been widely applied in evaluation of services.

Out of the four the most embraced method is the SERVQUAL. This model has twenty two items

on the attributes of services grouped in five dimensions. The five dimensions include; assurance,

reliability, tangibles, responsiveness and empathy.

Theory of Quality in Tourism

One of the most significant theories in Quality issues is the Total Quality Management

approach. It encourages management systems for a customer oriented organization. One of the

major considerations is the involvement of all employees in the improvement of an organization.

The approach has eight major principles (James 1996). The first principle is that quality

enhancement should be customer focused. There should also be complete employee involvement.

The quality should be process centered and apply and integrated system. The approach is

strategic and systematic enabling continuous improvement. Decision making should be based

only on facts and not theory and lastly they put alt of emphasis on communication.

5
 Joseph Juran- one of the proponents of the theory suggested ten steps to enhance quality.

The first step is creating awareness of an opportunity to improve. The second involves setting

goals for improvement, then making organization to reach the goals. Once this is achieved

necessary trainings is done on ways of achieving. Training gives these stakeholders the go ahead

for carrying out projects towards goal achievements. As the project continues any progress

should be reported and recognition given. The ninth step is keeping the score and lastly the

momentum is maintained through making annual improvement part of the organization.

It is worth noting that quality is a major driver of the tourism industry. Unlike

manufacturing companies where quality is relatively tangible in terms of faster or efficient

automobiles, superior handset capabilities, or computers with larger storage capacities, the

situation is different for tourist firms. Hospitality involves services rather than products,

which in this case are difficult to quantify. Tourist firms therefore need to provide the

highest levels of quality, in order to increase consumer satisfaction. Such quality should

extend beyond the level of the after sells service provided by manufacturing companies. It

should more on focus on enhancing human experiences through imagination, curiosity, and

discovery.

Uses of SPC in Quality Improvement in Tourism (Lenehan& Harrington 1998)

SPC is the most relevant tool in quality management for tourism industry. To start with

the SPC give reliable data that can be used in documenting any improvement in the sector. For

instance without SPC it is possible that someone makes huge investments in developing some

infrastructures within the tourism site. Later on the person may reflect on what the investment

achieved and fail to see the effect. With SPC each improvement is documented and preserved.

6
 SPC is also useful in understanding the tourism process. One of the ways in which this is

achieved is through creation of pareto charts (820 rule) and the flow charts. The pareto chart for

instance can indicate customers complaints which the management can correct to ensure

improved service.
The customer loyalty is most likely to improve as they learn of the management efforts to

enhance quality and consistency. When this happens the tourism sector will have retained many

customers and hence be able to achieve more profit.

SPC is useful in understanding the tourism process. One of the way in which this is

achieved is by suing fishbone to identify the underlying problems. There are four steps to

using the tool. One is the identification of the problem, which involves listing of the

problems faced by the organization. It includes what the problem is, where and when it

occurs. The second step involves working out the major problems involved. This may

involve factors such as tasks, people, equipment and control. The third step on the other

hand, involves the identification of possible causes. Where causes are complex and large,

then it is best to break them down into smaller and manageable sub-causes. The fourth and

last step involves analyzing the diagram and entails setting up investigations and carrying

out surveys to investigate further the more likely causes (Widman & Jon, 2000).

Methodology

SPC tool was utilized in accessing the performance quality of the employees in terms of

how they relate to the visitors. In which case, 15 employees (mostly guides) were harmonized to

act as the specimen of the case over which they were studied for their performance result in a

period of three months (February, March and April). The average for the performance quality

over the three months was then calculated to give an accurate view regarding this variable. The

7
dependent variables considered for the case are employee productivity, employee engagement,

attendance, knowledge of the employees, public relation ability.

A rating of 1 to 5 was considered to help in assessing the employees performance with 1

being poor and 5 being excellent, 4 is very good, 3 is good and 2 is need for improvement.
The SPC tools used in evaluating the average performance of the employees in relating to

the visitors include X bar chart and R bar chart. In the process of accessing the distribution of

performance, histogram and probability plot chart for the case.

Excel was then used in analysis of the data and plotting of the respective charts.

Results and Analysis

In order to make the process for the quality assurance process analysis, data was

obtained for 15 employees performance ratings over 3 months with the total average of

performance calculated in the last column. Results are shown in the table below.
Table 1: Performance Quality Score for Agents (February - April)

Employee February March April Average Attribute

1 3.00 3.12 3.20 3.11 Good

2 3.00 2.40 2.00 2.47 Need to improvement
3 2.40 2.45 2.40 2.42 Need to improvement
4 1.70 1.90 3.70 2.43 Need for improvement
5 2.20 2.45 2.50 2.38 Need for improvement
6 2.30 2.20 2.30 2.27 Need for improvement
7 2.40 2.38 2.29 2.36 Need for improvement
8 3.40 2.80 1.20 2.47 Need for improvement
9 3.20 3.25 2.92 3.12 Good
10 2.50 3.25 3.20 2.98 Good
11 2.30 2.31 2.12 2.24 Need for improvement
12 2.16 2.70 2.34 2.40 Need for improvement
13 3.40 3.25 3.20 3.28 Good
14 3.20 3.12 3.30 3.21 Good
15 2.40 2.53 3.50 2.81 Good

8
 The above table indicate the total average showing how the employees performed on

average over the three months. From this, the average were then transformed into attributes to

give a definite picture regarding the performance. It comes out that a good number of agents

showed a certain level of improvement over the period even though the average remained to

below 3.0 at 2.66 This is indicative that there is still need for improvement. The x bar chart was

used in the determining the presence of variation and the performance of the employees.

Figure 1: x bar chart assessing the variation

Figure 1: X bar control chart of quality assurance process.

From the above chart it comes out there is adequate control for the quality assurance

process; this is as shown with all the variations falling within the control limits. Even though

there was state of control in quality assurance process, most of the points were falling below the

9
average; this is a show that there is great need for improvement in the process. Due to the fact

that there were no evident causes of this, the assumption was that most of these could have arose

from common causes of non-conformities.

An R bar chart was then plotted to help in depict the variation range of the process.

Figure 2: R bar control chart of quality assurance process.

As shown by the graphs, some variations go outside the control limits. Further, the

distribution of the points throughout the control limits is an enough indication that there is no

consistency in the employees performance when relating to the visitors coming to the museum.
A histogram was plotted to help in showing the variation existing between the

performance quality during the three months period.

10
Figure 3: Frequency Distribution of Performance Quality Scores (April-June).

It comes out that the histograms shape is skewed to the right hence cannot be said to be

normally distributed. The figure with the highest frequency is 2.4. We can notice that the shape

of the histogram bimodal andis positively skewed to the right, which indicates that the data is not

normally distributed. Skewness = 0577. Kurtosis= -1.49 which means that the histogram is

platykurtic. Mean is= 2.66, and standard deviation= 0.097

Discussion
Thirty percent (30%) of the target population represented the sample of the study.

Stratified random sampling technique was used to derive a sample size of 15 respondents .The

Researcher personally administered questionnaires with open ended questions which were used

to collect primary data from the respondents so as to enable them provide objective and detailed

answers (Mugenda, 2003).

11
 Based on the collected data, it is noteworthy that the performance quality scores of

the museum personnel were far below the expected standards. This implies that the

organization needs to develop and implement effective strategy to improve performance.

One such way is to implement a strategy that focuses on employee engagement. Employees

are a central part to the success of any organization. Without employees, an organization

cannot function. In the words of (Wilkins, Merrilees & Herington, 2010) employees are the

heart and soul of a business organization. It is therefore important for the organization to

engage its employees on a more proactive basis. This includes allowing employees to take

part in the decision-making and problem solving process (Bellrich & Samuel, 2013). It also

concerns encouraging innovation at all levels, by allowing them freedom to experiment, try

out new ideas, as well as sharing.

In addition, based on Bar chart A in figure 1, it is notable that performance quality

scores vary in relation to the service delivery. This clearly demonstrates that each employee

is unique in terms of his or her abilities and performances. Whereas there those that may

take an active part in brainstorming through a specific problem, there are those that may

perform manual tasks more effectively than others may (Louise, 2011). This is the diversity

of the workplace and is therefore the responsibility of managers to recognize such diversity

and allocate tasks to different employees to achieve a common goal.

Furthermore, Bar chart B reveals that employees exhibited low performance

tendencies. It is sound to argue that, low employee performance is not the kind of

performance one would expect from a museum. The museum setting involves a direct

interaction between employees and visitors and may be demanding to an extent, as the

latter may demand additional assistance. In other words, it involves a great focus on

12
customer care as compared to other businesses. The management should therefore assess

the root cause of low performance among its employees to enhance customer satisfaction.

There are a number of things to look at in this direction. Such include the need to review

the current reward system, in order to ensure that the employees are fairly rewarded,

based on their input to the organization (Nelson, 2012). The management may as well

review the allocation of duties, tasks, and activities at the museum. When employees are

overworked or when tasks are complex or repeated for longer duration it may create a

sense monotony thus contributing to low performance (Nelson, 2012). The management can

look towards such areas, as well as other that may be of interest.

In addition, as noted in the histogram, the performance of employees at the museum

does not meet the set criteria. It is far below standards and contributes to low customer

satisfaction. The management therefore has responsibility to improve this performance. It

is beyond doubt that the continuation of this trend may work to hurt the organizations

profitability in the long term. Furthermore, improved employee performance is linked to a

number of benefits including improved customer safety, customer satisfaction, and most

importantly, employee retention (Louise, 2011). Employees that are highly motivated tend

to deliver greater performance that those that receive less motivation. In the same way,

they are more likely to serve the organization for the long term (Bellrich & Samuel, 2013).

Based on the above data presentation and interpretation, the performance scores of the

employees are poor and have a negative implication on the museum. The average score is 2.66,

and adequate measures need to be put in place to change this.

13
Recommendations& conclusion

This assignment utilized the SPC tool to assess the performance quality of the employees in

terms of how they relate to the visitors at a museum. The findings of the assignment reveal

low performances among the employees. As part of the tourism industry, the success of a

museum depends on the good relationship between employees and visitors. The museums

management therefore needs to adapt effective strategies aimed at improving employee

performances. This may include some of the following important strategies:

Allowing employees to take part in the decision-making and problem solving process

at the museum.
Encouraging innovation at all levels, by allowing them freedom to experiment, try

out new ideas, as well as sharing.

Reviewing the current reward system, in order to ensure that the employees are

fairly rewarded, based on their input to the organization.

Reviewing the allocation of duties, tasks, and activities to ensure that employees are

assigned tasks they can handle without causing fatigiue.

A Plan for improving performance

Based on the independent variables that affect performance scores for the employees, we came

up with the following actions aimed at improving employee capability and variability

distribution.

1- Setting up for the measurement of quality improvement:

a. Quality improvement process is a continuous and cyclical in nature.

Therefore, it must be measures and evaluated. This becomes a management

tool for improving performance in the museum.

14
2- Benchmarking:
a. Benchmarking from other similar organizations such as top museums will

help in improvement of performance among employees.

3- Non-financial aid for the museum:
a. This can be in terms of business advice or consultancy. This needs to be

improved with the aim of encouraging the adoption of quality approach. This

will improve the performance of employees.

4- Intensive use of structural funds:
a. This will aid in the improvement of the museums products to its customers.

This is done through the concentration of resources to projects that are geared

towards employee satisfaction.

15
References
Alfar, B. (2011). Strategic Management in Todays Complex World. Business Journal

Intelligence, 4(1):143 150.

Bagad V. S (2008). Total Quality Management. Pune: Vikram Printers.

Bellrich, P. & Samuel, D. (2013). Employee Management and Motivation: Strategies and

Processes. Havard: Havard Business School Publishing.

James, P. T. J. (1996). Total quality management: an introductory text. London, Prentice Hall.

Fleisher, C.S. & Babette, E.B. (2007). Business and Competitive Analysis: Effective Application

of New and Classic Methods. London: FT Press.

Mugenda M. (2003) Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods, Nairobi: Act Press.

Mukherjee P. N (2006). Total Quality Management: New York: PHI Learning.

Murphy, P. E. (1997). Quality management in urban tourism.Chichester, Wiley.

Jones, E. E., & Haven-Tang, C. (2005). Tourism SMEs, service quality, and destination

competitiveness. Wallingford, UK, CABI Pub. http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/9780851990118.0000.

Lenehan, T., & Harrington, D. (1998). Managing quality in tourism: theory and practice. Dublin,

Oak Tree Press.

Lawyer, E., &Mohrman, S. (1992). Employee involvement and total quality management:

Practices and results in Fortune 1000 companies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

16
Louise, B. C. (2011). Employee Motivation: Leadership, Policy & Practice. New York: Cengage

Learning.

Nelson, Q. (2012). Organizational Behavior: Motivation in the Workplace. New York: Thomson

South-Western Publishers.

Widman, P. & Jon, W. (2000). Problem-Solving & Decision-Making Toolbox. New York: Wiley

& Sons.

Wilkins, H., Merrilees, B & Herington, C. (2010). The determinants of loyalty in Hotels.

Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 19: 1-21.

17
Appendices

Skewness

Kurtosis

18